Chris Duane_Semper Fi!
It's
Thanksgiving. Our forefathers were thankful to live on a
newly-discovered continent, and later they were thankful to live as
freemen who had escaped the British Empire's rule and control over their
lives.
Today we
are thankful for what yet remains of the traditions which have marked
our country's greatness over two Centuries. But many of us are harried
somewhat as we have noticed that our great country is drifting toward
collectivism and away from the individualism which forged and formed
America as the greatest nation on earth, in all of earth's human
history. Now people in all fifty States are talking about secession.
It's driving the communists mad. While enjoying our holiday, let's look
into the idea of secession vs collectivism. It will do the Pilgrim
proud to hold such contemplations on this very special day. It also
would please the ghost of Henry David Thoreau, don't you agree?
Secession is in the wind today,
experiencing a surge after the November 06, 2012 elections. Many on the
"right" are very fearful of the agenda of those on the "left", and to
those who are awake to, and aware of, the reality that
both sides are equally dangerous
to American freedom, the whole messy
political left-right-paradigm slime-bath is offensive and disgusting.
Damn the Republicans and Damn the Democrats both to Hell, I say, and so
do all three or four other Americans who've figured this out.
The
idea of secession drives communists, socialists, and collectivists in
general madly wild and passionately fearful. If you don't want to play
their game of centralized control over society and culture, the average
communist/collectivist sees you as a direct threat. He must control
you via the state (government) or he sees you as a threat.
Most
Americans showed clearly with the election that they want the
collective way of life and they want a powerful central government to
ensure that everyone, including those who do not wish to
participate in their centralized government's authoritarian power games,
must ante up and place their bets just like all the good little
statist boys and girls. Your refusal to play their game is perceived as
a threat to them, and it makes them defensive. Being as how
defensiveness always attacks, they jab out at you for not joining into
their view of societal adhesion.
To
prove that I'm not exaggerating, I'll offer a novel idea which most
Americans have never read, although it's a part of our heritage as
Americans. It was written circa 1884 by an American libertarian
philosopher named Herbert Spencer, in his immortal essay entitled "The Right To Ignore The State". I am predicting that the comments under this article shall be, uhm, er, "colorful" at the very least: Here is Spencer -
As
a corollary to the proposition that all institutions must be
subordinated to the law of equal freedom, we cannot choose but admit
the right of the citizen to adopt a condition of voluntary outlawry.
If
every man has freedom to do all that he wills, provided he infringes
not the equal freedom of any other man, then he is free to drop
connection with the state - to relinquish its protection, and to
refuse paying toward its support. It is self-evident that in so
behaving he in no way trenches upon the liberty of others; for his
position is a passive one; and whilst passive he cannot become an
aggressor. It is equally self-evident that he cannot be compelled to
continue one of a political corporation, without a breach of the moral
law, seeing that citizenship involves payment of taxes; and the
taking away of a man's property against his will, is an infringement
of his rights.
Government
being simply an agent employed in common by a number of individuals
to secure to them certain advantages, the very nature of the
connection implies that it is for each to say whether he will employ
such an agent or not. If any one of them determines to ignore this
mutual-safety confederation, nothing can be said except that he loses
all claim to its good offices, and exposes himself to the danger of
maltreatment - a thing he is quite at liberty to do if he likes. He
cannot be coerced into political combination without a breach of the
law of equal freedom; he can withdraw from it without committing any such breach; and he has therefore a right so to withdraw.
To
assess one's predisposition toward being either a statist or an
individualist, one merely need read that passage over again about three
or four times and think on its meaning. How one ultimately perceives
the logic and philosophy contained in that brief mental exercise
determines in a recognizable way one's predisposition as a statist or
as an individualist.
No
collectivist can enjoy reading the writings of this nation's Founders,
or the writings of the 19th Century libertarians, while any individualist derives
intense joy and hope in so reading. The Founders spoke of "unalienable
rights" which come from Nature or Nature's God, and they codified
those rights as coming from, deriving from, a higher authority than any
man-made government. Collectivists, especially collectivists of the
communist and socialist bent, hate and fear that kind of consciousness.
To the statist, the very idea of a soul seceding from the collective
government is a threat and must be eliminated. Hence Homeland Security's
inherent psychological premise, and hence its hell-for-leather assault
on patriotism and Constitutionalism and individualist dissent within
our American society today.
For the strong in spirit, for the individualist, I'll offer this little brief film by Chris Duane of
Don't-Tread-On-Me. It's about personal secession from the futility of the "madding crowd". | iSecede |
Enjoy, and -- Happy Thanksgiving!
With a 'Salute!' to Chris Duane,
Elias Alias, editor
No comments:
Post a Comment