“A patriot is one who loves his country all of the
time, and his government when it deserves it.”
From personal experience I can tell you that one of the hardest things to do is to detach one’s self emotionally from a subject and examine their own personal beliefs under a microscope for flaws. That becomes even more difficult when you have not been taught how to think critically; to be able to objectively analyze all sides of an issue and form a fact based opinion. If you cannot, or will not do this, you are no better than a sheep that is herded around by those who ‘provide’ your thoughts for you; be your shepherd a news anchor, an elected official, or the instructor who taught you in school. If you cannot, or will not think – question – then you cannot say that the thoughts and opinions you hold are your own.
Last night I watched an interesting video that covered a multitude of subjects, but one of the things said in this video struck me as being quite true. The narrator said that people seek out things that validate their existing beliefs and they shy away from things that make them question those beliefs. I have found this to be true; people seek out others who share their beliefs and avoid those who don’t. Take your choice of news channel for instance. If you are a Republican you are likely to watch FOX News and avoid CNN like the plague. If you are a Democrat the reverse is probably true. The books you read, the shows you watch, and even the people you associate with, all are chosen to reinforce, or validate your opinions.
Aside from our opposable thumbs, what sets us apart from the beasts of the field is our ability to think critically. Prove me wrong. If cows could think, how come they never invented automobiles? If pigs could think, how come they have not learned to fly? If dogs could think, how come they have not invented devices that allow them to contact dogs on the other side of the planet? If man had not been able to think we would still be living in caves, subject to the harsh reality of living in a world where our freedom and safety are at the mercy of nature.
So why are so many people today averse to thinking? Is it laziness that causes them to accept whatever they are told by those in positions of authority or trust? Has thinking been bred out of us? Or, is it possible that we have been indoctrinated into a condition where we are incapable of thinking; to simply accept whatever we are told; to not question things; to simply follow orders…OBEY?
I’m going to tell you a painful truth here; if you are incapable, or unwilling to think, then you are a slave to those who provide you with your thoughts and beliefs. Look at a computer; it is just a box with some circuitry in it. A computer without the software cannot think for itself, it has to be PROGRAMED to take the data that is inputted to it and produce a result. Our minds are similar in that, for them to produce an accurate analysis of an issue, they must consider all sides of the matter; be open minded enough to examine ideas that might conflict with existing beliefs.
That lies at the core of critical thinking, the ability to examine freely all sides of an issue and come to an objective decision based upon evidence and fact; and if you reject facts which cause you to question pre-existing beliefs, then your opinion on the matter is not based upon facts; upon the truth. If your opinion is NOT based upon the truth, then it follows that it must be an emotional response; making you no better than an animal that reacts instinctively to stimuli.
If you were to undertake a study of the evolution and history of man you would find, that aside from the threats posed to him by being in a state of nature, the biggest threat to man was…OTHER MEN. In a state of nature, man, as a singular individual, is possessed with the ability to do as he pleases without restraint. At the same time he is saddled with the complete responsibility for providing for all his wants and needs.
Locke describes this condition as “… a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man.” There is a word for that condition – LIBERTY.
However, in a state of perfect liberty there are no rules, or guidelines, that man must follow; which places the liberty of all other men at risk from their fellow men. That is why Locke adds the disclaimer, “But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is not a state of licence: though man in that state have an uncontroulable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some nobler use than its bare preservation calls for it. The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions…”
That explanation, or description of liberty sounds strikingly similar to something Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter to Isaac Tiffany in 1819, “Liberty then I would say that, in the whole plenitude of it’s extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will: but rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will, within the limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.”
So, if liberty is the ability to do whatever we want, rightful liberty is the ability to do whatever we want…so long as we do not violate the equal rights of others. The question is, if man enjoyed that kind of freedom, why would they quit their status as freemen in a state of nature and place themselves under any system which allowed other men to enact rules that they must obey.
The answer is quite simple actually. In an absolute state of nature, while there is a higher law that governs the actions of men, that law has no enforcement mechanism; it relies upon man willingly respecting the rights and liberty of his fellow man – something history has proven time and time again that man is not willing to do.
In an absolute state of nature each man is free, and has the right, to defend and protect his life, his liberty, and his property against attack from others. Locke goes on to explain this as follows, “And that all men may be restrained from invading others rights, and from doing hurt to one another, and the law of nature be observed, which willeth the peace and preservation of all mankind, the execution of the law of nature is, in that state, put into every man’s hands, whereby every one has a right to punish the transgressors of that law to such a degree, as may hinder its violation.”
However, in a state of nature the weak can be terrorized by the strong, or the many; making their lives, their liberty and their property unsure. It is for this reason that man joins together into societies, or commonwealths, and places them self under the authority of ‘government’; to better secure their liberty and their property. Locke explains this by saying, “The great and chief end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property. To which in the state of nature there are many things wanting.”
Locke is/was not alone in speaking such sentiments; others throughout history have spoken similar sentiments. Take for instance the book The Law, written by Frederic Bastiat in 1850, wherein we read, “What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.
Each of us has a natural right—from God—to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties?
If every person has the right to defend—even by force—his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right—its reason for existing, its lawfulness—is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force—for the same reason—cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.” There is also Thomas Paine, author of the pamphlet Common Sense, who in his book The Rights of Man declares, “Man did not enter into society to become worse than he was before, nor to have fewer rights than he had before, but to have those rights better secured.”
Let us not forget that the very document that established America as an independent country 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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”
I think it is safe to conclude that men join together into societies, and form governments, for one purpose – to secure their liberty. If that is true, then if government does not faithfully serve that function, why do people continue to consent to its authority; why do they obey laws that violate their rights and liberty, and why do they seek to pass laws that violate the rights of others? Do they believe that the majority has the right to impose its will upon the minority, or the individual? If so, how can they make the claim that they stand for equal rights?
If, as the Declaration of Independence says, all men are created equal with certain unalienable rights, then aren’t my rights just as important as yours? You may think it is acceptable that a simple majority decision is all that is required to trample upon the rights of those you disagree with, but what if the political tables were to turn, and you suddenly found yourself among the minority; I bet you would not be too happy when it was YOUR RIGHTS that were being trampled upon. A true patriot, a true lover of liberty would defend the rights of all men equally; even those they disagree with. I don’t see much of that happening today; leaving me to wonder how many patriots are left in this country.
If government, and it does not matter if it is run by a majority of Republicans or Democrats, fails to secure your rights and liberty, then government is NOT doing the job we were told it was established to do. END OF STORY!!! Therefore, if government is not doing the job it was established to do, and you still support it, you cannot say that you love liberty; for if you did you would oppose with all your being every instance in which government violated both your rights, and the rights of those you disagree with. That is not happening; not when people are demanding that others wear face masks, or close down their businesses for fear of spreading a disease…a disease with a 99% survival rate!
And it’s not just this Covid nonsense that has angered me, there is much more. The fear of guns that has been inculcated through the news media and our educational systems has seen laws passed that violate my right, and the right of every other law abiding citizen to own and bear the arms of their choice; and the ability to use them whenever their lives, their property, or their liberty is threatened.
And now, due to a complete and utter lack of understanding regarding the true history of the event known as the Civil War, we have Congress working on the passage of a law that would remove EVERY monument, statue, plaque, and other memorial dedicated to Confederate soldiers at all national parks. HR 7608, sponsored by Democratic Congresswoman Nita Lowly from New York, will give the National Park service 6 months to remove every single reference to the Confederacy from all National Parks; even though those parks were established to remember the events that took place there. How can people learn the truth about the history of the battles that occurred in those locations when the history of one side of the conflict has been scrubbed from the records?
That’s why I began this with a discussion on critical thought; for that is something that is sorely lacking in America today. Critical thought no longer forms that basis for the beliefs and opinions of most Americans today; instead they are governed by emotion; with the primary emotions being fear and the fact that everything outside what they have been indoctrinated into believing offends them.
I would like for y’all to read a couple quotes and see if they speak to you the way they speak to me:
– Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Leo Tolstoy
-The sin which is unpardonable is knowingly and wilfully to reject truth, to fear knowledge lest that knowledge pander not to thy prejudices. Aleister Crowley
Are you a free thinker; do you form your opinions based upon a careful examination of all aspects of an issue, or do you allow your emotions or indoctrination to limit what evidence you will consider when forming your opinions?
If you cannot see that government is/was established to secure your rights and liberty; if you cannot see that government is not serving that function, then you are not basing your support or opposition to government based upon facts; your basing it upon your loyalty to whatever political ideology you follow.
There two more quotes I’d like for you to read. The first quote is found in Section 95 of Locke’s Second Treatise, “MEN being, as has been said, by nature, all free, equal, and independent, no one can be put out of this estate, and subjected to the political power of another, without his own consent. The only way whereby any one divests himself of his natural liberty, and puts on the bonds of civil society, is by agreeing with other men to join and unite into a community for their comfortable, safe, and peaceable living one amongst another, in a secure enjoyment of their properties, and a greater security against any, that are not of it. This any number of men may do, because it injures not the freedom of the rest; they are left as they were in the liberty of the state of nature.” (Read that emphasized part as many times as required for it to sink in)
The next quote is found in Lysander Spooner’s book No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority, “If any considerable number of the people believe the Constitution to be good, why do they not sign it themselves, and make laws for, and administer them upon, each other; leaving all other persons (who do not interfere with them) in peace?”
Liberty, above all else, gives each of us the freedom of choice regarding how we will live our lives; what decisions we will make, along with the responsibility of accepting the consequences of those choices. If you take that freedom of choice away, you take away man’s liberty. Each of us should be free to choose whether or not we want to wear a face mask, view historic monuments dedicated to those we support, AND those we oppose; to carry a gun on ourselves at all times for our personal defense; and to be allowed to choose whether or not we will submit to a government that has forgotten that there are limits to its authority.
Did you know that James Madison, the guy who was a driving force behind the system of government we have today, once wrote, “The preservation of a free government requires, not merely that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained, but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great barrier which defends the rights of the people.
The rulers who are guilty of such encroachment exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are tyrants. The people who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them and are slaves.”
Our government, or more specifically your government, for I no longer pledge any allegiance to it, has overleapt the great barrier which defends the rights of the people, and it continues to do so at an alarming rate. This government is tyrannical, as it acts according to its own will, or the will of a majority; not the will of those who voted to ratify the Constitution, and the promises made to them as to what would be the limits to its powers.
If you submit to this government; either due to fear of resisting it, or because you support the idea of having an arbitrary government that can enact whatever laws it thinks is best for you, then YOU ARE A SLAVE…no if, ands, or buts…END OF STORY.
A patriot would not have to read a lengthy rant to understand these things. The unfortunate thing is, a slave has been so indoctrinated to accept their bondage that they cannot grasp the concept of freedom, and as Etienne de la Boetie said, “One never pines for what he has never known; longing comes only after enjoyment and constitutes, amidst the experience of sorrow, the memory of past joy. It is truly the nature of man to be free and to wish to be so, yet his character is such that he instinctively follows the tendencies that his training gives him.”
From birth you have been trained to accept servitude, and you’re following your training remarkably well. The thing is there are those of us who see the truth, who have analyzed the facts, and we have found our government to be lacking, and we do not like being slaves; even though you might. We are those who Boetie describes as, “There are always a few, better endowed than others, who feel the weight of the yoke and cannot restrain themselves from attempting to shake it off: these are the men who never become tamed under subjection and who always — like Ulysses on land and sea, constantly seeking the smoke of his chimney — cannot prevent themselves from peering about for their natural privileges and from remembering their ancestors and their former ways. … These are the ones who, having good minds of their own, have further trained them by study and learning. Even if liberty had entirely perished from the earth, such men would invent it. For them, slavery has no satisfactions, no matter how well disguised.”
In Section 22 of his Second Treatise, Locke writes, “The liberty of man, in society, is to be under no other legislative power, but that established, by consent, in the commonwealth; nor under the dominion of any will, or restraint of any law, but what that legislative shall enact, according to the trust put in it.” The trust we have placed in our government has been violated; replaced by the arbitrary will of a majority, or worse, and oligarchy; a few who hold the reins of power. That is not liberty, that is not freedom, and that is NOT acceptable.
Finally, in Section 135 of his Second Treatise, Locke writes, “Though the legislative, whether placed in one or more, whether it be always in being, or only by intervals, though it be the supreme power in every commonwealth; yet:
First, It is not, nor can possibly be absolutely arbitrary over the lives and fortunes of the people: for it being but the joint power of every member of the society given up to that person, or assembly, which is legislator; it can be no more than those persons had in a state of nature before they entered into society, and gave up to the community: for no body can transfer to another more power than he has in himself; and no body has an absolute arbitrary power over himself, or over any other, to destroy his own life, or take away the life or property of another.”
As we are all equal, in both our sovereignty and our rights, no man, nor group of man, has any right to impose upon, or restrict the rights of anyone else. If you believe otherwise you cannot claim to stand for equal rights; to say otherwise would be the apex of hypocrisy. Therefore, if the system of government established to better secure our rights and liberty violated the trust put into it, that power reverts back to the people who can, “… 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.” That’s taken straight out of the Declaration of Independence folks.
And if that isn’t clear enough, then there is always this, wherein Locke states that government which no longer serves its intended purpose of securing our liberty has declared war upon us, and it is our right to absolve ourselves of our allegiance to it. Here, read the entire quote yourself if you don’t believe me: “The reason why men enter into society, is the preservation of their property; and the end why they chuse and authorize a legislative, is, that there may be laws made, and rules set, as guards and fences to the properties of all the members of the society, to limit the power, and moderate the dominion, of every part and member of the society: for since it can never be supposed to be the will of the society, that the legislative should have a power to destroy that which every one designs to secure, by entering into society, and for which the people submitted themselves to legislators of their own making; whenever the legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge, which God hath provided for all men, against force and violence. Whensoever therefore the legislative shall transgress this fundamental rule of society; and either by ambition, fear, folly or corruption, endeavour to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people; by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and, by the establishment of a new legislative, (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own safety and security, which is the end for which they are in society.”
Well folks, our government has made it abundantly clear that it cares little to nothing about securing our liberty; in essence it HAS declared war upon the very purpose it was established. The question is, how much longer are the patriots of this country going to put up with it?
Our ancestors did not pledge their lives, their property, nor their sacred honor so that we could walk head first into bondage and servitude; they did it so ensure that we would enjoy the blessings of liberty. A true patriot honors them in deed and words, a slave follows orders just because government says so, or some goon with a badge points a gun at them and demands they comply.
So, which one are you; patriot or slave? With all the people running around with masks over their faces I’d say the slaves outnumber the patriots with an overwhelming majority; and that does not bode well for the future of liberty.
I don’t expect to make a difference, to change the minds of those who prefer slavery over the animating contest for liberty. I just want to make it abundantly clear for future historians that there were some of us who resisted what is coming to America; some of us who stood up and defended what men like Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, and yes, Jefferson Davis stood for. We will not go quietly into bondage; even though the majority of the people in this country are welcoming it with open arms.
History, and posterity will be the judge as to who defended the principles this country was founded upon, and I don’t think they’ll be too kind when they talk about y’all…