There was in Italy a river called the
Rubicon. It was more then a waterway, it was also a border between action and limits. For you see when a commander was returning to Rome from a campaign, he could not bring his legions south of the Rubicon. This line was there to keep a man from feeling that he not only ruled the battle field, but should rule the Roman senate. If he did bring more then his private staff with him across the Rubicon, then he had gone over the line.
"Crossing the Rubicon" has morphed into a modern saying that implies there is no going back. A point has been crossed, and it cannot be uncrossed.
We, as a nation, and state, have crossed the Rubicon, and cannot retreat.
Tennessee, and to a smaller extent Smyrna, are in the middle of a political and social storm. Should a public smoking ban or limit be instituted? Let me rephrase that. Should a smoking ban, or limit, be enforced on us? We should at least be honest when approaching how it will be carried out.
Now I have posted previously on the subject of the proposed smoking ordinance that James Yates will soon be putting forward for council vote. I am against it for many reasons. One reason why I am against it that is hard to articulate without a bit of ancient and modern history thrown into the post.
I have no doubt that this new law from the legislature in Nashville will soon pass. Why? Because politicians do not get re-elected for NOT doing something. Action, even if misguided, gets votes. I have never heard of a politician who got elected on the platform that "I did nothing during my last term". A politician must have something to take credit for so they can fill the airwaves with the soundbites of their deeds.
We are reaching the point where everything in life is regulated. From the tank size of our toilets, the water flow from our shower heads, and even to the
size of the holes in cheese. However, the things the government can control and legislate are finite. With that limit approaching they must turn their controlling eyes towards us.
That's you and me for sake of this post.
Now to be truthful, they do not see it as control. No sane person has a desire to control and manipulate the actions of others. The problem is what our government has become as it has evolved through time. In history there is a philosopher named Kant, a man under-taught in schools today. He formulated his ideas of freedom and liberty in
Principles of Rights.
The first of these rights was the "Liberty of every Member of the State as a Man". A certain part of it stands out as important in this debate on smoking and other acts.
:*'No one has a right to compel me to be happy in the peculiar way in which he may think of the well-being of other men; but everyone is entitled to seek his own happiness in the way that seems to him best, if it does not infringe the liberty of others in striving after a similar end for themselves when their Liberty is capable of consisting with the Right of Liberty in all others according to possible universal laws.'*A Government founded upon the principle of Benevolence towards the people*after the analogy of a father to his children, and therefore called a paternal Government*would be one in which the Subjects would be regarded as children or minors unable to distinguish what is beneficial or injurious to them. These subjects would be thus compelled to act in a merely passive way; and they would be trained to expect solely from the Judgment of the Sovereign and just as he might will it, merely out of his goodness, all that ought to make them happy. Such a Government would be the greatest conceivable Despotism; for it would present a Constitution that would abolish all Liberty in the Subjects and leave them no Rights.
I remember as a youth asking my dad to shoot off some fireworks. he told me that I was too young and that they were dangerous. He was my father. I look and see municipalities banning fireworks for the same reason. Daddy government? Paternal you might even say. I also remember going about building a small cabin with my cousin. We were halted from the first site because my Uncle said it would be a problem there. Today if I try to build a shed in my backyard I would need to get the local governments permission and OK. Daddy government again?
We have so silently slid into the paternal government that Kant warned us of so many years ago.
Now a smoking ban on public places may seem such a small thing when compared to the ills and sins of the world. "It's just smoking" you may say.
Back to the Rubicon.
When you cross that point there is no going back. Tennessee is standing in the river and can still see the line below it's feet, and the next few months may be very important to all of us.
Some states have crossed the river long ago. You could not find a finer example then New York. Here is just a
short list of things that they have tried to ban, or have banned, in that state.
* Trans-fats.
* Aluminum baseball bats.
* The purchase of tobacco by 18- to 20-year-olds.
* Foie gras.
* Pedicabs in parks.
* New fast-food restaurants (but only in poor neighborhoods).
* Lobbyists from the floor of council chambers.
* Lobbying city agencies after working at the same agency.
* Vehicles in Central and Prospect parks.
* Pit bulls
* Cell phones in upscale restaurants.
* The sale of pork products made in a processing plant in Tar Heel, N.C., because of a unionization dispute.
* Mail-order pharmaceutical plans.
* Candy-flavored cigarettes.
* Gas-station operators adjusting prices more than once daily.
* Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus.
* Wal-Mart.
California follows the state of New York with attempts to ban
smoking in your car when children are in it, and even
Incandescent light bulbs. Berkley California has even
banned coffee they don't like. After all, Daddy knows best.
These states crossed the river so long ago that it has become a faded memory. Tennessee stands shakily on that line, not sure whether to go forward, or pull back.
Now it rests upon the shoulders of the politicians and that frightens me.
Last night I sat in the Smyrna city council chambers and watched the latest town workshop. A short one when compared to others. It ended for me on a foul note. Mr Yates asked the town attorney if she was still working on his smoking ordinance. One that he is putting forth to require a smoking section in all restaurant's. The mayor, Mr Spivey, laughed and said that the way things are going in the capital, that it would not be needed. That moment of laughter from several made me think.
Why are they working on a limitation, when a ban would soon be enforced from Nashville? Why waste city time, and resources?
It was at that moment that Kant famous words came to mind.
These subjects would be thus compelled to act in a merely passive way; and they would be trained to expect solely from the Judgment of the Sovereign and just as he might will it, merely out of his goodness, all that ought to make them happy
It's hard for a government to break the habit of control.
We all stand as a state in the river Rubicon. Tomorrow we will find if we have crossed that line.
