Liberty Practice ChallengeSubmitted by Josf on Wed, 04/11/2012 - 10:29
On the subject of Goals: a member of this forum Judge Bartley offered comments and a link concerning the practice of Liberty as a rule, or a challenge, in our world.
My words, my take on things.
To be more specific the exchange of information, or the discussion, which is a competitive endeavor seeking higher quality and lower cost viewpoints by comparative analysis on the original purpose behind The Constitution.
Please note that the question can be general or specific, and where it is general the answer will be the collective sum, or aggregate total, of many people sharing the same goal, while the specific answer will be more accurate as to the actual goal being shared by each individual person.
Generally speaking The Constitution can be understood as a thing that is used to improve government.
Yes, many people may say, I agree, as this is a common goal, to improve, so, by all means, let us improve government.
It has been a long fought battle on my part to nail down the specific goals in mind for the specific people involved, so as to understand why these specific improvements were made so as to make government better, according to those people who made government better, and that general question has a very specific example in the change from The Articles of Confederation to The Constitution.
Why, specifically, was it changed, and how was the specific goal reached, in that specific case.
A. No Constitution (People subject to British Rule, fleeing Britain, Settling in America, then becoming ruled by the Monarchy step, by fearful step, once again)
B. The Declaration of Independence and The Articles of Confederation leading to Published Rebellion and Invasion by a Criminal Army sent by the Monarchy to enforce obedience upon Targeted Individuals (all who refuse to obey)
C. Elimination of the Invading Criminal Army and a sudden and rapid force employed toward the goal of altering The Articles of Confederation into The Constitution, or, in more specific terms: the removal of a working Democratic Federated Republic and the empowering of a Single Nation State.
Having my own viewpoint, not having a viewpoint handed down to me, I can not write the script written by someone else, I write the script written by me. That above is the way I see it, and I must add:
Removal of Legal Money Competition under a working Democratic Federated Republic and instead of Legal Money Competition those people who created The Constitution ushered in a new age of enforced Legal Money Monopoly, because that was their goal.
In the Practice of Liberty, it seems to me, people will volunteer to meet and discuss and make deals so as to avoid something terrible, so as to avoid horrible things, so as to avoid costly actions, and so as to avoid being subject to the designs of criminals, including the goal of avoiding subjugation by Legal Criminals.
How far away from Liberty have a people become when those people don't even have a word for Legal Criminals.
In the past, it seems to me, the operating term, the word, for a Legal Criminal was a Monarchist, or Nationalist, or a Tory or Loyalist.
"Oh, yea, the guy down the block, he is a Tory, a Loyalist, one of those guys who feeds the Army that is now occupying our homes, stealing from us, raping our women, killing us, torturing us, because we have the audacity to refuse to feed them, so that they can grow even more powerful while their targeted victims grow even weaker by that obedience to that arrangement."
"Does he feed them under duress, you know, at the point of a bayonet?"
"No, no, no, he will trample upon, or stampede over, his own grandma to get in line to lick their boots, are you kidding me?"
"A toady to sociopaths is what he is, I declare."
"Exactly, pining for a position in the new realm is my guess."
"A steady income as an informant most likely eh?"