22 votes

If The Birds Could Vote...

A few years ago I decided to put some bird feed on my deck so I could get a better view of some local birds. Almost immediately they came.

It was interesting watching all the different types and sizes of birds so close to my window when they came to partake of my generous gifts.

But it didn't take long for the novelty to wear off because along with the birds came more problems than it was worth.

First of all, my deck became a depository for bird droppings. Try as I might, I couldn't keep up with it.

In addition, some birds engaged in destructive activities like chewing on my awning ropes and eating vegetables growing in some pots.

Within a few weeks I decided it wasn't worth it, and I removed the bird food.

So they quit coming, and I had learned a lesson which I use sometimes when discussing government handouts. There seemed to be a clear analogy between free things and birds and - people!

First of all, it was obvious to the birds that coming here for free food was a lot easier than digging up worms or seeking food in the wild.

So I wondered, what if young birds got dependent on my free food from an early age and then one day it was gone?

Would they struggle or even starve because they never had to work for their food before? After all, up to that point they never had to learn how to find food in the wild.

A second question came to mind; what if the birds in my local area could vote on whether I should provide bird feed?

It's quite obvious they would vote to keep it coming. They might even make a law forcing me to provide bird feed.
To equate this story to people in real life, in many ways, this is the state of our nation today.

Big-government has put out free food and many Americans are dependent on it.

Take our retirement for instance. When FDR created the Social Security system in 1937, our government was telling us that we didn't have the brains to prepare for our retirements, and thus made everyone dependent on that program.

Now it's being done with health care, education and most egregious of all, are the foreign aid programs in which our government gives out "bird feed" to foreign nations as well.
Politically, the civil war going on within the Republican Party today is based on this very subject.

Establishment republicans have no interest in a limited federal government (which should be less than 20% the size it is today). Why? Because they have grown just a dependent on big-government "bird feed" as their democrat "opponents" or any other Americans.

But the emerging liberty-wing of the republican party IS interested in constitutional ideals.

That would mean abolishing huge chunks of the federal government as it exists today such as the IRS, Dept of Education, Dept of Commerce, HUD, Dept of Energy, National Endowment for the Arts, USAID, and ending ALL foreign aid (just to name a very few).
So America is at an interesting crossroads in our recent history where there is a real movement to reign in and restructure the federal government.

But it most likely will fail in the near future because (as I put forth earlier), if the birds could vote, what would they decide?

It's obvious because they already voted by coming to eat my free food every day. They already HAD the choice, and they voted to come here to eat because it was easier - UNTIL THE FOOD RAN OUT.

I don't think the liberty movement has the numbers (yet) to exact any real change at the federal level, but the seed is planted (thanks in large part I believe, to the efforts of Ron Paul in his two presidential campaigns).

Dr. Paul knew he wouldn't win, but he could teach on a national stage.

Until the establishment Republican Party is either destroyed and rebuilt or it somehow gains the numbers needed to support a true liberty movement, there will be no real change.

And since that would mean ending many of the programs, agencies and laws which enrich establishment republican elected officials such as U.S. foreign interventionism, a bloated military and military-industrial-banking complex, funding arms races worldwide, foreign aid programs and the mammoth domestic welfare state etc...NOTHING will change.

Because the birds will continue to vote accordingly.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Ooh, I read something very similar on another site

I believe it was in the comments section of an Infowars article. Similar premise, and just as very well written.

I believe in the freedom to be what we choose to be.

Thanks for reading Sheldon

I appreciate it.

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

Here is the problem with this analogy,

as a liberal would see it. With bird feeders, the number of birds that can survive in the wild is higher, because some birds, which otherwise would not be able to get enough food, will now survive. If you transfer this to people, that means that a certain number of people would starve without welfare. Thus, this type of consequentialist argument fails, because even if a large number of people would become self-sufficient if welfare were eliminated, a certain number of people would starve. Many people would find this unacceptable and thus will argue that welfare is necessary.

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

So what makes him responsible

So what makes him responsible for their survival? If he does not agree voluntarily to provide for them (charity) and instead is forced to do something solely to benefit another he has in effect become a slave. And a life that is not lived freely is not a life.

So again, yes its tragic that some may die, but why does he have to work to benefit others?

I am not saying I agree with the logic

I was simply putting forth what a liberal's take on this argument would be.

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

Best post ever!

There's more to it than bird poop...

The bird feeder I had also attracted other species. There was the cat that hunted and ate the birds that came to the feeder and also the raccoons and squirrels that devoured as much as possible before the birds could get to it. Then, wars opened up, battles between the factions all trying to get to the free stuff first. It was so non-peaceful and aggravating, I stopped feeding the birds. So, handing out free food goes even beyond the original intended audience...it leads to theft and war.

Your Analogy Doesn't Work

Birds do not become dependent on bird feeders. Finding food is innately instinctive, so unless there is very severe weather, they are not going to starve to death if you suddenly take away the feeder. Putting a bird feeder up doesn't cause them to suddenly lose all ability to take care of themselves.

Even regular visitors to bird feeder seek out different food sources during the day. Nobody there is getting 100 percent of their diet from your feeder.

Birdfeeding has been a hobby of mine for many years, so the amount of ignorance in this thread rankles me.

Not saying it's a bad hobby or wrong in any way. I just used...

...this to show a degree of dependency when free things are available and how you can equate it to government and/or politics.

You said birds do not become dependent on bird feeders which may be true, but whichever way you look at it, without that free food available they would have to work harder for it in the wild - no matter what percentage of their diet is from the free stuff.

But please don't think I'm discounting your hobby in any way - it was just an observation and analogy.

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

The Birds


Instead of attacking, what happens if they just opt out?



Hen pecked, LOL.


Free includes debt-free!

Cyril's picture



"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Cyril's picture

Well, I think you nailed it with your own empirical evidence

Well, I think you nailed it with your own empirical evidence, there.

Thank you for this.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

scawarren's picture

Great post, pawnstorm12. I

Great post, pawnstorm12. I agree with the thoughts you have expressed and all I would add is that all of those unconstitutional departments and agencies could not survive if we actually had to pay for them which is why I believe exposing the federal reserve banking cartel should be at the top of the "to do" list.

It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. – Mark Twain

Bump 4


Free includes debt-free!


Free includes debt-free!