Power versus People

When I think about how the United States economy is so powerful and its people are so wealthy overall—and its military follows this wealth and freedom; and I think of how China has over a billion people while the United States only has 350 million, I think China has much more potential for economic power than the United States.  And Germany and Japan.  I think of the pure human potential—and that China—and India—dwarf the united states by far.

 

I think that if China—and India become capitalist nations—free nations with small government—they will dominate the world.  Their economic power; their wealth and prosperity; their military power—if they choose—will dwarf the United States many times over.

 

One might say that the United States military is so powerful—that the United States is so much more powerful than China—that it is impossible for China to compete.  But China has four or five times as many people as the United States.  And that human potential eclipses the United States’ military advantage at present—that an augriculture in China or India will be so much more prolific than that that of the United States.

 

In the Second Great War of the 20^th century, Germany had much better technology and training and prowess than the United States.  The United States was a baby, really.  But the pure human potential—the pure numbers of people and human vitality of the United States defeated the Germans.  In the same way, both economically and militarily, China could very easily defeat the United States—or anyone on this planet.  Easily.  If they were a free country.  But that would mean that those in power in China—or India perhaps—would have to give up their dictatorship to the people.  So, it would mean loss of power—and wealth and sex—for them—Which they are not going to do willingly—So that the whole of China could be prosperous and wealthy and powerful.

 

There has been a battle between power—those in power—and people—throughout history.  It is usually a few who have the power and milk the many: The people.  It is a new invention to con the people into giving their power to a few where the many have or seem to have the power—but give it away to a centralized authority—to a vanguard—and their prosperity diminishes or disappears the same way.  A centralized authority—or a classic dictator—is like a drain in a reservoir.  The water is like human vitality; wealth—material and spiritual.  The more power the centralized authority has, the more the human vitality drains away—the more centralized authority a society has, the bigger the drain.  The smaller the centralized authority is—be it a well-intentioned government; or a monarchy, the smaller the drain; and the less the human vitality drains away.  The bigger the government, well-intentioned or not the less wealth the people have.  The smaller the government (to the point of maintaining negative rights: basic individual freedom and rights and safety and property rights), the more wealth the people have.  And the difference between the two is exponential.  It is not linear.  A small government’s people become quite wealthy and the nation becomes quite powerful.  The bigger the government, the way less wealthy and powerful they become at an alarming rate on something like an asymptotic curve.