Woke up this morning at 2 a.m., with so much on my mind concerning the direction of my Country, and writing this two-part post, I hardly knew where to start. I read my e-mails and reading a quote by Harry Browne stirred my nettle [sic], as I recalled speaking to him on a trip to Atlanta in the late nineties.

Harry Brown was a great Libertarian and a free-market investment analyst, who became a candidate for president in the late nineties as I recall. I followed his writings and read his books in the seventies, while I was still studying the Philosophy of Freedom, and learning how political goverments in general operate and this government in particular.

I wondered how one with his views on Freedom could decide to run for president. He was in Atlanta on a speaking engagement and scheduled to make a speech on the radio. I called him at the radio station and spoke to him. I wanted to know how, as one of his Libertarian stance, he reached a decision to run for President. He spoke quite eloquently about the notion that he believed he could make a difference, if he could be President, to change the direction of this country. He of course did not make the grade, and passed away sometime later.

I’m well aware the seduction of politics is a powerful drive, once one gets a taste of it. I’m reminded of what Samuel Adams, known as the father of the American Revolution, said: “If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.” (The Rights of the Colonists,1772)

In the first part of this post, I briefly described the candidacy and presidency of Barack Obama. What he promised, what he has done, and his recent changes in his political speeches running for re-election. Which brings into play the opposition he faces.

The Libertarians, Tea Partiers, and all those Americans, angry, confused, upset and struggling to find a candidate they wish to support and vote for in the 2012 election, are having difficulty finding one. Despite the fact some are hot to trot for one or the other of the nine person line-up on the Republican side, not enough are agreeing, and are looking for someone else to fulfill their desires and defeat Obama.

In this connection, all the televised debates are a vetting process for that one candidate. Personally, I think the American people would be well advised to do some vetting of themselves, by spending time informing themselves as to what’s at stake, with attention on learning the real meaning of freedom. What it means, why we lost it, and what it will require to re-claim and re-gain. Be that as it may, the crossroad of where we are seems to be focused on finding someone else to solve the problem. Conversely, in this current process struggle, may be the wake-up call.

Eight in the current line-up of candidates have a background of political activism, with the exception of Herman Cain, whose background has been in the business world of free-enterprising capitalism. It appears he’s having some traction, as evidenced by his recent win in the Florida straw polls. The main managed-news media is barking at his heels, with an all-out campaign to de-throne him, by their punditry yakking about his unelectibility, and touting Perry and Romney as the two frontrunners. One a governor and one a former governor, both with a political background that supports their position, their answers are that the problems facing this nation can be solved by more political intervention, to deal with the problems political meddling has caused in the first place. Even daring to promote the idea that one batch of politicians on the state level, is better suited to rule than on the federal level.

The propaganda of action proposed as solutions to this amount of Socialism we are mired in up to our gills, is a sort of modern-day reenactment of Plato’s “Republic.”

Actually, I think the debates could be quite positive, if one listens carefully, because they in essence inform us as to how we wound up in this hellish state of Socialism, as the candidates describe what they have done, and their proposals of more of the same in the future for this country. And it’s quite interesting to listen to their weaving in and out of the same old rhetoric that brought us to this brink of disaster in this country.

Perhaps there is a glimmer of hope, inasmuch as a great number reject this line-up, and are still looking for something else, along with growing disenchantment of Obama. The realization and speculation that there’s something amiss in the total line-up from both sides, Republican and Democratic, may indicate an awakening, long overdue.

As remote as the possibility sounds at this juncture, by some miracle, there could be enough awakening to the fact that we can’t vote ourselves out of the crisis we voted ourselves into; plus the fact voting is disguised coercion. And the fact that the act of voting is arbitrarily placing a stamp of approval to confiscate the property of one’s neighbor.

I remind the reader, Hitler in the latter stages of his dictatorial regime, ordered armed guards in large trucks to round up the people to be taken at gunpoint to the polls to vote. The lust for power of politicians over the lives of others to confiscate property, requires your vote to accomplish that. An act performed in secrecy. If one seriously ponders this act, the immorality comes to light. Many good and decent, responsible hardworking Americans, would consider it reprehensible to steal from their neighbor, but have no qualms about acting to place someone in power to take their property. Which in reality is precisely what voting does.

The essence of Freedom is the self-responsibility of ownership of Property. The antithesis of Freedom is the system of Socialism, which confiscates one’s property [money], without the consent of the owner.




Share →