Sunday, April 29, 2012

On horns of a dilemma

America was founded as a free Republic, a Republic which, from its' very inception, was under threat by those who favored consolidation. The struggle between those who wanted to preserve subsidiarity and those who wanted to consolidate power in a central government raged in the legislatures and courts between 1789 and 1861.

That which could not be won by seventy years of debate, the tyrant Lincoln won by a brutal war, a war that forced sovereign states who freely withdrew from a free compact to remain, against their wills, in the union. With the Yankee victory and subjugation of the Southern Republics, ultimate consolidation of all power in Washington became inevitable.

There were those, such as Grover Cleveland, who hoped Pandora could be put back in her box.  But the Linconian consolidation had prepared the soil of American governance too well for the poison seeds of so-called Progressivism.  When Progressivism did arrive it arrived with a vengeance, lead by the megalomanic, Teddy Roosevelt, and followed by the social troglodyte utopian, Woodrow Wilson. With these collectivist book ends Progressivism rooted itself in both parties.

Progressivism, in relation to Liberty, is anything but progress. It is a form of socialism, and socialism is a form of political slavery.

The great libertarian, Lysander Spooner put it this way; "...there is no difference, in principle --- but only in degree --- between political and chattel slavery. The former, no less than the latter, denies a man's ownership of himself and the products of his labor; and asserts that other men may own him, and dispose of him and his property, for their uses, and at their pleasure."

With progressivism the poisons of both socialism and fascism infected the once free Republic.  At first the infection did not seem fatal. Their influences even appeared to wane with the so-called end of the Progressive era.  But if they vanished at all, they did so only from public sight. The Constitutional amendments passed in the second decade of the 20th century had already done massive damage, crippling the Republic in countless ways, as well as energizing the enemies of liberty within the wounded Republic.

These influences, therefore, remained well ensconced in government, working insidiously, eventually creating a false left and right that, today, bear the labels  "liberal" and "conservative." But the fact is, neither has any meaningful relationship with the traditional understanding of these two terms. The liberals are any thing but liberal to those who disagree with their policies, and the effects of their time in power clearly show conservatives conserve nothing.  Rather, both ideologies ceaselessly engender government growth and control. As George Wallace was fond of saying, "There's not a dime's worth of difference between them"---referring to the two establishment parties who have had a monopoly on power for over a century and a half now.

As these two evil twins have matured, they have taken over more and more, reducing the states to mere administrative units of the Federal government, intruding increasingly into every aspect of the private lives of citizens, and creating a massive complexity of laws and regulations no human on earth can comprehend.  As a consequence, We the People have become increasingly constrained and discouraged in countless ways. It is not difficult to see that the purpose of the central government has been stood on its' head and made more and more the tool of private and special interests. 

While separation of church and state has taken the form of government suppression of and hostility toward religion (especially Christianity), a movement to separate socialist forces (such as unions and state), or fascist forces (such as corporations and state) cannot be found any where on the radar screen.

As a result of the invasion and growth of the Progressivism, we now find the once great and free Republic on its death bed, with the forces of collectivism beating down the last doors of resistance. While collectivism has always had a bad name in America, things have changed so greatly in the past two decades that the advocates of total government are almost ready to publicly name it and claim it for what it is: Totalitarianism--and to do so with no apologies.

American society is in an intolerable state, housing the irreconcilable visions of individualism and collectivism. Which way it will go remains to be seen, but the one certainty is that things cannot remain as they are.  

The American poet, Robert Lee Frost, prophetically wrote "Two roads diverged in a yellow wood...and I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference."

Even as desperate as the situation is, America does have a real choice.  Even at this late date, the road to serfdom is not inevitable. And no, it is not between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. These are not real choices, but flip sides of the same consolidational coin. The only real choice is between the establishment forms of collectivism, the most lethal of which are lead by the collectivist totalitarian, Barack Obama, and the standard bearer for American Liberty, Ron Paul.  

Whether America goes toward some form of imperialist, utopian socialism or returns to the free and peaceful Republic of the Founders, the transition will be painful---very painful.  There will be much unavoidable distress and no one will escape unscathed. A large number will not survive at all if the collectivist route is chosen.  While that may seem an extreme statement, it is not without its' witness in history.

In a fallen world, where men are hypnotically allured by power, man has always had to struggle for  the recognition and exercise of his natural rights--for his freedom. Freedom, historically, is most definitely the road less traveled, the road taken only by those truly hopeful, confident, creative and courageous--those filled with reasonable hope and optimism based upon a single condition: being left alone.

As the unbiased eye surveys the scene across the vast empire of the American union, it is not hard to see it is in great disarray. Destroyers ruling the streets of once great cities are filled with passionate intensity, to borrow a phase from Yeats, while the once productive, the so-called middle class, seems exhausted from the battering, plunder, regulating and pillaging of the Federal government. Government control and oppression have combined to create an atmosphere of  discouragement and exhaustion--a general malaise. Will America go the route of the many, or take the road of freedom--the road less traveled?

Signs are not encouraging for the most part. Already we are beginning to see articles talking about expatriation of citizens in an attempt to escape the plunder of the American Empire. No one wants to escape where there is freedom. No one wants to stay where there is oppression. When citizens begin escaping their homeland and revoking their citizenship you can be sure something grave is in the process of happening--that a trend is being set that is not likely to end well. 

The real question the election of 2012 will answer is, "Have the people of America become so sedated and made so passive by the drug of socialist entitlements and dependency that they have no more will to resist total enslavement to their government masters? Or does enough real courage, confidence and hope still exist in the hearts of Americans that the fires of freedom might reignite and burn brightly on the dark and bloody shores of North America?

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Governments, Human Freedom, Racial Hatred and Segregation

Birds of a feather flock together. Because bluebirds prefer to stick together doesn't mean they hate cedar waxwings. The fact that you don't want to live among others who are different from you does not automatically mean you hate them. But that is the knee jerk assumption that the American political left and the Federal government (which are one and the same) want people to conclude.

In South Africa today many are noting that things were better for both whites and blacks during apartheid. If some one said something analogous to that in America regarding segregation, the Orwellian thought Nazis would immediately shout him down as a bigot. They would never give him the shadow of a doubt. They would never, for a single moment, think that maybe the person saying this is doing so because he has the best interest of both races in mind, and his opinion is actually born of examining the evidence, all the evidence, objectively, and is not just the result of some long held bias.

The knee jerk accusation of racial bigotry is the standard attack on whites for resisting government enforced integration. Yet, when blacks freely choose "to flock together" and "rebalkanize" by demanding their own television channels, their own magazines, their own fraternities in colleges, their own student union buildings, and their own dorms, there is no analogous outcry against them. How much sense does that make? Does integration only work one way? Does integration only work when and where and to the degree blacks want to work?

Of all the injustices there are, you'll find the suppression of the free and lawful choices of human beings near the very top of the list--especially when it involves the natural right of freedom of association.

If people freely choose to integrate, nothing should stop them from doing so--with the operative word being "freely." If not, nothing has the right to make them do so--not any individual, or court, or administration, or document--for Freedom of Association is a Natural Right. The very arrogance of the use of force to suppress human freedom and rob the individual of his or her natural rights is, its' self, among the greatest of all human evils.

People instinctively resist force, even if that force is trying to make them do something that may be reasonably considered a good. 

Why would they resist a given good? 

They resist because they know in their hearts that it is profoundly wrong to use an evil means to accomplish a perceive good--especially when that evil means is the suppression of freedom. People want their wills unencumbered, and they instinctively know that the use of force robs them of their free will. And to the degree a man ceases to be free to choose he ceases to be human. Those who take his freedom diminish his humanity by degrees. That is why they resist.

To the degree a government suppresses lawful freedom and natural rights, that society grows despotic, cruel and inhuman. The federal government has done this very thing, and has, as a consequence, grown increasingly despotic, oppressive and controlling. In their arrogance, the leaders of the Federal Government have sought to do what God Himself will not do: take our freedom from us. 

Unlike the Federal government, God respects our created humanity and the freedom intrinsic to it. Grace builds on nature; grace perfects nature. So states an ancient Christian truth. In contrast, governments attack human nature by imposing the inhuman upon humans. In other words, treating We the People as if we are mere inanimate objects, lacking judgement and incapable of self determination---treating us as if  we are fit only to be manipulated as passive objects of the most recent social experiments, bright ideas and arbitrary tinkerings of Dear Leader and his cadre of elite bureaucrats.

Under the aegis of the false philanthropy of "equality," the elites in the Federal government have sought to grow their power and control over the American populace by using dehumanizing means and methods.  The effect has been the very reverse of what was purportedly intended.

The Federal government is playing a dangerous game, heedless of the fact that he who rides the tiger's back ends up in its' stomach.

They apparently failed to learn this one simple lesson from their one time adversaries, the Soviets. Achieving conformity of behavior by threat of force does not change hearts and minds--the very things that must change if race relations or any other kind of relations are to improve in America. 

Relations do need to improve in America--all kinds of relations. But government meddling and the use of force increases anger and resentment, and makes every thing worse. Government force hardens rather than opens hearts, creates a metaphysical balkanization and provokes the just outrage of a people who intuitively know that their natural rights are being suppressed.

The recent Federal policy of "artificially evening the playing field" in an attempt to correct perceived injustices in the past not only fails to help solve America's societal problems, it has made things worse--much worse. 

Such actions on behalf of the Feds do not result in justice, but compound injustice, setting citizens against one another in a legislative zero-sum-game, tearing the domestic fabric of the nation apart. 

The policy makers in Washington would do well to pay heed to Winston Churchill's warning, "If the past sits in judgement of the present, the future will be lost."

Only a people who do not fear the encroachment of a foreign power (government) putting their freedom, their families and their possessions under constant threat of loss can live happily and peacefully among one another, in justice.

Only freedom works.

Can I get an "Amen!"?

Thursday, April 19, 2012

Two Economic visions for America and their Consequences

The questions that historians will muse over in future generations is, "How did the richest nation in the world, with the means to sustain its' prosperity for centuries, how did they squander and annihilate their entire wealth and position in the world, doing it in the span of only a few short decades?" Such madness is one of the wonders of the modern world.
And here's their answer they'll come up with--it is so obvious we won't need the distance of history to see it: the causal forces were many that brought the breath taking collapse of the Yankee Empire, but they were all primarily centered around a selfish, self-indulgent, cowardly, greedy, spineless, corrupt, ignorant, power hungry, depraved political class; a blind, and ideological leadership who, as the primary means of staying in power, spoiled and indulged the people with largess from their own money, stolen from them by the leaders in the form of taxes and inflation (the cruelest and most harmful, painful to the poor tax of all: the hidden tax).
The mechanism the politicians used to destroy America is commonly called "misallocation of wealth." Misallocation consumes and destroys wealth.
Proper allocation multiplies wealth.
It's the difference between eating your seed corn and planting it.
Eating your seed corn feeds you today but provides nothing for tomorrow, planting it multiplies it beyond measure.

Let's juxtapose that into the present situation.
Oblamer makes "the rich" pay their "fair share"--whatever the Hell that is.
Oblamer takes that money out of the private sector and misallocates it in order to buy votes from the non-productive.
This is tantamount to eating your seed corn.
What if Oblamer does not take the money, but leaves more and more wealth in the hands of "the rich?"

The rich then take the "seed corn," plant it (investment). It creates jobs for those who would have eaten the seed corn from the master's hand (Oblamer), and they have the dignity of being able to feed themselves, not just once, but for decades through this process of proper allocation of wealth.
The problem with this second scenario (in Oblamer's view) is that it does not secure the politician's power and increase the control of the government over the people. Proper allocation of wealth leaves the people too free, too independent, too confident in their own abilities.

Oblamer's thinking and methodology is the thinking of a slave master (which is what he African ancestors were, and many still are).
His subjects (supporters) are those who have abdicated their God given right to liberty for the security of the slave state.
The welfare, entitlement state is nothing more than institutionalized slavery, concocted to do nothing more than increase government control over the people.

In Oblamer's world of misallocation, wealth really is a zero sum game.
In the world of the entrepreneur and investor wealth is multiplied through growth.
What we are seeing at the moment and have been for some time is the welfare system devouring the seed corn that would have fed every one in the coming years. It will soon be all gone. Then what will we do?
I don't know how I can make this any cleared for your f**ked up collectivists.