The Natural Progression of Progressivism

Recently i read an article in the NY Times called Japan, Seeking Trim Waists, Measures Millions. It reports that Japan rolled out a massive campaign to reduce obesity by mandating that companies and local governments periodically measure and report the waist sizes of Japanese citizens. Penalties are imposed on those who don't meet the goals. It sounds kinda funny, and also alarming.

Why does the Japanese government believe they have the right to intervene in the lifestyles of its citizens in this way? Well, the logic is that since Japan has nationalized health care, an overweight person, who is more prone to disease, is a higher financial liability to the rest of the people. It's a logical point. In fact, regulations and mandates are the next natural step after the government gets involved in any arena. If a citizen is going to benefit by a program, they are going to give up some responsibility as well. They are going to lose their freedom.

This anecdote shows why i oppose federal intervention. Socialized systems operate on the basis that the government both owns the resources (including people and the fruits of their efforts) and can determine their use. While the intentions are often the very best, the result is, among other things, a loss of liberty.

i much prefer the early Libertarian tradition of the United States, which maximizes personal liberty. In this scenario, a person can choose any lifestyle they like, and deal with their own consequences. In addition, any person or group of persons are even more able to freely help those in need.

In closing, i offer this quote from "The Law," by Frédéric Bastiat:

"If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind?"