Dan McLaughlin

Voices For Freedom Read Columns Daniel McLaughlin
To Home Page Latest Newsletter Column Archives Click to get these columns for your local paper	© 2006 Daniel J. McLaughlin Smoking and the “F” Word It is not proper to use words that are socially unacceptable. Certain words are stricken from the vocabulary of people who want to be accepted as good, enlightened, upstanding citizens. Words that offend the sensibilities of intellectual leaders shouldn’t be uttered in public. One example is the “F” word, fascism. It is not proper to discuss such an offensive topic or suggest that it even exists anywhere other than the history books, or in discussions about those bad guys, Hitler, Mussolini and other unseemly characters. I am sure some will be surprised, but fascism is not a historical artifact. It is a description of a type of behavior, one that is rampant and widely accepted today. The definitions of fascism are as varied as the experts you ask. I tend to give more weight to one of the foremost authorities on fascism, Benito Mussolini: “Anti-individualistic, the fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State, which stands for the conscience and the universal will of man as a historic entity… The fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it, no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value… If the 19^th century was the century of the individual, we are free to believe that this is the ‘collective’ century, and therefore the century of the State.” Wow, I know people like that! We read about them in the news all the time. Some people see themselves as the conscience and universal will for the nation, the state, the county, or the city, which are subunits of “The State”. I read that the public health director of Cattaraugus County, New York thinks the banning of smoking in an individual’s own vehicle when accompanied by children is a wonderful idea. “It is well worth it from a public health standpoint”. The only problem she sees is how such a law could be enforced. She got the idea when she read about Rockland County imposing upon it’s people. If Rockland County can deny their citizens rights to use their own property, why shouldn’t Cattaraugus County abuse it’s citizens? I guess it makes some sense, in a perverted sort of way. Children are individuals too, with their own rights, and the question may be stated as whether the rights of children are violated when exposed to second hand smoke in a car. The answer is in considering the overall rights and relative health of children in various situations. Children in Cuba, Haiti and Zimbabwe don’t have to worry too much about cigarette smoke in cars. They don’t have cars. Their worries are far worse because of disdain of the government for more significant rights. The children in free countries, who may be exposed to second hand smoke, are infinitely better off and much healthier, because freedom brings with it prosperity, better diets, healthier children, and longer life spans. Every measure of well-being increases with freedom. Nobody in my home is a smoker. We do, however, have our own vices, things we do that may increase the risk of dying before the age of 100. I don’t want an expert to protect me from myself. I know my goals, ambitions and desires much better than any expert possibly can. If the thinking behind the smoking bans is extended to its logical conclusion, Hitler was on the right track. He energetically enforced public health and condemned smoking. Health was every good Nazi’s solemn duty. Like Hitler’s efforts, the argument can be applied to anything; witness the attacks on fast food, trans fats, drugs, SUV’s, guns and other convenient targets. Even Grandma’s apple pie can be seen as bad for our health (she used lard!). Prohibition will always bring the same negative effects that prior prohibitions brought, negative effects that heavily outweigh any possible benefits. It is a great thing to be healthy, just as it is great to get straight A’s in school. People, however, have different priorities and interests. If someone values a good education, he will study. If she values a trim figure, she will watch what she eats. If they value watching TV, eating chips and smoking, they must assume the consequences. It is important to talk about the “F” word openly, and understand its wide implications for contemporary society. Discussing fascism will shine some light on actions that comprise it and threaten individual liberty. Let the light shine on.
Contact us Privacy Policy
Daniel Mclaughlin Copyright © 2006 [Daniel McLaughlin]. All rights reserved. Revised: 03/18/08

Voices For Freedom

Read Columns

Daniel McLaughlin

To Home Page

Latest Newsletter

Column Archives

Click to get these columns for your local paper

Smoking and the “F” Word

It is not proper to use words that are socially unacceptable. Certain words are stricken from the vocabulary of people who want to be accepted as good, enlightened, upstanding citizens. Words that offend the sensibilities of intellectual leaders shouldn’t be uttered in public.

One example is the “F” word, fascism. It is not proper to discuss such an offensive topic or suggest that it even exists anywhere other than the history books, or in discussions about those bad guys, Hitler, Mussolini and other unseemly characters.

I am sure some will be surprised, but fascism is not a historical artifact. It is a description of a type of behavior, one that is rampant and widely accepted today. The definitions of fascism are as varied as the experts you ask.

I tend to give more weight to one of the foremost authorities on fascism, Benito Mussolini: “Anti-individualistic, the fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State, which stands for the conscience and the universal will of man as a historic entity… The fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it, no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value… If the 19^th century was the century of the individual, we are free to believe that this is the ‘collective’ century, and therefore the century of the State.”

Wow, I know people like that! We read about them in the news all the time. Some people see themselves as the conscience and universal will for the nation, the state, the county, or the city, which are subunits of “The State”. I read that the public health director of Cattaraugus County, New York thinks the banning of smoking in an individual’s own vehicle when accompanied by children is a wonderful idea. “It is well worth it from a public health standpoint”. The only problem she sees is how such a law could be enforced. She got the idea when she read about Rockland County imposing upon it’s people. If Rockland County can deny their citizens rights to use their own property, why shouldn’t Cattaraugus County abuse it’s citizens? I guess it makes some sense, in a perverted sort of way.

Children are individuals too, with their own rights, and the question may be stated as whether the rights of children are violated when exposed to second hand smoke in a car. The answer is in considering the overall rights and relative health of children in various situations. Children in Cuba, Haiti and Zimbabwe don’t have to worry too much about cigarette smoke in cars. They don’t have cars. Their worries are far worse because of disdain of the government for more significant rights. The children in free countries, who may be exposed to second hand smoke, are infinitely better off and much healthier, because freedom brings with it prosperity, better diets, healthier children, and longer life spans. Every measure of well-being increases with freedom.

Nobody in my home is a smoker. We do, however, have our own vices, things we do that may increase the risk of dying before the age of 100. I don’t want an expert to protect me from myself. I know my goals, ambitions and desires much better than any expert possibly can. If the thinking behind the smoking bans is extended to its logical conclusion, Hitler was on the right track. He energetically enforced public health and condemned smoking. Health was every good Nazi’s solemn duty. Like Hitler’s efforts, the argument can be applied to anything; witness the attacks on fast food, trans fats, drugs, SUV’s, guns and other convenient targets. Even Grandma’s apple pie can be seen as bad for our health (she used lard!). Prohibition will always bring the same negative effects that prior prohibitions brought, negative effects that heavily outweigh any possible benefits.

It is a great thing to be healthy, just as it is great to get straight A’s in school. People, however, have different priorities and interests. If someone values a good education, he will study. If she values a trim figure, she will watch what she eats. If they value watching TV, eating chips and smoking, they must assume the consequences.

It is important to talk about the “F” word openly, and understand its wide implications for contemporary society. Discussing fascism will shine some light on actions that comprise it and threaten individual liberty. Let the light shine on.

Hit Counter