The road to freedom is not paved with politics
Albuquerque Libertarian Examiner October 20, 11:01 PM
The road to freedom is not paved with politics
Kent McManigal
Freedom is not to be found in "politics". If you enjoy politics, then by all means play the game, but don't make the mistake of thinking that those who don't share your interests are "not doing anything" for freedom. The case may be that they are doing more by simply living free than all the activists combined will ever achieve. After all, "politics" doesn't have a very good track record of promoting freedom in any meaningful way.
You can be completely non-political while staying informed and increasing your own freedom. By your example, you can inspire others to increase their own freedom and give them an idea of how it can be done.
My own advice is to ignore the state and its ridiculous "laws" as much as possible; only paying attention to the tyranny in order to avoid becoming a statistic of state brutality. If you are a sociable sort, find like-minded people with whom you can share ideas. You could even join a secret society of free individuals. Do what makes you happy as long as it doesn't involve initiating force or deception.
What is probably the most powerful thing you can do for the future of freedom? Give your children a taste for freedom. It will stay with them for a lifetime. I was recently reading a friend's blog and she pointed out that letting your children experience freedom makes them remember it and want it. Looking back over my own childhood, I see how true that is.
As a child I wandered far from the watchful eyes of my parents. Taking chances. Exploring. It gave me a taste for freedom that will never fade. Even with, or possibly because of, the very real risks involved, there is probably no greater gift you can give your children. It teaches resourcefulness and responsibility. After all, if you get treed by a pack of angry feral dogs where no one can rescue you, you had better figure out a solution. More than anything else, my own childhood freedom probably had more influence on my current hunger for freedom than any other experience or teaching. I have tried to pass that along to my own children. I'm still trying. This is the road that will eventually lead to widespread freedom.
- xntryk1's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Inaction is the opiate of armchair activists and pseudo-cynics
Politics is the control of wealth and power. You are being conditioned to condemn politics as petty and boring, thus granting all the more control to the powers that be.
---------------------------------
Fuck the Enlightenment
Viva la Renaissance
The road to slavery,
The road to slavery, however, is paved with non-politics. I agree that living free can be a good supplement.
I gotta ask
How is it that you see the only type of societal organization that doesn't call for enslaving 'the people' as leading to slavery?
Government requires everyone in it's declared jurisdiction to be subserviant to it. Anarchy has no declared jurisdiction.
Please explain.
It is just an observation
It is just an observation that we have seen a rush towards fascism in this country and there was no light at the end of the tunnel until we got involved politically.
Thanks for the response, but you didn't answer my question
I'll rephrase my question in case I didn't make it clear.
The government, even the government framed by the US Constitution, calls for anyone within the territory over which it claims dominion to be subserviant to it. It (the government) creates for itself by self declaration a relationship with those people over which it claims dominion that enslaves those people.
So...how is it that you see the political means, that is the use of government, as the path towards freedom and the non-political means (an-archy) as the path towards slavery?
What a load of hoohaa!
"The government, even the government framed by the US Constitution, calls for anyone"
No it doesn't. The Bill of Right specifically say the opposite. They spell out what the government cannot do.
"for anyone within the territory over which it claims dominion"
Congress shall not... How is that a claim of dominion by the top over the bottom? It's the exact opposite. We are claiming "dominion" over the top.
"to be subserviant to it"
No where is there any service defined in the original BIll of Rights. This is irrelevant theory of monarchy applied to where it makes no sense whatsoever.
"It (the government) creates for itself by self declaration a relationship with those people over which it claims dominion that enslaves those people."
No it does not. The people defined a strict relationship where they are in fact above the state.
That's why sheriffs are more powerful than governors.
"So...how is it that you see the political means, that is the use of government"
Political means under the US Constitution are the use of the public's power not government. Your anti monarchist sentiments are appreciated but they simply do not represent the inverted structure of the US political model.
"non-political means (an-archy) as the path towards slavery?"
Because non-political means in the bottom up context of the US political model means you do not defend your neighbor.
WE ARE THE POLITICIANS. THEY ARE THE CIVILIANS.
You've got this whole thing backwards.
---------------------------------
Fuck the Enlightenment
Viva la Renaissance
You are new. Allow me to help you to understand something.
Your entire analysis and rebuttal of my points is quite amusing. You believe you're not subserviant to government? Do you believe that the farmers in western PA who were the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794 weren't seen as subserviant to the government by government? Do you believe that the Browns of NH weren't seen as subserviant to government by the government? What the documents that outline the form of government that's supposed to exist say and the manner in which the government actually operates are two very different things, and this is a distinction which you clearly don't see.
The rest of your post and rebuttal is rather innane. 'The people' are above the government? Are you for real? How does that work out for people who take that view?
The political means is theft. Go learn something. Read Bastiat's book, The Law.
Perhaps then you may be prepared to see the truth.
I didn't say above the law
In Parliament laws come from the top and get refined toward local area needs.
In America we complain and laws get made. The truth you are grasping at isn't that we are under the rule of those at the top. The truth is that because we have been lazy corporations are getting more laws in than we are.
---------------------------------
Fuck the Enlightenment
Viva la Renaissance
I didnt answer your question
I didnt answer your question because it is off topic. You know that I think that the likely consequence of anarchy is feudalism, making a limited government relatively better. These circles get really real boring. Apparently you are not sick of saying the SAME stuff over and over. Maybe you should bring some sort of new facts once in a while to liven things up.
My question is off topic? Are you taking notes from Pelosi now?
I'd ask if you were kidding, but I know you're not. My question is directly relevant to your comment. Ducking the answer won't make the question or the principle go away.
Let me guess, you feel war is peace too, right? And is ignorance strength?
No it isnt. You bring your
No it isnt. You bring your anarchist bullshit into every thread. We are here talking about the utilitarian value of political action here and now. I'm tired of talking about this with you. You dont even know your own ideology as well as I do, you just parrot the same absolute platitudes rather than actually trying to convince.
The political means is theft.
Just because you don't believe it doesn't make it false. You bring your endorsement of theft into every thread. That's what the political means is; theft. You believe in the political process, you believe that some special people can declare what they're going to take, from whom they are going to take it, and that no one can do anything about it except of course to 'leave', whatever the hell that means. It's quite clear you don't believe in the individual's right to own themselves, their labor, or property. And you think you know my ideology better than I do?
I doubt highly you'd have the balls to attempt to come steal the property you advocate for the government to take from me for yourself. It's no wonder you advocate so much for government.
I know I'll never convince you to stop making claims on what isn't yours. I just want enough people to see the theft and violence of government for what it is so that when I defend myself and my property agains the aggression of people like you it's seen for the just act that it would be.
Fantastic article!
I really enjoyed reading it! Thanks!
I gotta tell ya xntryk.... we must have some sort of mind-meld
I can usually tell by the TITLE of the post that it is you. Thanks for another FABULOUS article.
Educate, educate, educate..... that is what I see as our mission here. Change the knee-jerk reaction of society to one of freedom. Not to say that the activism is not worthwhile..... but it won't help if society isn't in general agreement.
_________________________________________________
"Not armies, not nations, have advanced the race; but here and there, in the course of ages, an individual has stood up and cast his shadow over the world."
Ain't it the truth...
...and thanks. :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Let them protest all they want, as long as they pay their taxes.” ...credited to Al Haig, Ronald Reagan's Secretary of State.
http://groups.yahoo.com/g...
http://www.dailypaul.com/...
Ron Paul = Red Pill