I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. – James Madison
Madison was, of course, exactly correct. Those sick enough to seek power over others are never satisfied with the amount they have; they are driven to constantly seek more, to gradually push the boundaries of what they are allowed to do like the camel in the proverb. The United States was founded on libertarian (at the time they were called “liberal”) principles, but in the process of getting the country started far too many exceptions and loopholes were allowed in those principles; the most egregious of these was chattel slavery, an evil whose legacy is still contributing to the decay of liberty a century and a half after it was abolished. In the name of “safety”, “public order”, the “greater good” and other such vague nonentities, the rights of individuals have been eroded gradually and silently since the latter half of the nineteenth century, until there are precious few left (and those are cracked and pitted almost beyond recognition). Even the principle of self-ownership, the one upon which all the others (and the very principle of democracy) depend, still exists in name only; armed thugs have been granted the power to inflict violence upon virtually anyone for virtually any reason (or even for no reason), to break into the private homes of peaceful citizens without warning, and to sexually and/or medically violate anyone’s bodily integrity on pretexts that even the Inquisition might have found flimsy. Throughout all of it the American people, mesmerized by propaganda of imaginary hobgoblins, have allowed encroachment after encroachment, abrogation upon abrogation, while licking the boots of the overlords and thanking them for the privilege.
But those overlords forgot one thing: though Americans have degenerated into a race of spineless weaklings, they are as prudish as they ever were (if not more so). While they are as willing as ever to celebrate the mistreatment of people they can rationalize as being not like them (racial or sexual minorities, drug users, etc), they don’t like the idea of being seen naked or having their sexual secrets exposed. So while the news of each new excess of the police state for the past several decades has been greeted by the majority with yawns or even cheers, Edward Snowden’s revelations exposed an aspect of it that offended Americans’ Puritanical sensibilities. Costumed goons murdering, abducting, destroying and pillaging was of no consequence, but now that they’ve been caught peeking through a hole into the girls’ locker room the peasants are ready to form a lynch mob. To be sure, the most broken and lost of the mob have aimed their anger at Snowden; they blame him for making it impossible for them to continue on in blissful ignorance. But a greater number are at last directing that anger where it belongs: at the police state. Today there’s a protest against mass surveillance going on, and this column is a part of it. I fear it’s far too little decades too late, and that the majority will go obediently back to sleep as soon as the President assures them that he’s “doing something” about it; however, I will continue to fight for freedom and justice as long as there is breath in my body, and while the masses are aroused I think we need to keep shouting at them in the forlorn hope that they may have finally reached the limit of their tolerance for oppression.
I’m happy to see this column. Unfortunately, seems to me as though a large portion of Americans cheer the boot on the neck.
If you type Puritans and Catholics the you might sound less ignorant. Look up Pre-Code Hollywood on Wikipedia and the Catholic role in outlawing feminine wiles. A prostitute can lead a Protestant Church because Protestant is not a religion; it is just many religious views condemned by the Roman Catholic Church. A Puritan may be bad, but the Catholic Church was a much bigger monster. The Spanish Inquisition did not persecute people for not being Spanish, they killed people for not being Catholic. Protestants are little churches with different views. Their system offers some checks and balances to power.
If you were a regular reader, you would know Maggie hardly leaves the Catholic Church blameless, particularly when it comes to the situation in Ireland. But if you think that stopping the NSA from tapping our phones and computers is less important than mentioning the obvious impact Protestantism has has had on American culture, then maybe reading this blog isn’t for you.
I just re-read Maggie’s column for today. NOWHERE does she write the word “Protestant.” Go away, troll!
If you would respond to the subject matter of a post rather than making an asinine comment on a metaphor, you would sound less ignorant. Consider yourself on probation; this kind of ridiculous trolling is not welcome here.
And if you haven’t yet read “How Not To Get Your Comments Posted“, I strongly suggest you do so without delay.
Yes – lets condemn the whole church, as it exists today, for a practice that ended hundreds of years ago.
And while we’re at it – lets condemn every white child born today for the evils his ancestors did to Africans over a century and half ago. Let’s condemn every Italian child for the evils the Romans visited upon the Gauls.
I’m reminded of this quote from “Kingdom of Heaven” …
I just visited that web site you linked to, Maggie. It’s sad that the only newspaper willing to be a sponsor is British, not American.
This is an awesome column and yes, I do agree to a very great extent with your views on Snowden. I don’t see him as a hero – or even a guy with any great amount of “honor” – but … who cares? In the end we needed to know about these things and I don’t care about the “quality” of the messenger – or even if he’s an outright crook. I don’t think the revelations will mean much though. I think Americans deserve to be enslaved because we’ve lost the concept of what freedom is all about. The Commander In Thief just changes laws to suit him without going through Congress and the “regime media” and his sycophants encourage him to usurp even more power. Charles Krauthammer commented that “These ObamaCare changes are becoming so endemic – nobody even complains”. On the same day Kraut made those comments – POTUS was running around saying … “I can do whatever I want”. Face it – we officially have a King now … GW Bush paved the road for him and Obama drove right down that fuckin’ highway at full speed.
So I think Snowden’s revelations, which SHOULD provoke outrage, will be summarily dismissed by Americans.
Meanwhile – Google is now putting facial recognition into their “Google Glasses” which will be able to call up a person’s identity, address, and criminal record just by looking at them. Nobody gives a shit though – they think it’s neat. Everyone is now trying to figure out how this technology can benefit them. And – it is seductive – I can only imagine how awesome it would be as a doorman to be able to “card” people on sight and identify people with a troublemaking background. Then I have to slap myself for “fantasizing” about that because the widespread use of such technology is just as destructive as hell to liberty.
Which kind of gets to the root of the problem – too many people see this kind of thing and think about how it would benefit them – and how they’d have to give up those benefits if they condemned the technology or practice. So they find a way to rationalize it and ignore the widespread harm these things do in favor of whatever small benefit they can get out of the thing.
On the founders – I remember they taught me about the Articles of Confederation and how lousy they were. Well, now I’m thinking maybe they weren’t so bad. The Constitution was the birth of this (what was to become) leviathan, overpowering and liberty-killing federal government. Sometimes I think – if I had a time machine one of the things I do is go back and put a bullet in Alexander Hamilton’s head – and Aaron Burr certainly did him in – only too late!
As soon as the money runs out – and the entitlements no longer can be paid – we’ll have mass chaos in America but never fear …
We’ve already created the framework for the perfect dictatorship to put things in order when it happens – but not a lot of people are going to like it when it happens.
“I think Americans deserve to be enslaved because we’ve lost the concept of what freedom is all about.”
Please forgive me for what I’m sure are going to be two incredibly naïve (and possibly ignorant) questions. I’m trying to take into account the vagaries of typed internet discussion so I don’t accidentally come across as rude as that’s not my intent:
1) Enslaved by who?
Are we talking about China? The Mohammadians (did I spell that right)? The “capitalists”? The “socialists”? Who’s coming the closest?
2) To what ultimate end?
I’m not talking about the idea of “power for it’s own sake” as referenced in that passage from “1984”. I’m asking if these ‘enslavers’ magically achieved all their goals tomorrow, what would they have their newly acquired slaves do? Toil in factories? Engage in a second Inquisition or Reign of Terror? Or just simply sit quietly at home until they think of something for them to do?
I’m sure that last part probably comes across as sarcastic, but I’m trying to find some way to vent my frustration, and indeed fear, with rhetoric that doesn’t seem to take very seriously the idea of ‘the day after’ once the system burns down beyond the basic “it’s got to be better than what we have now!” or conversely “it’s going to suck, HARD!!” Although honestly there are times when I wish something would happen just so we could get it over with.
All that aside, what makes you say the Articles of Confederation weren’t so bad? I assure you there’s no sarcasm or malice behind that question. I’m genuinely, respectfully curious. 🙂
The dictator will reside in the White House.
People do freaky things when the shit hits the fan. In St. Tammany parish, immediately after Katrina – the “Pro-Second Amendment” police went around seizing guns from law abiding people. Well, there wasn’t much “civilization” left here in the aftermath and they hadn’t planned for a “doomsday” scenario. So a lot of them believed that since they were in uncharted territory – it was suddenly okay to violate people’s civil rights and take their guns in the name of public safety. The airwaves were full of bullshit stories of rampant crime in Orleans parish – and the police in the more “docile” parishes believed those stories and were bent on keeping the Orleans problems out of their more “conservative” parishes.
Now – a lot of people would assign a devious motive to that and say the police were just waiting for this opportunity to “usurp” the citizens of the parish … but I usually write things like that off to ignorance and confusion (and everyone here was confused at the time – to say the very least). If they had wanted to “usurp” the actions they took would have been a lot bigger. I know some of these cops and they’re members of the NRA and believe in the second amendment – they just didn’t think things through – or at least the police chief in charge of them hadn’t. They thought they were protecting people – and somehow they thought, in the name of protection – extra-constitutional methods were acceptable. This a part of the problem with police culture and government in general – they believe that anything is acceptable if it can be justified in the name of public safety. They have since learned that they can’t do that – since the NRA took them to court and won. Well – hopefully the learned the lesson – who’s to say? At least now they DO plan for doomsday scenarios and how to react in a constitutional fashion during them while maintaining public safety – or at least say they do.
Look at what is happening in Congress – JUST BECAUSE a group of elected Republican congressmen are doing their jobs (i.e. legally OBSTRUCTING legislation they disagree with – which is their constitutional duty and what guys like ME elected them to do – since my Congressman and Senator are among the “obstructionists”) … Obama is now being told by his sycophants that it’s okay to “forget the constitution” and “bypass” congress and make his own rules. He’s only too happy to do so.
These idiots don’t realize that they have created a “Royal Presidency” here now – and at the slightest crisis (just as in Hurricane Katrina and St. Tammany parish) … that “Royal President” will feel empowered to do whatever the fuck he pleases in the name of setting things right. And the people under him – just like the stalwart second-amendment believers on the Tammany police force – will follow him and execute any orders he issues.
Look at what Bush did with TARP (which happened during another “emergency”) … Congress passed that law to buy toxic assests … but Bush used it as a slush fund for the banks and, when Obama inherited it – he used what was left of it to bail out the auto companies and the UAW.
The dictator is in place – he’s already violating laws and no one seems to care. It only takes one crisis event and the rest of the veil will fall.
And no – I’m not saying it’ll be Obama who will be in the oval office when the balloon goes up – it could be the next POTUS or the one after – Republican or Democrat. But it will happen. In the meantime – we’re living in what Mark Levin calls a “soft tyranny” – a “twilight” state in which people THINK they are free – but are far from it. Eventually the “soft tyranny” will drop all pretense and become hard. And all it will take is a big national crisis to complete the transformation.
Sorry it took so long to reply, busy day. And also sorry for still more questions; I realize what you say below about not having all the answers.
“Look at what is happening in Congress – JUST BECAUSE a group of elected Republican congressmen are doing their jobs (i.e. legally OBSTRUCTING legislation they disagree with – which is their constitutional duty and what guys like ME elected them to do – since my Congressman and Senator are among the “obstructionists”) … Obama is now being told by his sycophants that it’s okay to “forget the constitution” and “bypass” congress and make his own rules. He’s only too happy to do so.”
You have ‘forget the constitution’ in quotes so I’m guessing someone actually said that somewhere. Was that an accusation or was a member of the President’s administration actually stupid enough to admit that’s what they’re doing? I did a quick google news search for that phrase and only found a link to an editorial from the Pakistan Daily Times.
Aside from that, it seems to me the ‘obstructionists’ have overplayed their hand based on this:
“These idiots don’t realize that they have created a “Royal Presidency” here now – and at the slightest crisis (just as in Hurricane Katrina and St. Tammany parish) … that “Royal President” will feel empowered to do whatever the fuck he pleases in the name of setting things right.”
Are the “obstructionists” the idiots, and therefore should not have done what the voters were telling them to do because it has created a much worse situation?
Finally, with regards to “soft” vs. “hard” tyranny, even if such a shift didn’t occur under Obama, what would be gained by adopting the latter that isn’t currently being gained by the former? Would it just be the amorphous idea of “public order”?
I should add that I’m not trying to pointlessly stir you up, Krulac. I greatly enjoyed the fact that we reached common ground a few days ago, and don’t want to destroy that. This is definitely a time when I wish we could be discussing this over a drink. Say, a good quality root beer.
Hey look man – I am a chucklehead. I’m outspoken but I don’t have all the answers. I also spent 24 years of my life having my ass chewed in the military when I fucked up – and I fucked up plenty and I learned not to take the ass-chewings personally. In fact – the ass-chewings happened so much I became immune to them – and became known for my integrity because I’d always admit my fuck ups. I actually took credit for the fuck ups of others too. Why not? After awhile the ass-chewings were nothing.
“Captain, I destroyed that crypto key early – and now I’ve caused a security violation.”
And I know for a fact he went to the XO and said … “Damn that Chief Krulac – he’s hardcore honest – came and reported himself for a security violation he could have covered up.”
Proof that you can turn a fuck up into something positive – yeah I got my ass chewed, but I also earned the CO’s respect and I knew that would happen when I put myself on report! So in a way I’m not as honest as he thought and maybe a bit more manipulative? LOL.
So people getting angry with me doesn’t bother me. What does bother me – is people who don’t know me who try to “fill in the blanks” with dark matter and evil motives. I’m not like that. I’m a team player – but I am also a passionate player.
Let go on record saying that I’ve never felt anger toward you, and I hope I’ve never given you cause to be angry with me. I appreciate it when people admit they don’t have all the answers. I admit it to myself all the time.
I hope this comes across right, but I prefer people like that because it can make it easier to tell if they are trying to sell you a bill of goods.
Reminds me of an MST3k episode, “Overdrawn at the Memory Bank”. A Matrix-type movie from the 1980s starring the late Raul Julia. His character, Fingal, yells to his coworkers in the computer program, “Listen! We’re nothing more than a byte in a giant computer!” Mike & the ‘Bots reply in unison, “I’m okay with that!” when the co-workers ignore Fingal.
http://youtu.be/dh8VxUhFpsM?t=6m55s
While Overdrawn at the Memory Bank has its problems, it’s not nearly as bad a movie as some people like to let on. I’m cheered to see it referenced.
It’s one of my favorite MST3k episodes to watch. The riffing was great and like you said, the movie itself wasn’t that bad.
Even if futile (I hope not), there is no moral choice other than keep trying. Thanks for that!
This article has made me more appreciative of Ill Will Press, Zipperfish, and Evil Dave. Too bad that only the first one is still well-known on Newgrounds and YouTube.
Great observations and excellent choice of quotes.
Maggie, let’s see how many people I can piss off.
Everyone is under the misapprehension that government can only be a negative in our lives. I do not believe that, and neither did the Founders and Framers.
Government can have a positive influence on our lives, as anyone who remembers public schools before Nixon and Reagan ruined them, programs that work like Head Start, the School Lunch program, Meals on Wheels and Social Security. Take the cap off Social Security, and let it tax capital gains, and keep it something the government can’t touch, and it will work, for ours, our children’s and our children’s children’s lifetimes.
Government can be the punishing father, or the nurturant mother, or both. But the more it is the nurturant mother, the less you need the punishing father.
Read George Lakoff’s Moral Politics before you answer me.
No. You fucking read “A Necessary Evil“, stop pretending I believe things I don’t and drop this trolling you’ve started as of late because I’m getting awfully tired of it.
And one more thing: if I wanted a fucking “nurturant mother”, I’d move back in with my real one. I’m a fucking adult, and I don’t need a father OR a mother, especially not in the form of a collective of power-mad assholes who decide they have the right to act in loco parentis for me without my fucking consent.
*slow clap*
There is no trolling. It demonstrates the dichotomy between us.You can think of government being nothing but a Necessary Evil.
But as Teddy Roosevelt stated in Asheville NC in 1902, WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT, you and I. And if government is acting in an evil fashion, then WE are at fault.
Government works well or not dependent upon the degree of involvement of its citizens. Most Americans understood that fact until they were lulled to sleep by Ronnie Reagan who tripled the National Debt, and began the destruction of competition in this country by refusing to enforce the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. For some reason, the American public turned off its brains, as well as its sense of community–not collectivism, community, and there is a huge difference–and started being a bunch of every man and woman for themselves.
On 13 August 2009, Deena Stryker published an article on OpEdNews titled “Selfishness is Un-American.” There is a great paragraph in that article that shows how so many modern Americans have twisted the concept of “self-reliance,” into a pathetic excuse for indifference and injustice
“In the early days of the republic, the need for solidarity [unity of purpose and mutual support] among individuals was obvious. As individuals became less able [and I would add less willing] to provide solidarity for one another, that role was shifted to government. You are not called in the middle of the night to [help] deliver your neighbor’s baby because there is a hospital equipped to do that. But when your neighbor knocks on your door because she ran out of milk, you say ‘too bad for you, lady.’”
Objectivists and many Libertarians and Conservatives seem to believe that the only way that they will survive in today’s world is to be as selfish as humanly possible. What they refuse to understand is that a community (not a collective, these are two entirely different animals), working together in the members’ mutual interest, under auspices of the Social Contract, will survive and prosper far better than selfish individualism or mindless collectivism. This nation was founded on the basis of community, of unity in terms of purpose and mutual support, which becomes obvious to anyone who reads the papers of Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Madison, and Lincoln.
Further Deponent sayeth not.
I beg your forgiveness for my two cents here, but I’ve been following this conversation (and the one from a few days prior) with some interest.
Girard, you seem like a nice enough fellow. Unlike other people who post willy-nilly pulling things out of thin air, you’ve actually taken the time to do some research to back up your arguments.
However, you really don’t see the trolling inherent in the phrase “let’s see how many people I can piss off?” To say nothing of the impossibly broad statements you make about the philosophies of those here, and your saying that your conclusions are so obvious. When it comes to the Founding Fathers, we’re talking about men long dead whose words have been interpreted and parsed for 200 years. I suppose it might be comparable to Krulac’s “Kingdom of Heaven” quote above, all have claim to them. I think debate is healthy, but from my perspective the way you present your arguments is not helping your case.
Noted. I just do not like the attitude that government is evil without telling me why it is. For myself, evil is when human beings are turned into things, whether by a government, a group or an individual. So certainly, a totalitarian government is evil, and the oligarchic plutocracy that we are sliding towards faster and faster is also evil. But a government that maintains, or at least attempts to maintain, the roads and other infrastructure, benevolent police and fire protection, unbiased courts, military protection if we are attacked unprovoked by a foreign nation, records of property transfers and ownership, and care for widows, orphans and the disabled, cannot be called evil, even if you are required to pay taxes to maintain it. Admittedly, the days when this country could claim anything like that as the governments’ purpose are long gone, but you don’t fix a problem by retiring from it; you face it and fix it, or you become part of the problem.
You may feel you don’t need a “father OR a mother”, but as a transwoman with disabilities I need the sort of safety net most libertarians oppose, assuming the “Free market will fix it” or that there’ll be a sudden outburst in generosity from the finally unrestrained rich white guys who’ve been oh-so-horribly oppressed.
I’m not trolling either even though I’ve left a lot of comments to this end, I just wish that you would consider the impact that right wing libertarianism has on people like me who have shared many of the same experiences you have. I find it genuinely distressing and upsetting.
The “Self made man” or in this case, woman, attitude bothers me because nobody is truly self made. Some of us rely on support nets more than others, of course. I feel like in your ideal world, I might already be dead, and that saddens me. To most libertarians I’m so unimportant my safety is only guaranteed on a song and a prayer.
It makes me genuinely angry and upset because I know even with our current “Nanny State” governments there is still a lot of that same “Libertarian” thought.
Libertarianism isn’t “right wing”, and until you let go of the foolish left-right myth and pay attention to what libertarians actually say rather than statist caricatures, there’s no point in discussing this.
See R.J. Eskow’s “11 Questions You Should Ask Libertarians to See If They’re Hypocrites.” http://www.alternet.org/economy/11-questions-you-should-ask-libertarians-see-if-theyre-hypocrites
See Robert Locke’s “Marxism of the Right,” in the March 14, 2005 issue of American Conservative. http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/marxism-of-the-right/
See Benjamin Franklin’s letter to Robert Morris, Christmas Day 1783, to show that one of the basic premises of libertarianism, “What I earn is all mine,” is flawed.The Founders’ Constitution, Volume 1, Chapter 16, Chapter 12. http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.html
I’ve long known that both liberals and conservatives claim the Founding Fathers (and usually, Abraham Lincoln) as their own, and each usually has an explain-away for slavery. It did startle me when the claim went out that the Founders (and Lincoln) were secretly gay, but it shouldn’t have. And so now it turns out they were all libertarians all along! It seems Lenina was right when she stated that everyone belongs to everyone else, except she forgot that they have to be dead for a hundred years or so. Heck, I claim them as fellow Deists.
Tripping around the ‘Net (following freegirard’s libertarianism links) I found other links, including this one by our old friend Amber Lyon. I found it interesting.
Republics die from inner rot, not external attack. Part of inner rot is when you put your freedom and well-being ahead of mine. All of our freedoms are of equal importance to all of us. An attack on one is an attack on all. They came for the Communists first, as Pastor Niemoller pointed out almost 80 years ago. We may have to give up some of our privileges to ensure that others have their full rights. One of those “privileges” is the hoarding of wealth at the expense of others.
Yes. Recognizing, of course, that my enjoyment of my own liberties “at your expense” (and thus there is justification for restricting said liberties) means that it has to harm you, not just annoy you or offend you or even outrage you. It has to be more than (as suggested in the one article) that my watching porn means that you are no longer free to live in a society unvulgarized by porn’s existence.
But I suspect that you already knew that. 😉
Of course. We aren’t talking about transient reasons, or something i can avoid. We’re talking about you putting a lead smelter on your property, for example, next to my dairy or pre-school.