Freedom or freedom?

Ok... so I pinned a few guys down in a discussion recently... and it really has opened my eyes about the nature of this left-right dichotomy, a gaping CHASM if you will, in this nation. In the entire WORLD really. The root of the issue is this: The revolutionary Idea that came to fruition in 1776, a paradigmatic shift really, was that each man owns himself absolutely. He is endowed, by his Creator or by Nature, whichever you prefer, with inalienable Rights. These Rights are not bestowed, or given, by others... they are his whether anyone respects them or not. They are his even if he is unaware of them. Even though he might try to sell or abdicate them, or even deny their existence, there they remain… right at the very core of every man’s soul. It is the Logical end-result of the realization of what it means to be the only sentient, rational being on this planet, and, so far, in the entire Universe! It is the very manifestation of a perfect understanding of human Nature. Rights can only be violated.

It wasn't until 1776 that finally a government was instituted among men that held as its' central tenet a respect for the Rights of the Individual (which means in-divisible). For the first time ever, Man is FREE... with no if's, and's, or but's. No asterisk, no footnote. Absolutely FREE.

One of the first things you have to learn in Law School, as well as the very study of Logic, is that a thing cannot both BE and NOT BE at the same time. Our entire legal system was founded on it, and utterly depends on it.

The seed of destruction was planted the first time someone said, "Well, you can't be free to not pay your taxes." And so... the question should have been, "Well, are we Free or not Free?" We cannot be both at the same time. In this country, in the land that our forefathers fought and died for so that we might be absolutely Free, with a capital F, we have willingly relinquished our birthright by agreeing that it should be a relative freedom, with a lower-case f. At first, we willingly sold off bits and pieces of it in exchange for things we thought we needed and that we thought government could better provide. Now we are selling if off at record pace for shit like "Obama phones" and "free" healthcare, never mind that the strings attached have become CHAINS!

I have taken a lot of criticism for my obsession with the idea of absolute, Objective Truth. But the alternative to that is called relative, Subjective truth. And it is the ONLY alternative. Once you abandon Objective Truth, you abandon logic, reason, and science. And you start getting numbskulls who wonder, "If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around to hear it... does it really make a sound?" You also get people who deny the humanity (Rights) of others, which enables slavery, murder, and mass-murder. And selfishness... you can justify all kinds of things once you decide that nothing is real and True and everything is subject to how your mind perceives it. You revert back to survival of the fittest. The difference between humans and animals is completely dis-regarded. That is REGRESS, not progress!

This is why you can never take even one step back with these people. When asked the sum of two and two, is there any other answer but four? But they abhor the possibility that someone could be so absolute, so SMUG, so 'black-and-white' as to demand the answer of four and force it upon them.

The answer, for us, if we are to come out of this alive with our Nature and our very Humanity being held in a state of permanent RESPECT by our government, is to go back, all the way back, to 1776, and accept at face value, absolutely and without subordinating conjunction (if, unless, but, etc.) that entire second and third sentence of the document that revolutionized the world and then examine all that has happened since with intense scrutiny and vigor. We will see a change in our way of life... it will be hard on a lot of people. There is a certain comfort in slavery, and not all are willing to give that up. But we will also get to say goodbye to things like the individual income tax, corporate personhood, foreign aid, governmental subsidies (all kinds... corporate welfare, farm subsidies, and yes WELFARE!), unions, cops that treat us like sheep, and a general paring down of all governmental activity, across the board. Also, it might finally make sense to create two classes of citizens: Free Americans, and wards of the State. Wards of the State will necessarily include anyone on public assistance of ANY kind, government employees, violent criminals, and anyone who willfully wishes to participate and live under the wing of the Government. Free Americans will include anyone who doesn't wish to take part in that madness, along with lawbreakers who abused their wardship and were expelled. Don't worry; we'll take "care" of them... What will eventually end up happening is that walls will be built around the cities (look at the red state, blue state voting map by district! There are no blue STATES, only blue cities!), ostensibly to keep the unwashed, selfish capitalists out (but the sharp, pointy barbs will be aiming inward) and they can live happily ever after in their Utopia. I accept the fact that there will always be those that despise the animating contest of freedom and wish to live under the wing of the government. I don't hate them. But the idea is that there must be a place for those who don't want to participate, those that take their Freedom seriously and responsibly. After all, America BELONGS to these people. It is their PROPERTY. They created it, they won it, they gave it life, and they wish to leave it to their children.

Words to look up. I'm serious... no matter how much you think you know these words, look them up again. I do it all the time, just to make sure I am using them correctly. This is important. One of the tools used by subjectivists (Liberals) is to get you thinking that when we say the word Freedom, we mean the same thing. We don't. They have in mind the lower-case version, with if's and's and but's.

• ·         Endowed
• ·         Inalienable
• ·         Rights
• ·         Bestow
• ·         Individual
• ·         Absolute
• ·         Relative
• ·         Objective
• ·         Subjective
• ·         Truth

And so, having agreed on the definitions of those words, the question I'd like you all to answer is: Do you stand behind the assertion that all human beings are free absolutely, possessed of individual inalienable Rights, that our constitution was instituted to secure these rights, not bestow them, and, with that established, that each individual ought to be secure in his person and his property, free to distribute, delegate, or dispose of the product of his labor and intellect as he sees fit. Do you, or do you not, agree with that statement, as is, with no conditions, asterisks, footnotes, or subordinating conjunctions? Everything from here on out depends on this, and if you don't realize it, you are more lost than you think. Every argument has at its core a misunderstanding and the first remedy is to check your premises. THIS IS THE PREMISE! Every American takes it for granted. It goes without saying. It's in the Pledge of Allegiance. Our entire SYSTEM is built around it. And it is my contention that many of you don't really believe it or value it... that you would sell it for a little perceived security and misguided attempts to promote the general welfare.

Some of you *THINK* you believe it, but only with conditions, or you want to re-define the words it contains, FUNDAMENTALLY changing the meaning. You are adrift and have no real idea what you are, but you are socialists/progressives/liberals/egalitarians/Marxists/Fascists. Others know EXACTLY what they are doing and just want the question to go unanswered until it is too late and we are forced to drop the charade and bend over. Those people are called COMMUNISTS, Subversives, Fabians, Frankfurt Schoolers, and Fifth columnists, and as such they are dangerous to the entire Idea of America and deserve to be set adrift/gulag/HUNG. They cannot be allowed to continue to breathe, because when they get their way, you will only breathe by their permission. And also, some of you *say* you believe it, most of it, but you think you can tinker with the system, adjust a few things, talk sense to the Communists and Socialists, give them a little to get along, and everything will work itself out in the long run. Those people are called Republicans, and they have presided over 100 years of slow decline into SOCIALISM. They are ineffective and infertile. Anyone wanting to wonder why Donald Trump was elected need look no further than this paragraph. But there is hope! Trump means that more than half of the country holds allegiance to NEITHER of those three groups!

The question is, what are you?

The Wagon Analogy

Well, it looks like I lost another friend... not like R.I.P or anything, but my Facebook muck-racking has another casualty. My intention has never been to hound people and beat them into submission, but merely to prove that we all can agree. There is Truth out there, and we CAN find it. Our problems arise from our willingness to believe convenient falsehoods in order to make our lives more comfortable. In this case, it was the falsehood that has been propagated for YEARS that government employees, including teachers, firemen, police, etc, are taxpayers just like the rest of us. They are not. I don't want them to feel bad about it... the ones doing a good job should feel GOOD about it. I, and all other producers of wealth, pay them gladly and appreciate their work. But the VERY SECOND they begin to believe that they are somehow superior and a class above us mere citizens, the deal is off. We can no longer appreciate them. One way they have been led to believe that is by encouraging them to believe they are taxpayers like the rest of us. They are not, and it obscures the special relationship we SHOULD have with them: we are the employers and they are the employees. 

Let's take a County Employee, for instance. Say he makes $80k per year. Like most of us, he pays county sales and use taxes, and property taxes. But his paycheck comes from the county, too. So, why don't they just pay him less, by the sum of all the taxes he would otherwise pay? Or pay him less but give him an exemption card to show that his taxes have already been deducted from his pay? If his property taxes, sales and use taxes, etc, adds up to, say, $15k, why don't they pay him $65k and call it quits. It's the SAME THING. The end result is that he really makes $65k because the VERY SAME entity that pays him took some back. The same goes for Postal Workers, DMV workers, Military servicemen, Firemen, Congressmen, Senators, dogcatchers, social workers, Mayors, etc. And what I just described is not really feasible, but it should suffice to prove that they are not really "taxpayers" like the rest of us.

The analogy I used was only partially developed. I guess I should try to flesh it out a bit: Imagine a wagon train of pioneers trekking across the prairie. It has been a long and arduous journey, and all the horses but one have died and so most are walking and carrying their stuff. There are hunters, cooks, wheelwrights, farriers, cobblers, seamstresses, doctors, blacksmiths, map readers, children, soldiers, carpenters, etc. But only one wagon and one horse. At first, say, just the children are in the wagon along with the supplies/food. After a while, the doctor says, "Y'know, if I get any more blisters I will be unable to treat anyone else's blisters and we'll have to stop and the Indians will come and we'll all die." And so the doctor gets in the wagon. A little while later, the cook says, "Y'know, If I get in the wagon I could be preparing meals while we travel and we wouldn't have to stop for so long and everything would be more efficient." And so the cook gets in the wagon. A while later, the map reader says, "Y'know, without me, you all would be lost. My freaking feet hurt. I'm getting in the wagon!" And everyone else grudgingly allows it. Then, the carpenter says, "Well, without me, what are you gonna do if the wagon breaks?" And he promptly climbs in the wagon. Suddenly, they notice that the horse is breathing hard and struggling. A few of the guys still walking decide to help the horse and start pushing the wagon. After a while, the farrier says, "Man... my wrist hurts from all this pushing. If I injure my wrist, I won't be able to fix the horseshoes." And so it is decided that the farrier doesn't have to push. The hunters come to the same conclusion. Soon, the blacksmith pipes up with, "Y'know, since there are plenty of people pushing, I need to put my hammer and bellows in the wagon so I don't get too tired from carrying them." At some point, the seamstresses say, "Y'know, since we are going downhill, can we get in the wagon? We aren't really made for all this pushing anyway." And on it goes.

Okay... at some point, more than half of the pioneers end up in the wagon... or at least not pushing. Soon thereafter, a brilliant idea forms among the party. It began with the map reader who suggested that if the pushers pushed harder, they might reach a certain lake before nightfall and everyone would have fresh fish to eat and clean water. This sounded good to the pushers, but they were pretty tired already and unsure of themselves. One of them said, "Hey! We have to do all this extra work to get fresh fish and water... but you don't have to do anything extra?" So the map reader says, "Well, ok... let's VOTE on it!" And of course, since more than half of the people were in the wagon, the pushers had to push harder. A few days later, one of the cobblers sons said, "Hey everybody! Look at that guy! He's not really pushing, he's just kinda walking beside the wagon!" And so, a new idea was floated. "Why don't we have the children stationed around the outside of the wagon to keep an eye on the pushers so that doesn't happen again?"

As you can imagine... after a few weeks of this, the pushers ought to be getting a bit perturbed. "Look, I don't mind pushing the children, the cook, the doctor, and the map reader. It has to be done. I understand that. I do it gladly. But having the farriers sons whipping us to make us push harder, and the fact that the horse died a long time ago and we don't even NEED a Farrier anymore, and that ominous mountain range up ahead has us a little concerned!" At that, the carpenters nephew says, "Need we remind you that we voted last week that you guys can just SHUT UP AND PUSH!"

And so, the relevant question should be, are the people in the wagon helping the wagon get anywhere? Maybe a better question is, does the wagon get from point A to point B by the direct effort of the pushers, or by the effort of the riders? And the answer MUST BE that the riders are only indirectly, and secondarily, helping. They DO HELP, but only indirectly. The wagon would still get there without them.

  The ugly truth we all need to confront is that this country is at a tipping point. And since all I am qualified to do is shut up and push, it is up to you people in the wagon to kick out everyone that doesn't need to be in there, and tighten up your game, and at the very least, get out and walk! Or else, the pushers might decide that they don't need you and just walk away, like Ayn Rand wrote about. This problem was not caused by the pushers. It was caused by too many people in the wagon with blinders on, allowing them to think they were somehow pulling their own weight. That is the truth. And if I have to lose friends over it, so be it.

"The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth." - H.L. Mencken

http://fabiusmaximus.com/2010/03/05/workers/