Greenland and the Federal Urge for More

As if the Federal government is able to fully control all the land, people, and resources currently in its control, Trump has begun to aggressively demand US ownership of Greenland. Advocates of the plan justify it by claiming that the US needs Greenland for defense against China. The plan has fractured relationships with dozens of allies. Many countries are losing what little trust they have in America because they have no way of knowing they are not the next on a list of potential hostile takeover targets. Greenland has done nothing to harm the US or show that they are inept at governing themselves. The nation’s only crime is being on land advantageous to American Federal interests. Any country in the world has something the US government could use. There is no limit to the constant lust for power of the American government. Of course, any government with the same level of power as ours would be similar or worse, but the State still bears responsibility for its actions. While this recent episode of Federal greed has shocked the world, it should be unsurprising to anyone who has lived in America. The reality behind the demands of Trump is far greater than just him, and has been damaging the nation for years. The US Federal desire for power would be directed at the American people if it were not directed towards Greenland. While Trump seeks control bombastically and publicly, the administrative state has already sunken its teeth silently into the flesh of daily life. 

When Trump seeks to publicly increase power the whole world cries out, but neither party objects to an increase in control over the American people. Whether it is an increase in surveillance justified by terrorism fears or a system to ensure compliance with climate ordinances, each party has its unique vices resulting from obsession with power. The country was founded upon the principle that the people were primary to the form of government. The good of the people was an explicit basis for the existence of the State. However, just as the British government strove to control the colonies, the current regime cannot let anything within its reach exist unhindered. No one politician can right the ship and shift the momentum from approaching greater control to some sort of stasis, because the system has already grown so large that it perpetuates itself. Some well-intentioned committee eventually becomes an entity that functionally exists to perpetuate itself. Even when people in government do not want to increase its size, any area without explicit size limitations will naturally tend to increase. If any administrative function is supposed to do some good at a smaller size, they will inevitably think they could do better if they were larger. Ineffectiveness and effectiveness both lend themselves naturally to expansionary arguments. More explicit legislation against government growth is needed to reverse or even stop the trend of recent decades. 

Paradoxically, the reason the country has so much power to exploit is that the Government allowed far more freedom than other countries. For decades the nation has been in freefall converging towards a level of government ownership much closer to other countries we compete against. However, the remnants of entrepreneurial freedom are able to spur on incredible gains not possible in other countries. The strength of the nation must sadly be seen in its ability to flourish even when weighed down by excessive Federal control. As the State continues its march towards ever greater ownership, there will be less resources and power for it to exploit. The Government must never forget that only through its comparative absence was the nation able to achieve such a level of prominence. Of course, the State promoted good order and defended the Country in times of need, but its role was far more as an allower of creation rather than the driving force behind it. Without a recognition of the people as the masterminds of the US’s prominence, Federal expansion will continue.

While Trump’s annexation of Greenland may later prove to win us some war, it would do the state well to first recognize how its addiction to control has damaged its own people. If Trump’s desire to take over Greenland were an isolated event, it could be little more than a heterodox foreign policy position. Far from being unique, his stance actually is only a natural follow through of a Federal trend that has been accepted for many years. Some of the anger sent at Trump for his desire to annex should be redirected towards the constant tendency of the Central State to expand.