Powered by Blogger.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

How to Bring a Country to it's Knees - Part 1 - The Philosophy Of Rule

"You have to ask yourself, 'Who owns me? Do I own myself or am I just another piece of government property?' " -- Neal Boortz

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." -- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, June 28, 2004.

Marxism, Socialism, Fascism, Lenninism, Totalitarianism and Statism are essentially the same things. Other than a few discrepencies from ism to ism, you'll find that you can sum up all these groups in a category called Collectivism.

Many people don't understand this concept and don't realize that the ideas of Collectivism have hijacked our political, economic, and educational systems and is broadcast through our homes by the media.

So what is Collectivism?

Ayn Rand states "Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group -- whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called 'the common good'."

Bert Rand reminds us: "Don't forget that pure democracy is a form of collectivism -- it readily sacrifices individual rights to majority wishes. Since it involves no constitutional bill of rights, or at least, no working and effective one, the majority-of-the-moment can and does vote away the rights of the minority-of-the-moment, even of a single individual. This has been called 'mob rule,' the 'tyranny of the majority' and many other pejorative names. It is one of the greatest threats to liberty, the reason why America's founding fathers wrote so much so disparagingly of pure democracy."

Many would stop here and smirk thinking Wait a second!! We ARE a democracy!

The fact is, we are not. Or more correctly, we were never supposed to be. The founding fathers worked exceedingly hard at making sure that the United States of America was established as a REPUBLIC. Much of their personal writings talk extensively on the dangers of a democracy. In fact, NOT ONCE does the word 'democracy' appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, or the constitution of any of the fifty states. Yet today, our teachers and politicians use it as if the word itself was noble and the impetus to lead the world to peace and prosperity.

One might wonder what is so bad about democracy. To put it simply, a democracy is the power of the majority to rule over the minority. It is the right to allow a group through concensus to overthrow the rights and liberties of the minority or individual. It is essentially collectivism and the last thing the founding fathers wanted for this nation.

"Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments the real power lies in the majority of the community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of the Constituents." -- James Madison, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, 1788

"The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816

The people cannot delegate to government the power to do anything which would be unlawful for them to do themselves." -- John Locke

"A pure democracy ... can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party... Hence it is that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in thier deaths." -- James Madison, Federalist No. 10

In fact, the Constitution is very specific on the type of government we should have.

"The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government..." -- United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 4

To understand the objective of the framers of our Constitution, you have to understand the definition of another 'ism.' This 'ism' seperates itself from those found in the broad category of collectivism and stands alone in it's support of the individual over groups. It is the basis of freedom, of liberty, and is the idea behind what made America's government so special and so different from its contemporaries. It is called Individualism.

The founding fathers had been under rule from a corrupt government where it's citizens served the king, and where rights and property did not belong to the individual, but to the crown. After they fought and gained freedom, they wanted nothing to do with the collectivist ideals that had been forced upon them. Having their opportunity, they set out to create a nation whose government would be the smallest in the world and with very limited power. Their goal? To assure to every American that their life would be their own by establishing a Constitution that guaranteed that THEIR government would never have the capacity to interfere in their lives. It was an experiment. It was a revolutionary idea. And it failed.

Today we have the largest and most powerful government the world has ever seen. This is a far cry from the ideas of Jefferson and his pals as they penned forth their vision of the very opposite on that famous piece of paper we know as The Constitution of the United States of America. But that comes later. Let's get back to Individualism.

"Individualism regards man -- every man -- as an independent, sovereign entity who possesses an inalienable right to his own life, a right derived from his nature as a rational being. Individualism holds that a civilized society, or any form of association, cooperation or peaceful co-existence among men, can be achieved only on the basis of the recognition of individual rights -- and that a group, as such, has no rights other than the individual rights of its members." -- Ayn Rand

"This right to life, this right to liberty, and this right to pursue one’s happiness is unabashedly individualistic, without in the slightest denying at the same time our thoroughly social nature. It’s only that our social relations, while vital to us all, must be chosen -­ that is what makes the crucial difference." -- Prof. Tibor R. Machan

"The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom." -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

"In principle, there are only two fundamental political viewpoints. That is, two contradictory ends of the 'political spectrum.' Those two principles are freedom and slavery." -- Mark Da Cunha

It is this ideology that guided the framing of The Constitution. At no time in history had a government been established that guaranteed that every individual was his own master. As the Declaration of Independence declares, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The fight for Liberty was costly. Many Americans died fighting for their freedoms and the founding fathers did not take lightly what they wrote. Some of our leaders today have referred to our Constitution as a "living document," essentially meaning that as society progresses, we can not be expected to abide by the chains or confines of this document. To say that we can contradict its limiting powers or ignore its constraints is irresponsible and is an affront to the very freedoms that so many died for.

The Constitution is binding, a contract for all time between the people and its government and it was meant to be so. Because the cost of freedom was so high for so many, would it make sense that some of the greatest thinkers of all time would leave us with a flimsy Constitution that could be changed and molded to fit the whims of government? The answer is a resounding no. These men were fighters, they were champions of freedom and liberty, and they were serious.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." -- Jefferson et al, The Declaration of Independence

"In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."- Thomas Jefferson

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."- Samuel Adams

Now back to the present.

As I said before, the great expiriment has failed. At no time in history has a government wielded more power, more authority, and more influence than ours. In the coming weeks and months (as I have time) I will be delving into more detail of how we got to where we are, how we can fix the problem or even if we want to. The reality is many people are apathetic or even happy with where we are. They enjoy the ease and comfort of knowing that government takes care of them and even cheer as "patriots" as their rights and freedoms are slowly stripped away. The lack of accountability in this country is astounding to me as is the lack of knowledge. I believe I have a moral responsibility to educate those who will hear and this blog is the beginning of my stand for the ideals that our founding fathers fought for so long ago. I invite you all to join me in this fight, for we all have a voice. Let it be heard.

God Bless,
-Travis Jackson

"But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty."--Ron Paul

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."-- Samuel Adams

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments and Discussion:

Total Pageviews

G. Edward Griffin: A World Without Cancer

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP