[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Editorial See other Editorial Articles Title: Ed Gov, Not Fed Gov For some time now, I have been considering running for Governor of the State of Idaho. I heard that! Stop laughing. Seriously. Hear me out. Most view me as being right wing, some extremely so. I occasionally characterize my politics as to the right of Attila the Hun, so I feed into that perception. Fact is, though, that I am staunchly pro-Constitution and favor self reliance and self determination above most things. Why Don't We Do It on the Shoulder of the Road? In an attempt to reach a broader swath of Americans whom I perceive to be increasingly disaffected from government, I have moderated my rhetoric lately, but neither my beliefs nor my core message. I see "middle of the road" America shifting and, as America's economy worsens even further, I anticipate a massive shift. By this time next year, it is very likely that Middle America and I will meet on the shoulder of the road. Nature Abhors a Vacuum If nature did not abhor vacuums, I might advocate the complete abolition of government (aka "anarchy" in some quarters). People being people, however, I believe that some minimal form of government is necessary to prevent tyranny by self-declared rulers. Permit me a brief example. One summer I shared a house with three other fellows - intelligent, rational and generally considerate individuals all. I always got home from work before the others and particularly enjoyed the silence of the house. The moment one of them came home, though, he made a beeline for the living room TV, turned it on and then invariably left the room. In response to my objection, he would reply, "Well, nobody else was watching it, so why does it matter? Besides, I like having the background noise." Silence meant nothing to these otherwise well-meaning oafs. Silence merely was something to be filled with noise. Nature abhors a vacuum and the natural tendency is to rush in and fill it ... with something. Lack of government is like silence. Most people see no value to it and rush in to fill what they perceive to be a merely worthless void. Busybodies and control freaks are the ultimate expression of this tendency. "Well, nobody else is making rules to govern our behavior, so we might as well do it," they say. Pity. Next thing you know, people are being consigned to gulags and worse. Problem is, the control freaks are somewhat correct, if misguided. Without some rules, the world would descend into Mad Max chaos. The problem lies with the term "some." How little government is enough and how much government is too much? That is the real question. The Circle of Strife I have written about this tension before and dubbed the resulting cycle "The Circle of Strife," in which societies tend to swing between freedom and tyranny. Only in freedom can tyranny gather sufficient force to take over and only under absolute tyranny do the seeds of liberty force their way into fruition. Or, in short: Freedom fosters tyranny and tyranny breeds freedom. We might differ in our opinion as to where we are in the Circle of Strife here in America, but few would argue that we aren't far along the path toward outright tyranny, while many would say that we arrived there quite some time ago. I am in the latter camp, of course. The Circle of Strife holds that only in a free country, as America once was, can tyranny find the space in which to gain a foothold and grow. Grow until, like the noxious weed that it emulates, every bit of freedom is crowded out of existence. However, then the seeds of freedom left behind (memories, perhaps, be they actual or hardwired via some sort of DNA encoding) begin to sprout. And grow. And flourish. And, in a rush, vanquish the tyranny that went before. Until freedom reigns supreme all over again, creating space for tyranny once more to gain a foothold. And so it goes. We create our own opposition, in other words. And revolution does not necessarily mark a shifting of the pendulum back along the course just traced. The Russian revolution last century merely was a stopover from the relative freedom under Russia's monarchy to the nightmare tyranny of the communists who very nearly destroyed that nation. Trading the devil you know for the one you don't not always is a good idea. Men seem to want to be led, for always people choose leaders, even though that choice sometimes simply is to allow someone to seize control. Men want to be led benignly, in their best interests. That can happen irrespective of the form a government might take. In fact, an argument can be made that democracy is one of the worst forms of government, since it always results in a form of mob rule. Two wolves and a lamb voting about what's for dinner, an aphorism first written down by Benjamin Franklin. Tyranny of the Majority Always, there will be a sizable minority in a democracy tyrannized by the majority, an ever-present fear of America's founding fathers, which is why they established a constitutional republic. They knew about mob psychology. A large group of people will shed its morality and mindlessly follow primal desires, with a lynch mob being the classic example. Bottomless welfare rolls and predatory taxation are the result of mob rule, an inevitable result when the majority of a group finds it can peacefully take the minority's wealth merely by voting it to themselves. Long ago, America became a democracy. The American republic’s safeguards were abandoned through time, casualties of Supreme Court lawmaking, congressional sellout and Executive Order. For the same reasons, America has lapsed into Corporate fascism and now is on the verge of full-blown Communism. Today, you vote for whichever dictator you want, then his government leads by following the polls, the results of which are preordained by the media in the first place. A form of democracy. A guided democracy. A dictatorship, if you will. Make no mistake about the existence of an American dictatorship, with the reins of power held by those who stand in the shadows, orchestrating the mob electorate to flow in predetermined paths. And ever-increasing tyranny, as evidenced by the machinations of the Department of Homeland Defense, calls for mindless unanimity, the Patriot Acts and America’s never-ending war against Israel's enemies and the denial of the West "our" oil. And the fact that America has a higher percentage of its population behind bars than any other country in the world. And the formation of a federal police force via the commandeering of each state's National Guard, together with the arming of virtually every federal employee with a uniform. And the ongoing disarming and regimentation of private citizens. And the implementation of thought crimes. And...and...and..... How long before the pendulum reaches its maximum travel toward tyranny in America and begins to retrace its steps? Must all true freedom be snuffed from existence, leaving only its seeds to germinate in the dark? Must it be that, like William Wallace, we demand "Freedom" with our final breath? Eventually, true freedom will return to America - or whatever it becomes following the upcoming unpleasantries. What form the government then takes probably doesn't particularly matter, but a constitutional republic did work once. It's just a matter of time. It's all a part of the Circle of Strife. The Governor of Windmills? But I digress. And rather badly, too. I was about to explain my hankering to run for Governor of Idaho. Would my running for Governor be a purely Quixotic quest, with only windmills to slay and no dragons? Not necessarily. There are lots of reasons for embarking upon such a campaign, only one of which is to secure the Governorship. Mind you, actually being elected Governor would be the ultimate prize of such a quest and one with which I could make great hay. For example, my first act would be to declare that Federal rights end where Idaho's rights begin - at the state border. Idaho's borders immediately would be sealed to Federal agents of every stripe, who could not enter without permission and a valid Constitutional purpose. In itself, that would be a significant move. I would press the Legislature to declare Idaho a state in which Federal gun laws would not be honored. Similarly, I would press the Idaho legislature to pronounce that Feds and families don't mix, prohibiting all Federal interference with kids, religion and free speech. I would lead the charge to take back our schools by, first, rejecting all Federal funding of education in the state. That would allow us to dispense with all the Federally-mandated staffing, reporting, indoctrinating and the like, with the result that we actually would have more money to spend on the basic education of our children. Equal rights for all and special rights for none. No exceptions. Affirmative action, quotas, set-asides and Idaho's "hate-crime" laws all must go. Budget cuts to match the privation already being suffered by the general population would be the order of the day. And I administratively would declare (and seek similar legislative declarations) that the Federal government balance its budget, abolish the Federal Reserve System and the IRS, close the borders (and deport all illegals, including anchor babies) and return all troops from their postings overseas. And that would be just for my first day in office. Let Me Know What You Think There are other reasons to run for office, though, particularly in view of the rigging of the electoral process that now takes place throughout America at every level of government. To influence the public discussion, for example. To awaken people to their inherent rights. To educate fellow citizens as to the proper role of government in a constitutional republic like what America once was. So, what do you think? Should I? Run for Governor of Idaho, that is? Let me know what you think. Email me at Steele@NickelRant.com and/or participate in the forum discussion on the page devoted to tonight's rant at the Voice of Reason (VOR) Network Internet web site: http://reasonradionetwork.com/ .
Poster Comment: Go for it, Ed.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: christine (#0)
Anyone to the right of Atilla cannot be pro consitution. The USCON is a document inherently ANTI-force. Atilla's policy of "self-reliance" use his hordes to forcibly take whateve they wanted...
No there are not, and thinking like that guarantees his loss.
A nation based on race has to keep other races out. A government dedicated to a proposition has to keep ideas out. |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||