The Last Tyranny Of Man

The steady stream of outrages emanating from our invasive government leads me to wonder what limitations, if any, my fellow citizens would place on our government. Currently government dictates include personal relationships, brain chemistry, medical care, roads, airway, waterways, life and death. Three of these are clear and obvious mandates; the others are even more clearly not something our founding fathers considered within the government purview.

Yet Americans of today think nothing of dictating highly personal and private matters with laws, guns and punishment. These tyrants see no difference between voting for their political representatives and voting for personal freedoms. The superstitious mind is a tortured thing, but believing that a majority vote always indicates the correct action, defies reason. Surely they don’t think that we can vote on everything. There must be some unalienable rights beyond the reach of these idiots and their congressional representatives.

Short answer; there are. Personal liberties of all manner and scope are sacrosanct in this country because of some very clear wording and some very simple ideas. Unalienable means you cannot vote on it. Self evident means that you don’t have to argue or fight for it. Endowed by your creator means that, short of a retraction directly from God, it is safe in this country. ‘Bestow the blessings of’ does not mean take away.

How can the judiciary stand idly by, while human freedom is laid waist by clearly illegal behavior from a government operating in direct opposition to its’ founding documents. Only the Supreme Court can restore the equilibrium envisaged by our founding fathers. Its’ failure to steer political forces clear of human freedom has put this country far off mark. At this point America can no longer be considered a free nation.

A communist government opening up a stock market and encouraging workers to invest in their country seems like such a strange concept. Yet it is no more strange than a free nation dictating what one can do with their bodies with regards to their life and their death and their health and their happiness.

This stark discrepancy boggles my mind. How can we call ourselves free while voting on freedom itself? Have we the people forgotten what freedom is? Does democracy give us the right to vote against freedom? Have Americans confused freedom with a free ride?

Fear of the future does not give us the right to seek another in this country. Freedom is not a choice for us. It is the law of the land. We must see it through. If it fails, so be it. But don’t give it up until then. It’s the highest ideal yet in human social evolution. Have faith in that.

Man kind will flourish in a totally free society. How many spouses of what sexual polarity is clearly a personal matter. What medicine you take is not a public debate in a free society. Presuming harm from behavior like any presumption should have no place in a court of law, even if the legislature insist. Those who would separate man from his behavior reduce him. Those allowing this conduct deserve what they get.

Rick Wolfe

If someone sells you a car, they are a salesman. If they sell you a house, they are a realtor. Your food is delivered by a waitress. Why aren’t any of these people called pushers?

Why does Bill Oreilly setting in the middle of the “no spin zone” insist that every drug deal is a violent crime? Either Bill has been watching way too much TV or he is spinning like a whirling dervish.

It’s all part of the process to demonize drugs, those who sell drugs and those who buy them. This is necessary in order to make what we do to them palatable to a society that is otherwise disinclined to be cruel.

Like every war the drug war is no stranger to propaganda. Reds, gooks, japs, krouts and now pushers and users are dehumanized in preparation for their violation. We have steeled our minds against the horrible reality of what we are doing with ugly words for people who do not deserve what we do to them.

Rick Wolfe

We must take care not to confuse democracy with freedom. When our political representatives vote on our personal liberties it is democracy. But it is certainly not freedom. Voting on freedom makes it popularity. Popular politicians are one thing, but popular freedoms belie an understanding of freedom. The 18th amendment was illegal, but that is not why it was repealed. It was not popular enough with those in voting control. That is why we still have prohibitions.

Without an amendment from our Creator, freedom is not something on which one votes, in this country. It was and is self-evident that our rights are unalienable in this country. This was established by a document that has never been amended. The Declaration of Independence created this country and imbued each of us with personal liberty. The liberty in the Declaration is the same liberty referred to in the Constitution. The Constitution is not an amendment to the Declaration of Independence.

This is not a fine point to be overlooked easily. Voting on personal and private conduct, that does not endanger or harm others, is prohibition. It is an arbitrary and unnecessary abridgment of personal liberty. It is most certainly not freedom and clearly illegal, in this country, just like the popular Prohibition that was repealed.

There are far too many incarcerated and otherwise restrained by our government in this country. It is true that a lot of those incarcerated should be for the protection of people, but certainly not for the protection of our society directly. That sort of protection is a thinly veiled form of social engineering that ties us all to the common yoke of popular opinion. It is a disease of democracy spread by tyrants rendering the infected afraid of both truth and freedom. It is freedoms greatest struggle and liberty is losing while an infection grows in this country.

The regulation of shared resources and the restraint of one to protect another have nothing to do with prohibition. These are things our government should be doing instead of engineering a Stepford society based on popularity.

Both the minority and the majority come together to conceive of prohibitions. This is true because all but a few vote for prohibitionist. You might argue successfully that your tyrant is more good looking, smarter, charismatic or whatever rings your bell, than whoever will ‘win’ the election, if your tyrant does not. But what does that have to do with anything in this country.

All those responsible for the practice of prohibition practice a very pure and virulent form of treason knowingly or otherwise. Prohibitions are not the sole failure of voters or Legislators to protect our liberty. The Supreme Court, or the Executive of these United States should restrain elected officials practicing prohibition in this country, be they in the majority or the minority.

Rick Wolfe