The truth behind political labels
The zero-sum game of politics is not a path to progress or liberty, so it cannot be progressive, liberal, or libertarian. It is unjust and antisocial, so it cannot bring about "social justice." Politics is the art of plunder, not economic production, so it cannot be fiscally conservative. None of the incentives of political power can offer a means to the ends politicians promise.
We do not need a monolithic mandatory monopoly government any more than we need a state religion for a functional society. Progress comes from choice. Attempts to constrain the liberty of others is trespass, no matter how benevolent the stated intentions may be. Fear of the consequences of liberty guarantees the destructiveness of authoritarianism while denying us innumerable opportunities afforded by liberty to innovate, experiment, and discover.
Remember, if you can't trust your neighbor to be free, how can you trust your neighbor to elect a stranger to rule you? Further, how can you trust that elected stranger who has no knowledge of your wants, needs, ambitions, and desires? Democracy is not the bedrock of our society, but rather sand in the gears and sugar in the gas tank. The labels applied to these factions vying for political power are irrelevant, and bickering over which set of trespasses is less burdensome is a distraction.
Being a Republic offers us a small advantage over being a Democracy; which is neutralized by their ability to stuff the ballot box for any result they want; as they are doing in Broward county in Florida, we loose that protection!
It does NOT look good for us; they will not quit until there is Blood in the streets! I am concerned that we may NEED the second amendment as the Founding Fathers planned!
WE live in interesting times, controlled by Evil people! Stay safe my friend, and keep your powder dry!
:)“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”
Lysander Spooner was right when he wrote that some 150 years ago or so. There is no special virtue in a "Constitutional Republic." The US has the highest prison population per capita in the world. Everything we do needs to be permitted and recorded and taxed, so it is not the freest economy either. If a "republic" is our best guarantee of freedom, it isn't good enough.
Now, as in Spooner's time; we have the government we have allowed. IF We do not limit the government, they will continue to expand, in power, and oppression!
The Constitution set up a VERY limited government, tehy are allowed control over DC (just a few square miles) ; and no other land. WE have allowed them to control over half the continent! That is our failure, not the Constitution.
We rae supposed to be the teeth in the Founding Documents! The press is supposed to be our attack dogs, not their lap dogs! We are armed to back up those attack dogs, and we are slowly allowing them to take away our GOD given rights to defend ourselves from an out of control government!
This is our failing, and not the Republic's! We are not worthy....
:(Victim-blaming. Government doesn't represent us. It never did and it never will. Government has always been organized crime using whatever means were at its disposal to apply a veneer of legitimacy to its actions. The State is a false religion, no more.
Then it is our job to fix it, accept servitude, or run and hide. There is no middle ground. So Pick your poison, how is best to die?
There is little other choice.
>:(You can't fix it.
You can't accept servitude.
You can't run and hide.
You can fight it, though.
The question is, what is "it"? The empty suits full of ego and belligerence on Capitol Hill, or the idea of their legitimacy in the minds of others? People obey politicians because they believe politicians are legitimate authorities. The belief is the real enemy. The weapons we must use are ideas.
Anything else is self-defeating.
Informationwar ...doing that.
Not enough. Offering will not foment any change. Change requires some form of direct engagement; either by voting (which you reject) or by force of arms.
Change is slow, painful, and risky. How would you make sure that this change is accepted, once offered?
Also I can hide if I need to, and provide my own medicine and food, indefinitely. You need to practice.
Be safe!
:)