The Essence of Tyranny.

It has come to me while I have been thinking about various blogs that and things that were coming up and I came to the conclusion before I did my next blog I needed to do this one.

I have been pondering about Government, about the role of Government, and what role that they play. But mainly about the disconnect.

There is a big disconnect between Liberals and Conservatives, Socialists and Libertarians, yadda yadda versus oh my gosh.

The disconnect seems to be over precisely what the definition of Tyranny is.

Liberals and Progressives, those more on the left, are of the political opinion that the Government can do things for you. Can be there for you, can provide things for you and stuff and provide you with a living and to be there in case you should fail, or to actually benefit you.

Libertarians generally think that Government cannot do this for you, or at least should not.

It all comes down to a definition of tyranny and just what we think is a big intrusive Government.

Most people think of Tyranny in terms of red hatted, black booted pistol wielding tyrants.

They think of tyranny in terms of people being thrown into gas chambers, held without trial, or have dogs and fire hoses being turned on them. They think of tyranny in mass graves and firing squads directed because you are a political prisoner, or a different religion, sex, creed, or orientation.

But what it comes down to the Libertarian, and many Conservatives is what political philosophers have said from our founders all the way up to the modern-day.

From Ronald Regan:

“When Government Expands, Liberty Contracts.”

“The Nine Most Dangerous words in the English Language are I am from the Government and I am here to help.”

To Thomas Jefferson:

‎”I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. “

A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government. “

“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.”

To Ben Franklin:

“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

To John Adams:

“A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”

And I am sure I can find many thousands of others.

That is the essence of tyranny. That is the essence of a radical Government. That is the essence of slavery.

It has occurred to me over and over again something about Government.

Imagine if Jesus, or Gandhi, or Martin Luther King, or God, or John Sheridan ;), was in charge of our Government.

Someone who knows exactly how much everyone needs, that can fairly ‘give’ one persons things to another so it is all fair and balances.

Someone who is Godlike, who is so angelic that they can do anything correctly.

But they are human. They will decay, and in our Government systems force people out eventually.

The quote by Jefferson is the key. The key to all of this.

You see what will happen if someone else gets all that power? A Hitler a Mao or a Stalin? A Government that is big enough to do anything for you, can do anything to you.

I mean the difference is between someone like Jesus, and someone like Hitler. If Jesus did it, it would not be tyranny, Hitler, can use it for any purpose that he wants to put it to.

People see the obvious signs and pictures of Tyranny. The dogs and the gas chambers.

But they do not see the hidden things. The encroachments of our rights on page 432 of a bill. After all we are getting free education! Free health care!

We are being provided for.

In that situation you cannot provide for yourself. You have traded your freedom for your own personal security.

It Starts at Home.

“All great change in America begins at the dinner table.” — Ronald Reagan

Something has been bugging me for a while now that I think the above quote by Ronald Reagan explains it.  In this quote Ronald Reagan is talking about politics, how children, or their parents, must get down at the dinner table and talk about relevant issues of the day.

Now, in today’s worlds you have the Progressives, the Liberals, the Socialists, the Statists, and the big Government types trying to make the world a more complicated place.  To confuse and divide the issue.  This might be intentional, or merely a natural by-product from an ever-growing and more insane Government.

Now often, in regards to spending and the economy, radio host Glenn Beck asks does this make sense to you?  Would you do this for your own family?

That is more the point of this blog.

Because in an ever-growing, ever complicated world, we need simplicity in our lives.  In all the moral, political, or philosophical debates that you can have, my goal is to constantly make things simple.  In a world that is more complicated simplicity is what is required.

And I have found the answer.

In order to make things more simple we have to ask what is the best for me?  What would I do?  What would be best for my family and my group?

This can explain everything from Macro Economics, to issues of foreign and international war.  Because it is easy to get lost in the muck and the mire and get confused.  Simply if it works for me, my life, and my family, then why can’t it work for Governments and political institutions?

There are two examples that make this point.

One is the market, the economies.  You only have a set income, no more, no less, to spend on your luxury items and the things you ‘need’ and then one makes choices.

Our Government’s solution is to just keep on spending money, beyond what the tax payers, their income, can provide, beyond what they can make on their own, raising the debt.

But if you did the same, took out and spent thousands upon thousands of dollars for PS3s, a New Car, an RV, and a Big Screen TV, what would be the result?  What would happen to you? Would that be the moral and right thing to do?  Would you even attempt it? How would you do it?  Would you borrow money?  What would be the consequences of these actions?

Then with the Israeli situation, the Israeli intercepting the ‘aid’ flotilla’s’.  Now people have said, well they were in international waters, well the Israeli’s did not have the authority to come and take those ships, that it was an illegal blockade.

All that may be true, and it is easy to get lost in the legality and the complexity of international politics, and if you pay attention at the least the blockade was not illegal.  But that is beside the point.

Imagine if someone was coming up to your house, mysterious package, maybe yelling insults and carrying a pipe?   What would you do in that situation?

Better yet, this is assuming that the person in question is outside their jurisdiction, and you are a peaceful person.  Imagine that you are being pulled over by a cop, you see that its markings are for the next question, but he comes over and says, ma’am, you have been speeding.  What would you do?  Would you pull out a pipe and beat the cop to death who may or may not be there legally, or would you be cooperative, and be peaceful to the officer?  What would you do?  Would you resist?  Or would you say sorry officer, it will not happen again.  All of this presupposes that you have the best intentions and are a peaceful person.

Then it starts at home.  Because once you start asking yourself, how would I react in this situation, what would I do for my own life and my family, then you can know how to react, then you will know what to do, then you will know the proper action to take.

Because it does start at home, if you can teach the proper morality and the proper way to react, then you can begin to fix things.  By teaching proper principles.

SB 1070

Well I tried to get through most of the bill, but it just wound up being a bunch of  legalese, and started to repeat itself towards the end of it.

This issue is so important to where I believe this country is heading as a nation and as a people.  It really is the pinnacle issue of all that is going on, and it proves a prediction that I made on this very blog.  Arizona is the crossroads for this entire debate.

But to set this up, I think a video by ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis:

I will get to that later.

But first, my thoughts on the bill.

People have been saying that it is fascist, it is racists, it sets up racial profiling, that it is unfair to the illegals and Hispanics who help build this country despite the lazy white guy.

I have not found any of this to be true in the least, from my reading of the bill.

It does not mention fascism or socialism or extreme government control of their lives, nor does it mention that people can be dragged away from their homes and their cars on the mere suspicion that you are here illegally, or that you look ‘illegal’.

In fact what it does mention is that the state has to go to the Federal Government in order to ensure that someone is here illegally.

And if someone hires and illegal they will face extreme punishment.

One of the biggest complaints that I have read, and read this morning before I started this, is that citizens will now have to prove that they are here in the country legally, and they have to prove that they are here legally.

That this violates one of our most sacred principles, innocent until proven guilty.  And that just because you do not have an ID that is not sufficient evidence to prove that you are here illegally.

This is blatantly false.  The police, and local agencies, still have to go through the steps of whether or not you are here legally or not.  They might be able to take you in the mean time, but it is still an issue of the courts, and the federal government and their databases to prove your immigration status.

That you need some form of ID, but in case you do not have it that is not an automatic assumption of your guilt.  Whether you are Latin American or anything else.

Perhaps the biggest concern about the bill is racial profiling.  Also again a false concern to me for the most part.  Governor Jan Brewer has, since signing the law, signed an executive order making sure that the police know how not to racially profile, and has signed another bill too much the same effect.  To make it crystal clear that the original bill, which does not racial profile, does not racial profile.

But lets play along with the potential abuse of the law.

A good dear friend of mine claimed that if there is any potential abuse under this law then that makes the law bad, immoral, illegal and should not be done.

I sympathise with him, I am a libertarian, any government intrusion, coercion, and abuse is a very bad thing.

But let us run with it, potential abuse under the law.

In this country we have a Second Amendment that gives Citizens the right to Bear arms.  The right to defend themselves using firepower, guns, back in the day muskets.

Now this is a fundamental principle that can be open to buckets of abuse.

Someone who has a gun, takes it, is drunk, angry, or is just having a bad day can take it, and murder their spouse who they just had a fight with.

Whose at fault?  The fundamental principle or the guy who fired the weapon?

I put forth that it is the guy who fired the weapon.  The guy based on other fundamental principles of our government, will be jailed, punished, or executed for his heinous crimes.

Much the same with happen in this law.  If an individual exceeds his authority and profiles racially, in any way, he will be punished by this very law that says that is a no-no.

And if the law itself is Unconstitutional I will trust in the courts to deal with it.

There is also a huge amount of hypocrisy about the whole thing.

You need an ID to vote, to drive a car, to get employment, a house, to have an alcoholic beverage, to visit other countries, and to re-enter this country when you are done.

So why not to determine your status if you are here illegally?  To determine who you are and what your intentions may be?

Also back during the health care debate people said read the bill, read the bill, you should read the bill.  And yet, now, the people who do not read the bill say its going to be fascist.

We are being set up gang.

In the clip by Bertha Lewis she claims that the evil…..tea partiers in that specific case..are out to get you.

And it will surpass the era of McCarthy, that it will surpass the camps in WW II, and it will surpass Jim Crow.

Now anyone with any amount of logic will tell you that is crazy.  Only Governments can do those things to you.

But the clip reveals quite an important part of her psyche and the psyche of Big Government people.  Any growth of Government on the right is Fascist, that they are using the European model, the Progressive model.

That this will happen when and if the white and the tea party members and the right ever come into power again, that they will grow the Government and come after the Left Wing Socialists and Communists and everyone else who is different from them.

Enter in SB 1070.

A bill passed by a Republican, and thus maybe a Conservative…thus is the popular perception in Republicans versus Democrats.  A person that could be supported by the tea parties, again the perception, a white person.

A bill that is supposedly fascist and will allow for racial profiling.  A bill that will allow people to be rounded up in the streets for just looking illegal.

And then they will be put into the Concentration Camps of  local sheriffs.

This is what is being said about the bill.

And none of it is true.

Nevermind that the bill and the subsequent legislation outlaws racial profiling.  Never mind that we have the right to defend ourselves and our borders, never mind that we need ID to do almost everything else in our society.

A piece of our society that can be abused easily as I have bought up in the past, but I digress.

Nevermind that this bill is supported by upwards 60% of the American People, including a majority of African and Hispanic Americans.

Nevermind that most people, apparently, do not care if there is a theoretical civil rights violation under this bill.  committed by an individual will be in violation of several laws.

But none of that matters.  Its meant to set up a false premise.

Fascists on the Right, Socialists on the Left.  That you cannot go to the right, they are fascists, sure we may be enslaving you and creating massive government programs, but at least we will not kill you.  After all they will just do the same things we are doing, and besides they are a bunch of racists that will not accept you because you are different.

That it leaves those in the middle apathetic, unwilling  to engage, or go to the other side.

All this is meant to do is an attempt to rile up their base, not to mention bash, debase and vilify anyone not subscribing to the progressive socialist utopia.

And any opposition to this socialist nirvana must be squashed,  as one sign said at the May Day Rallies, by any means necessary.