Interesting that you say corporations are created by government. I thought they were created by Wall Street, but perhaps we are both right to some extent. One feeds off another.

Incidentally, I find this concept an oxymoron and ironic, though I know what you are saying: “To hold fast to its ideals, what the Republican Party must do is promote candidates that strive for limiting the power of collectives.”

Isn’t a party a collective? Therefore, shouldn’t it limit itself?

Can your party and/or party leader give us what we all need–we, the people who are so diverse and often at the mercy of those in power, whether in business or government?

Why does government and business threaten us? The problem is a matter of choice. Government is monopolistic. When government takes over any endeavor, such as education, we are stuck with the choices made by government officials. Similarly, large business enterprises can eliminate alternatives. Consider Microsoft. If you do not like Windows, you are stuck.

Powerful people become powerful and dangerous because they put themselves at the head of large collectives. Corporations, for example, are big collectives. Government is the biggest collective of all.

What can we do? Remember this statement in my post.

We limit the size and power of government by limiting its responsibilities. What we can do for ourselves, we do for ourselves.

When government does what we can do for ourselves, or when the Federal Government does what state or local governments could do just as well, we have just given some people more power over us than we should have given them.

Consider also that corporations are creations of government. When a corporation serves no necessary purpose, when our laws alone allow it to grow in size, or when its CEO does not have to answer to the stockholders, that corporation becomes nothing more than an abuse of government power.

So what can the Republican Party do? To hold fast to its ideals, what the Republican Party must do is promote candidates that strive for limiting the power of collectives.

What politicians do is seek compromise. Compromise is the essence of producing legislation, but some compromises compromise our principles. What the Republican Party must do is promote politicians willing put their principles ahead self aggrandizement and bringing home the bacon. Unfortunately, that is far easier said than done.

Of course, you mention Thoreau, so you immediately caught my attention, which means I must now provide a wordy response. Sorry. I have a sketch of Henry David Thoreau on my living room wall. I have a rubbing from his grave. I have photos of his desk which is now preserved in a Concord museum. You get the picture.

Above all else, Thoreau was an individualist. He did not allow society or government or trends to impede on his desire to go to the woods and live deliberately. While some like to say Thoreau wasn’t any great hero for camping out in his own back yard, I would argue that when one is from a wealthy, prestigious family, giving it all up for a cabin and notebook is pretty brave–never mind living many lives including that of a pencil-maker.

In each of his lives, Thoreau was a man of conscience. He got locked up for refusing to pay taxes to fund a war he believed was unjust. He revered the natural world. He spoke and wrote about what he believed. He was a teacher and philosopher. He was a caring rebel.

And while Thoreau was also an orator,he wasn’t a politician. Obviously, Thoreau didn’t hold politicians in high esteem.

So what should we learn from Thoreau? Here is what I believe:

1. Hold to your ideals even when they are not popular.

2. Don’t trust politicians or government.

3. Protect your individuality.

Assuming we buy into Thoreau’s tenets, how then do we run a country based on 1-3?

Our country was founded on individualism, pride and respect for freedom. Overweening government is in direct opposition to those qualities. But here’s what it comes down to. Rotten people are rotten people, whether they are rotten in government or in the free market. And when rotten people control power and wealth, most of us pay the price.

Government and business must balance, and each must be held accountable in some way. If business could regulate itself, there would be no issue. If government could regulate itself, there would be no issue. The problem is, neither politicians nor big-business folks want to regulate themselves or their friends. They are like children who will binge on Oreos the moment mother leaves the kitchen.

You make a great point that political parties destroy themselves when they serve their political candidates and elected officials as masters instead of serving the people who are attempting to elect what they consider a viable leader.

To me, parties are self destructive in that, as you say, they focus on candidates. But in doing so, they also create artificial divisions that grow stronger every time the fight becomes “our guy vs. your guy” instead of, “How can we resolve common problems?”

Well, how DO we?

It’s easy to blame everything on government or business. It’s easy to scapegoat and finger point. It’s a lot harder to make government work for all of us.

When I hear things like, “This is a Republican philosophy” or “This is a Democratic philosophy,” I cringe. I see Thoreau’s philosophy rolled into two clusters where people in each cluster nod and applaud at whatever their leaders say.
It’s group-think that does not respect the individual in the party and only encourages respect for the candidate and the person who supports that candidate in every aspect at all costs. After all, the goal is to win, is it not? How can you win if you don’t all believe the same things?

I don’t know much about parties, but what I am hearing is that the Republican party is perceived as splitting. The elephant in the room (sorry….couldn’t help it) is “Why?”

I think if there were more acceptance of each other’s ideas within a party instead of the usual, “well, you’re too liberal for our party,” or “you’re too conservative,” the party would be stronger.

The problem is that members of the party are not respecting the individuality of each member because they believe if they do, they will cease to have a party. But in doing this, they are indeed destroying the party.

It’s hard to serve people. It’s hard to know what to do when there are conflicting needs. But good government is made up of LEADERS, not politicians. LEADERS find solutions that give everyone enough of what they need–not everything, but enough. The rest is indeed up to us.

Can your party and/or party leader give us what we all need–we, the people who are so diverse and often at the mercy of those in power, whether in business or government?

So far, I’ve never seen a party that has.

I am hoping, one day, to see a LEADER who does.