"In a democracy (‘rule by mob’), those who refuse to learn from history will be the majority and will dictate that everyone else suffer for their ignorance."
THIS seems to explain much in the current scene:
“Anarcho-tyranny is a concept, where the state is argued to be more interested in controlling citizens so that they do not oppose the managerial class (tyranny) rather than controlling real criminals (causing anarchy). Laws are argued to be enforced only selectively, depending on what is perceived to be beneficial for the ruling elite.”
Exploring the idea that a contract that is effected by deceit and coercion is invalid,
Do We Really Consent to Be Governed?
For the record, I can state in complete candor that I do not approve of the manner in which I am being treated by the liars, thieves, and murderers who style themselves the Government of the United States of America or by those who constitute the tyrannical pyramid of state, local, and hybrid governments with which this country is massively infested. My sincere wish is that all of these individuals would, for once in their lives, do the honorable thing. In this regard, I suggest that they resign their positions immediately and seek honest employment.
Join the club, bub. Romans 13 outlines the ideal civil government: protects citizens’ rights (such as life, property, etc.); punishes those who violate those rights. If our government(s) were truly legitimate in function, perhaps as many as 10% of its employees would be in the process of arresting, charging, prosecuting, and imprisoning the other 90%. (I say “as many as” hopefully, not reasonably. *sigh*)
Yeh, random thought? No, Hollyweird program featuring “feddle gummint” law enFARCEment at its. . . contemporary norm spurred this.
“The powers of the Legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the Constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may at any time be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation.”
The US Constitution was intended and designed to circumscribe, restrain, LIMIT federal powers, to first prevent it from infringing on individuals’ rights while enabling it to have just enough power to protect individuals from those who would infringe on those rights, but only in areas where the states did not already have that responsibility.
Now, “feddle gummint” powers have been so illegitimately stretched, the Constitution seems to largely be a dead letter, trotted out to be disingenuously twisted into support for whatever “feddle gummint” overstep is the latest power grab, and “stare decisis” means whatever is convenient.
*shrugs*
What to do. You tell me.
Many folks bemoan the obviously divided state of our society, but that’s really just either a thoughtless dismay or a disingenuous appeal to rally around destructive values. Mankind (yes, I use the time-honored term; I am not a Child of Darkness–at least in that regard) has always been divided into Children of Light and Children of Darkness, always has been for all of recorded time. I prefer to view the obvious divisions now in plain view as clarifying a time to choose which side one is on: Light or Darkness.
If you should decide to choose Light, then recall also these things:
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”? Edmund Burke (in a letter addressed to Thomas Mercer).
And
“The light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.”
And
“What fellowship does light have with darkness?”
Division should be a Very Good Thing, but it depends on the children of Light not hiding that Light but shining it into the Darkness.
These are just a few examples from which to generalize. Not all will have any direct application to any one election.
This year, again, I’m voting primarily against stupidity and evil.
Stupid or evil? (Or both?)
“Pro-choice” (which is really, “Deny ANY choice to the unborn”)
The Thugs Standing Around program of full employment for goons and petty tyrants
“feddle gummint” tyrannical meddling in citizens’ lives while actively enabling outlaws
The Cult of Anthropogenic Climate Scare-ism
Enablers and apologists for the hate cult of the Butcher of Medina evil
One can select any issue dominated by the lies of the Mass MEdia Podpeople Hivemind, politicians *gag-spew*
and Academia Nut Fruitcakes and plug it right into the “Stupid or Evil” matrix for consideration.
Punishing job producers for success
Encouraging sloth and greed by robbing those who are productive to give to those who are not (including cronies of politicians who milk the public purse and abscond with our grandchildren’s futures)
You get the drift.
Do NOT encourage everyone you meet/know to vote! The Founders were justly leery of too much democracy (which is why they designed the Constitution to create a representative republic with some democratic elements). Always remember Third World County™’s corollary to Santayana’s Axiom:
“In a democracy (‘rule by mob’), those who refuse to learn from history will be the majority and will dictate that everyone else suffer for their ignorance”
ONLY encourage those who are well-informed and who have a rational bent to vote. Actively discourage the ignorant, misinformed, DISinformed, and notably brainwashed from voting. Their influence is uniformly negative, no matter their unthinking, uncritical, ignorant political bent.
Saw a post from a guy griping about a “shelter in place” warning issued with no specifics. His workplace is apparently in the “epicenter” of whatever event the warning was about. No specifics, he asserts, is stupid.
I agree, but here in America’s Third World County™, where violent crimes are extremely rare (probably because nearly everyone except those who work in mandated “gun free zones” such as schools is at least likely to be armed), we don’t get “shelter in place” warnings. We get BOLOs. And yeh, full descriptions, pictures of perps, if possible, as well as specifics on the crime committed. Just in case.
Because here, violent crime is pretty darned rare, and that’s real news. Oh, and because most folks aren’t pussies who need to run and hide.
The Puffington Host touts the bill referenced in the linked article as “The Most Dangerous Bill You’ve Never Heard Of.” Dangerous to whom? Certainly not to citizens who are concerned about the tsunami of “feddle gummint” encroachment on their rights. Hmmm, must be dangerous to statists and other anacho-tyrannists. . .
This bill is barely a start on reversing the illegitimate encroachment on God-given rights that darned near the whole apparatus of the “feddle gummint bureaucrappy” has become.
Many have asked the question, “Is this really the best the parties could come up with?” To answer this question, one must ask, “Best for what purpose?” The “parties” in question have for some time been little more than a Uniparty of statists concerned with little more than different tactics for enhancing their own power over society. As such, when the Uniparty selected its Anointed One, its Dhimmicrappic arm simply engineered its nomination. Now, how to assure its election? Hmmm, need a stalking horse. . . Oh, right! Make sure NOTHING, not even a legitimate challenge at convention, prevents the selection of an unelectable candidate by the Repugnican’ts!
And it was so.
And so the Uniparty has offered a fake choice of one of two evils for the presidency. (Oh, and down-ticket races are often not much better, just choices between two different statists).
#Don’tVoteForEvil
As Thomas Sowell, a genuine national treasure, IMO, has recently written,
“If a third party candidate could divide the vote enough to prevent anyone from getting an electoral college majority, that would throw the election into the House of Representatives, where any semblance of sanity could produce a better president than these two.”
Here. An article that might help: How Not to Waste Your Vote: A Mathematical Analysis
Vote for Johnson/Weld instead of throwing your vote away on either one of the two worst candidates ever put forth by the Uniparty.
Nothing I propose (call it “pie in the sky dreamin'”) will ever likely come to pass, but if it were to come about. . .
How about these proposals to fix elections for public office:
Each candidate must put forth a platform as a proposed contract with the electorate. If elected, the candidate must make a good faith effort to effect the platform or be removed from office, possibly with prison and fines. Mechanisms for punishment would be tricky details, but could be worked out.
NO elective position should have the names of the candidates or their party affiliations listed on the ballot. Only the platform the candidate is committed to would be listed.
ALL voters would be required to complete a short, easy-peasy civics quiz like this one. A passing grade of better than 70% and their vote counts. I’d prefer better than 90%, but yeh, OK, since I’m dreaming anyway. . . *heh*
All ballot positions would be required to also list None of the Above as a legitimate ballot choice. If NOTA received a plurality of votes, the slate for that position would be wiped and another election held for that position.
All voters be required to produce valid photo identification.
All-in-all, these are quite modest proposals, don’t you think? *heh*