Knowing The Difference Between Right & WrongsteemCreated with Sketch.

in anarchy •  6 months ago

In our attempts to delegate our moral culpability, the difference between right and wrong has become so convoluted that the average adult human can not decipher a basic Human Right from a Human Rights violation. Most "responsible" individuals could not concisely define morality in one or two sentences. Give it a try: Can you define the difference between right and wrong in one or two sentences?

Image Source

Many of the people I confront with (what should be) this very simple question can not even come up with quasi-accurate, simple definition of a right action, a wrong action and the difference between the two. You would think that with our advanced education system and complex legal dissection of every single human action, we would have, as a society, come to some understandable conclusions regarding the subject of morality. After all, aren't the systems built up put in place to protect and uphold these very principles? Isn't the government supposed to regulate society in such a manner that protects the citizens from harm? Aren't the police forces supposed to protecting the innocent and vulnerable from those who would take advantage of them? Is the military supposed to be enforcing foreign policy or protecting us from others that would do the same to our lands?

Back To Preschool

Allow me to be the barer of some great news! The concept of morality, the difference between right and wrong, is not a complex philosophy! In fact, it's so simple that a small child can understand it! The hard part is forgetting all the bullshit you've been taught by those seeking to obfuscate this understanding. Why would those who are in control want to confuse the general public in regards to the difference between right and wrong behavior? It may have something to do with the fact that most of the actions of these organizations are actually Human Rights violations and are morally wrong. It would be very hard to pull this off without a general delusion of the concept within the general public. Let's get you all up to speed.

The difference between right and wrong is;

A Right Action is any action that does not harm another being or their property. A Wrong Action is any action which causes harm to another or their property.

Rather than expanding this outwards into the uncountable individual possible human acts, it helps to understand this by keeping it simple. In fact, keeping it simple is all that is necessary. Mark Passio blew my mind when he was able to sum up ALL Moral Law (Natural Law) with one simple rule to abide by: DON'T STEAL. Let's take a look at all of the acts that could possibly cause harm to another being.

  • Theft (Taking an other's property without permission that does not belong to you.)
  • Lying (This does not present someone with the truth and takes from them the ability to make an informed decision.)
  • Assault (Causing harm to an other's physical, mental or emotional body, taking from them the Right to be safe and secure.)
  • Coercion (Forcing someone to make a decision, one way or another, with threats of repercussions, taking from someone the Right of free-will choice.)
  • Rape (Forcibly taking someones right to choose with whom they have intimate relations with.)
  • Murder (Taking someones life without the Right to do so.)

As you see in parentheses beside each Right violation, every single one of these is a form of theft. We only need one law: DON'T STEAL.

Image Source

Violence Is Still Violence Under Any Other Name

It is impossible to come to an understanding of morality and advocate the governments, police, military and corporations of the day. In understanding the difference between Right and Wrong, it is inevitable to conclude that if an action is Wrong for one person to commit, it is also Wrong for any group of people - regardless of name. Violence insinuates a violation of rights. As such, any violation of Rights is violence. Now that we understand the difference between right and wrong we need to understand that 'the powers that think they be' do not possess any rights that you or I do not possess, regardless of supposed intent. It doesn't matter if someone says the money will be used for good. This does not give someone the right to steal the fruits of your labor.

Ask yourself;

  • Should I take a portion of my friends and neighbors earnings without permission?
  • Should I imprison people I suspect of certain acts without proof?
  • Should I present people with proposals and threaten them with violence if they do not comply?
  • Should I enter an other's home without permission?
  • Should I listen into my neighbors conversations and monitor their data without permission?
  • Should I physically detain and assault people?
  • Should I walk around with a gun on my hip and place my hand on it to illicit compliance in interactions with others?
  • Should I deny others the necessities of life if they do not have a specific means of attaining it that only I can authorize?

The answer to all of these is NO. In every one of these situations you are violating the Rights of another individual. Further more, if you do not possess the Right to commit these acts, how could you delegate the Right to commit these acts to government or any other organization? A Right is always a Right, a Wrong is always a Rights violation. It doesn't matter who you are, if you're a part of some organization or if you were ordered to do it.

Practice What You Preach

The most important step to understanding this information is applying it in your life. If we could collectively get our acts together, start behaving in a manner that is aligned with True Morality and Natural Law, we may have a chance at experiencing Freedom at some point in the human story. If we all acted Right and spoke/acted out against that which is not a Right, the world would not be in the state that it is in today.

I myself have had to quit my profession twice due to coming to terms with the fact that the way I was earning a living was immoral. I also openly admit this to people I know and speak about it in a manner that exposes it. The governments of the world are criminal organizations. If you work for them you are guilty by association and you are a criminal. I know many in the government, military and police may have joined with good intentions, it is not my purpose to speak down of you. It is my intent to shed light on Truth in order to promote freedom and justice throughout society.

I am calling all who can recognize the simplicity of Natural Law Principles in relation to True Objective Morality to begin aggressively implementing them in your life. If you work in an immoral occupation - quit! There are many ways to survive and it's never too late to change your life and live according to a true set of Moral Ethics which are uncompromising, even in the face of death. Speak out against violent behavior, regardless of who's responsible and stop suppoting these agencies and organizations financially and otherwise.

Morality is not subject to the whims and statutes of man, man is subject to the Laws of Nature. The sooner we can align with these forces, the sooner we can experience true Freedom & Abundance.

Thanks for reading, I hope all were able to take away some information that will help improve your life and the community around you. For many more Freedom, Health and Cannabis related posts check out my blog @jayanarchon.

Peace Everyone

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Great Work, my friend! These words have the power to break the glamour that bewitches the masses. You see folks, this is how it’s done - this guy quit his job for moral reasons! Imagine that. What are you willing to give up?

Not only is all immorality theft, but it is an infringement upon freedom. What’s being stolen is the inherent freedom of the individual in every case. This is an important point, because it highlights freedom as intrinsically linked with good. Freedom is not just a desirable condition, It is an inherent quality of ALL that is good. Its absence turns a good into an evil. Its absence is the perversion that makes evil evil.

This recognition highlights freedom’s importance, raising it way up the scale of priorities. Some believe they must sacrifice some freedoms to protect others, but when you realize you’re not just making a neutral decision to forgo the convenience of freedom, but actually transmuting good into evil any time freedom is sacrificed, you may be more hesitant to make that decision.

After all, all we do is in the name of improvement, with the purported goal of moving toward greater good. So willingly turning good to evil is definitively ill-advised, once recognized as such.


Exactly, great comment!

In this day and age of information, "not recognizing" Natural Law is willful ignorance.


Absolutely. And this is generally a cause of great anger and frustration for me because I feel these people deserve to be treated as any other aggressor. If a person was going to hire a hitman, it would seemingly be justified to use force to stop them. So if a person is going to vote for a politician to enslave you, what’s the difference?

However, my recent studies have helped me move toward an intellectual understanding of what my heart already knew - attacking statists who hear our words but do not heed them is not the way to go. It is not acting from Love.

Love is the force that moral law attempts to describe.


Yeah, Ive been there.

I think most people who have come to terms with reality have been through the same growing process, which includes self loathing and loathing humanity as a whole.

You're right it is all about Love. Do we make decisions and take action based out of Love or fear?

I appreciate your comments, it's great to communicate with others who have reached an understanding of the state we're in, and even more importantly: What we must do to get out of it. Our solutions are not elusive and complex. All wee need is Love and the Courage to back it up.


Yeah man, same here. I find a key realization to be the independence of our decision. When we have these conversations, it’s as though people believe a decision is being made for the world. As though if they accept the inherent immorality and invalidity of external authority, then the world will become anarchistic immediately and they will have to deal with the perceived negative consequences.

The reality is that we are only making a decision for our position and behavior, which is rather inconsequential in the short-term. In other words, there is nothing to fear by choosing reality, because the change won’t come until many more people make that decision to be moral. And once that happens, the many dangers they fear will be obviated by the cultural shift toward higher consciousness.

I hope I’m explaining this well; it’s a subtle nuance of the conversation with statists. Instead of thinking “what should the world be like?” we should put the focus on “what should I be doing to be the change I want to see in the world?” or “how should I behave, such that if everyone did as I do, the world would be a better place?” We’re not making decisions for the world, just ourselves. This takes some of the sting out of the decision; we don’t need to consider how everyone else will behave in the society we’re trying to bring about, because by the time the required number of morally-comitted individuals is reached for the change to occur, many of the feared outcomes will be mitigated, if not rendered wholly impossible.


Hit the nail on the head.

Humanity has become so self loathing that the idea of depending on someone as inadequate as themselves scares the shit out of most people. It's all smoke and mirrors. People are afraid that lack of government would cause chaos, scarcity and violence when in fact government is the main cause of chaos, scarcity and violence (or rather a reflection of the internal chaos we face).

Are the people that need "the sting" taken out of the fact that the world is the way it is because of the way we are likely to be capable of the self reflection necessary to change the world?

Are our worse fears possible in a state of freedom? Of course they are. They are even more possible now however, under the rule of criminals and false belief systems. I would even go as far as to say most of the things we are afraid of happening are happening now in spite of our denial and ignorance.

These fears are part of the dragon we must face and conquer on our path of self development. We need to be willing to stand for what is Right - even in the face of death.


Well said! It’s simply a case of “The devil that you know...” Even the Libertarian tent-pitchers fall victim to this insanity, despite their fallacious claim to being “freedom-minded” (all the more true of right-wingers).

They say, “But, China”, “But Russia” (the very fact they use these two examples proves they’re still tuned-in to their friendly neighboorhood network news team), and I want to say, “But, America!” You’re already living under the tyranny you fear, though perhaps more like Huxley’s model than Orwell’s... for the time being.

They think China can (or even wants to) ship its entire military here (3 million vs. 325 million, btw), and fight town by town across a whole half-continent? In an unwilling free society with no government to usurp, they would have to create government from scratch and supply millions of bureaucrats and enforcers to hold what was gained and establish their rule. It’s cost-prohibitive, never mind the logistics. An absolute impossibility IF Americans were willing to “Live free or die.”

Not that any of that matters anyway. I’m all about the categorical imperative - if man will be destroyed under free, moral conditions, then he does not deserve to live. Bring it on - fire and fury, kids and all - let us live right or die trying.