Thread: It's Not Really About Liberty

Freedom.



I don't think there was a single moment when freedom lost its' importance to the American people, or to Germans or to the French. It may not be a rejection of liberty that Man invests so much faith in government, but rather a debilitating fear of insecurity mixed with an insatiable resentment and paranoia surrounding economic inequalities. Marxists do not have an innate dislike of the ability to make choices. They seem to desire freedom of expression and to express interests in arts and science, as if they were materialists, individualists, or capitalists. They don't like being told what they can and cannot do and are fervent supporters of Democracy and all the liberties associated with political activism.



Libertarians and Capitalists, throughout the ages, have watched their liberties dwindle as governments have crept back into their lives Democratically, or freely, if the two can be considered equals. We have accused the aggressors as being tyrants, as being backwards intellectuals aiming to destroy the foundations of freedom, opposed to the most prominent principles of liberty. Our cries, themselves, have been perceived as paranoid and unfair, by the aggressors, who view their Democratic activism as an expression of liberty, a not an encroachment.



It is out of an environment of freedom that the Marxists and Liberals have reconstructed the powers of government, always aiming to extirpate the exhausting burdens of insecurity or inequity stressing the fabric of their societies. They find the idea that freedom requires insecurity an immature view, and find no contradiction in constructing government powers to ameliorate the instability of Man's Liberty by providing for social and economic security, in addition to the stricter rules of law meant to keep us safe and independent of one another.



For those opposed, we must admit that what we really seek is insecurity, because we recognize that insecurity breeds the greatest virtues and strengths in Man. That liberty without insecurity is tainted, that it gathers up all the virtues and vices of man and dives them into the crevasses of every lowest common denominator. We must admit that liberty allows for suffering, that liberty allows for people to destroy themselves and their families. We must admit that we are unsatisfied with the mediocrities and regulations necessary to provide for the common security of all.



While the Marxists have not yet found an economic model capable of sustaining their egalitarian ideology, they may one day succeed. Will we still be uncomfortable with their ideologies if we cannot see our own economic destruction looming on the horizon? Of course we will. The kind of liberty we seek is not liberty for liberty's sake. It is bred of a belief in individualism, in personal responsibility, and in an unregulated economic environment.



We must be honest.



We reject the idea that government should have the authority to regulate our economies, even when the people desire to use their liberty to enact sympathetic legislation. We reject the idea that government should have the authority to take from the productive and give to the unproductive, even when the people desire to use their liberty to support such legislation. We are not Democrats. We are not fans of Democracy. For with Democracy comes Mob Rule, comes the rule of the lowest common denominator. With Democracy comes arbitrary government; government by whim, driven by every emotional insecurity held by the people. With Democracy comes Corporatism and Socialism and Nationalism, all things we Libertarians distrust!



This is not a campaign for or against liberty. Democracy is a kind a of liberty. This is a campaign for and against a specific kind of government, a campaign for or against Democracy. Marx understood that Democracy was necessary for "Communism" (his idea of Communism, for by the end of his life, not even Marx was a "Marxist"). As Libertarians, we must look back to the American Founders for their wisdom and vision of a Constitutional Republic aimed at limiting government, at keeping the beast tied tight to his cage. We must bite the bullet and challenge the philosophies of Democracy itself, in favor of a strictly constitutional structure, impeding Government, getting in its way, protecting the sovereignty of communities, families, and individuals alike. We must fight to keep that sovereignty independent and to keep it from spreading into Democracy, where the whims of the majority override the liberties of individuals, families, and communities.



This is not about freedom. I think, maybe, we continue to lose the debate when we get confused about the true nature of what we are debating.

Good piece.



But I think it is far too late for this former constitutional republic to be saved at this point if one values liberty at all. The union must be dissolved; states and localities, communities and families all need to be able to re-assert control over their own destinies from Washington.

[quote name='Defensor' date='30 March 2010 - 09:16 AM' timestamp='1269955007' post='134614']

Good piece.



But I think it is far too late for this former constitutional republic to be saved at this point if one values liberty at all. The union must be dissolved; states and localities, communities and families all need to be able to re-assert control over their own destinies from Washington.

[/quote]



I'm not that opposed to such an idea.

I know I will never feel fully free of my oppressors until my government uses tax money to construct a massive multi-billion dollar wall at the borders to prevent entry - as a way of confirming the federal government's exclusive right to decide who will live in this country and who wont. This, coupled with at least 25 overseas military bases, all tax funded, in foreign sovergin nations, near-constant warfare against peasant farmers who couldn't find us on a map, and the maintainance of over 15 secret service agencies to spy on my neighbors, again, all on the government dime.





This is the only system that will allow me to feel free from government abuse of public funds at the hands of liberals - which I define as people who want to use public money for their pet projects.

[quote name='Dr.Knuckles' date='30 March 2010 - 10:50 AM' timestamp='1269960614' post='134643']

I know I will never feel fully free of my oppressors until my government uses tax money to construct a massive multi-billion dollar wall at the borders to prevent entry - as a way of confirming the federal government's exclusive right to decide who will live in this country and who wont. This, coupled with at least 25 overseas military bases, all tax funded, in foreign sovergin nations, near-constant warfare against peasant farmers who couldn't find us on a map, and the maintainance of over 15 secret service agencies to spy on my neighbors, again, all on the government dime.

[/quote]



Good description of the Obama welfare-warfare state.

[quote name='Defensor' date='30 March 2010 - 08:24 AM' timestamp='1269962653' post='134651']

Good description of the Obama welfare-warfare state.

[/quote]



Obama's been President for a year, not 200 years. Give me a break. That was embarassing.

[quote name='Goldwater' date='30 March 2010 - 12:08 PM' timestamp='1269965281' post='134676']

I would love for the states that continualy vote red or blue to become two seperate nations. A simple election in each state could decide which states go where.

[/quote]

That's a pretty foolish way to divide things up. The partisan red-state blue-state game means nothing.