Nature of Statism

Many people are curious at my vast disdain- for government power. They wonder where I get the notion that government isn't a force for good in the world, and instead should be something that is continually under suspicion. After all, these people think that the government is the great leveler that protects us from eeevil corporations.
To answer, I will present two current events that teach a potent lesson about the problems of government run amok.
The first is the continually-decaying situation in Zimbabwe. Our plucky picnic-basket pilfering African Strong-man Robert Mugabe has initiated "Operation Murambatsvina" or "Drive out filth" in order to rid the country of the "maggots that ruin the economy". More than one million people have been driven onto the streets after their homes were torched. Their crops are being slashed and burned as well. It seems Mugabe is trying to drive these people from the city to work the farms he's "liberated" from the White Oppressors. This sort of thing has happened before of course. It seems to be fated for Zimbabwe too.
It's a bitter irony that Africans had a longer life expectancy, better employment, and more food under the incredibly racist Rhodesian Government and the Obnoxious Iain Smith. More men have been killed due to conflict under Mugabe's rule than during the long and bloody insurgency in Smithy's Rhodesia.
What's the problem? According to the progressive stormfront.org "White Heritage Community", it's letting the Africans govern themselves. Of course, seeking policy advice from stormfront.org is pure lunacy. A better explanation is that Mugabe's government shows what happens when government goes wild with absolute authority. The same thing is starting in Chavez' Venezuela and other nations. Horrific democide like Zimbabwe's or Cambodia's cannot happen without government control. That is reason alone to be suspicious of the state.
The natural reaction to this goes something along the lines of "Zimbabwe and America are different. It can't happen here." If only white nations can be free of democide, then that proves Louis Farrakan's dictum that white people are from outer space, or perhaps an Atlantean Laboratory. Again, this isn't true. Genocide and Democide have occurred in nations of all colours. Americans and Zimbabweans are made of the same stuff. We have a few advantages that can easily be squandered- remember that Zimbabwe was once one of the richest nations in Africa.
Closer to home, the Supreme Court has handed down yet another pro-statist decision in the form of the Kelo case. The court has decided to boost the self-esteem of corrupt local governments by letting them use their imaginations to define the limit of Eminent Domain. If your house isn't producing enough tax revenue, then the city can dynamite it to feel better about itself and replace it with a federally-funded shopping centre.
Sensitive Justices John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer all decided that local towns are frustrated in their development, as this pesky "fifth amendment" keeps them from realising their dream of raising money. Fortunately, these Justices saw how the mean spirit of common law and civic virtue was depriving local officials of higher salaries and the pursuit of higher offices. They decided to help the poor local officials in their quest.
Sadly, not all Supreme Court Justices saw the progressive future. Some mean justices, like Justice O'Connor and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist thought that the dreams of our plucky local officials should take a back-seat to a silly concept called "private property." Under this plainly absurd notion, people would be able to own their own houses and keep them as long as they wanted! What foolishness!
As everyone knows, the state is all-powerful, and all of our lives and our things are actually its property. We must worship the all-powerful state, because it is plainly looking out for our best interests.
Enough of that digression. In truth, we've seen yet another blow to our rights as citizens handed down by un-elected dunder-heads who get off thinking about government power. This decision has been reviled by both the Left and the Right, and rightly so. It disparages the right of the individual to better line the pockets of rich contractors and morally bankrupt local officials who want more money at the expense of the rights of their citizens.
I hope Dubya and the congress lays aside the terminally stupid flag-burning amendment and creates some legislation to put the judiciary in their place. The right of eminent domain is only intended for projects that are absolutely necessary- military bases, roads, and other necessities. Greater tax revenues are not a sufficient condition to violate the most basic right of a free society. It's an element of creeping statism wherein the state becomes the only arbiter of its authority, and "rights" are merely a nicety given out at the convenience of the state.
If not, there's not much that the homeowners can do. I can think of a couple of solutions, but they're both rather radical and illegal. Perhaps a bit of civil disobedience is in order. I encourage the Left and the Right to get together and provide for those who resist this injustice. If that doesn't work, there's always a more drastic solution to deal with governments that refuse to recognise man's natural rights.