Good For The Country
by John Longenecker.
The Liberty Nuts, Part I.
As a gun owner, columnist and author, I’m asked, "You write socio-political complaints and your own idea of an answer, but what are you for?"
That’s easy. Sit back and have a cup for this series.
Many people believe people like me are gun nuts. Actually, we’re Liberty Nuts. For us, it’s not all guns; for us, it's a much broader picture of generations of liberty, sacrifice, connectivity to it all.
Which brings me to this: One of the greatest and under-reported news items of the new year is the finding, if you will, that so-called conservative values are actually Mainstream values.
One example of a common mainstream value is Household, of course; the values of privacy, of property ownership, of personal autonomy, home and personal sovereignty transcend party lines, do they not? I write about it often. Household is at the core of everything I write in Good For The Country.
Household is at the core of the nation’s way of life. That generations-old connectivity. In this analysis, we find the entire political spectrum sharing even more values in common, beyond question.
In general, especially among the liberty nuts, is the idea that we are not against government, as is often characterized, but against official misconduct. Since America is self-governed and the People are the pre-eminent authority, we alone have the right to say what is right. Officials, in their official capacity, have no opinion. If they wish to act as citizens, they take off the hat of official, like a judge steps out of robes, as in the hour when he votes at the polls.
Acts of official misconduct are lying under oath, official over-reach, stealing of archival documents, giving away technical secrets, giving away energy-bearing land title and control, you get the idea. It’s not a party thing; it’s not a governmental thing: it’s an objection to individual official misconduct.
And liberty nuts are not against change, but destructive change, that is, the because-we-say-so politics, the intrusions, penalties, unreasonable impositions, things detrimental to the household; each of these incrementally compels of us a change in our way of life, without any real positive result.
An example of these would be zero-tolerance policies; with no wiggle room for investigation or introduction of facts, parents are silenced, frozen out of their justice. Such unreasonable policies involve punishing fighting, instead of punishing bullying. The innocent is swept up in the counter-productive decision and the offender is never reached by the policy. Workplace zero-tolerance is equally unjust.
As households, each of us can honestly relate to these as unjust and detrimental. This is where and why so-called conservative values are actually, not surprisingly . . . Mainstream values.
Part of this mainstream view involves weapons, or personal defense of the person and household when necessary. You’ve heard all the arguments that the Second Amendment is a civil right, but many Americans cannot relate the Bill Of Rights to their modern household. This is an example of an interruption in connectivity, so critical to relating it all to what it's really all about.
Personal weapons – the right and the need to own, keep and use weapons, whether you want to own a gun or not – is an integral part of our way of life, and any interference with this choice means other interferences to come. This is consistent around the world. How is America immune? Well, she isn’t.
This is how the carrying of weapons is a barometer -- a predictor -- of the health of all our other civil rights, including freedom of speech, assembly, religion, security in our person and papers, you get the idea. The individual is a sovereign, and any interference which refuses to recognize this sovereignty, such as penalizing and discouraging self-defense and slowly eroding our household automony and authority, will profoundly disrespect all the others.
Where is this all leading?
Many pundits say that we must fight to win the hearts and minds of America, but it’s more than a simple battle: it is a never-ending fight for our way of life to avoid a horrible destination of a living death. This is to create and maintain the connectivity to the future generations.
For generations past, gunnies and the liberty nuts have warned about the dangers of intrusion and of threats to our Bill of Rights. They are correct, if world history, especially of the last century, is any indicator, and it is.
But new high technology of worldwide communications, of surveillance and of light-speed data-sharing potentiates immensely this move against the United States and her sovereignty. It becomes a looting, removing our objection as an obstacle.
For generations, the liberty nuts have warned America about encroachments on our rights as an unrelenting move to enslave us. Not entirely hyperbole, this living death can come not as an eventual end, but as a pall of a fate of nothingness; little by little, our resistance to this pall is pared down through politically correct abuse and punishment for our resistant ideas, of zero-tolerance policies to silence parents, of campaigns to remove pundits who say aloud their resisting values, and other methods to discourage resistance in America.
But this is not leading to Slavery. In the literal sense of the word, I doubt Americans will ever wish to own other people.
But there is a payday in creating Dependency in America.
This is why liberty enthusiasts champion freedom. But it's not enough. It’s equally important not only to get out of the water, but to see the shark. It’s equally important not only to want freedom, but to see what is coming between you and your personal sovereignty, in effect talking us out of our liberties.
Hurricane Katrina exhibited – in fact, genuinely unearthed – the greatest disgrace American Blowhards had vowed to eradicate: a disgrace which continues at this very hour – the disgrace of dependency in the name of compassion, equality, tolerance and of course, let us not underestimate it – horribly misguided cooperation.
This is the perfect example of what happens when the goodness of American core values are silenced and dependency prevails in even a small corner of the country.
It is clear that this rhetoric about compassion, equality and the rest were only tools to create dependency, quite a profit for some. Looting for the rest of us.
As I write in my book, Transfer Of Wealth, many of these homes see an abortion of a new horrific kind for America; where the household is the strength of the nation, some households are discouraged, talked out of realizing their right to companionship, commitment and happiness for the sake of dependency on specific tax relief, public assistance and other disincentives to building a home; as such, some households aren’t even born.
You can see now that sovereignty is not all about guns. Guns are about sovereignty.
It’s about liberty versus dependency, the malignant, misguided insistence of officials who absolutely need to be needed. The core of that value is dreadfully un-American.
It’s not about guns. It is about resisting the removal of, one by one, every obstacle to bring Americans closer and closer to an ultimate dependency on a punitive, or-else basis.
Where our liberty is backed by force -- our force -- we are being talked out of our weapons, all of our weapons: protest, privacy, our personal authority, official dialogue, state and personal sovereignty, self-defense. [Violent crime is a mistress of officials, a real payday in prestige, administration, jobs and political sway.]
The chief obstacle to this looting of America is our personal pre-eminent authority, our sovereignty. Disarming America -- by way of discourgaing resistance on all fronts, especially self-defense -- intrusions and impositions such as National ID Cards and RFID Chips slowly impress unwary Americans of benefits while asking them to open their purse and pay for it all with a little more sovereignty. And then a little more.
Until it's all gone.
Where the American Household is the Stronghold of resistance to adversity in America, the move is on to remove it in the quest not to impose Slavery, which would never stand, but to impose Dependency, which would be embraced.
Then it would be enforced.
Is there a difference?
_________________________
John Longenecker is author of Transfer Of Wealth, available worldwide. His website is www.TransferOfWealth.net His e-mail is John@TransferOfWealth.net, and he welcomes all correspondence.
The Liberty Nuts, Part I.
As a gun owner, columnist and author, I’m asked, "You write socio-political complaints and your own idea of an answer, but what are you for?"
That’s easy. Sit back and have a cup for this series.
Many people believe people like me are gun nuts. Actually, we’re Liberty Nuts. For us, it’s not all guns; for us, it's a much broader picture of generations of liberty, sacrifice, connectivity to it all.
Which brings me to this: One of the greatest and under-reported news items of the new year is the finding, if you will, that so-called conservative values are actually Mainstream values.
One example of a common mainstream value is Household, of course; the values of privacy, of property ownership, of personal autonomy, home and personal sovereignty transcend party lines, do they not? I write about it often. Household is at the core of everything I write in Good For The Country.
Household is at the core of the nation’s way of life. That generations-old connectivity. In this analysis, we find the entire political spectrum sharing even more values in common, beyond question.
In general, especially among the liberty nuts, is the idea that we are not against government, as is often characterized, but against official misconduct. Since America is self-governed and the People are the pre-eminent authority, we alone have the right to say what is right. Officials, in their official capacity, have no opinion. If they wish to act as citizens, they take off the hat of official, like a judge steps out of robes, as in the hour when he votes at the polls.
Acts of official misconduct are lying under oath, official over-reach, stealing of archival documents, giving away technical secrets, giving away energy-bearing land title and control, you get the idea. It’s not a party thing; it’s not a governmental thing: it’s an objection to individual official misconduct.
And liberty nuts are not against change, but destructive change, that is, the because-we-say-so politics, the intrusions, penalties, unreasonable impositions, things detrimental to the household; each of these incrementally compels of us a change in our way of life, without any real positive result.
An example of these would be zero-tolerance policies; with no wiggle room for investigation or introduction of facts, parents are silenced, frozen out of their justice. Such unreasonable policies involve punishing fighting, instead of punishing bullying. The innocent is swept up in the counter-productive decision and the offender is never reached by the policy. Workplace zero-tolerance is equally unjust.
As households, each of us can honestly relate to these as unjust and detrimental. This is where and why so-called conservative values are actually, not surprisingly . . . Mainstream values.
Part of this mainstream view involves weapons, or personal defense of the person and household when necessary. You’ve heard all the arguments that the Second Amendment is a civil right, but many Americans cannot relate the Bill Of Rights to their modern household. This is an example of an interruption in connectivity, so critical to relating it all to what it's really all about.
Personal weapons – the right and the need to own, keep and use weapons, whether you want to own a gun or not – is an integral part of our way of life, and any interference with this choice means other interferences to come. This is consistent around the world. How is America immune? Well, she isn’t.
This is how the carrying of weapons is a barometer -- a predictor -- of the health of all our other civil rights, including freedom of speech, assembly, religion, security in our person and papers, you get the idea. The individual is a sovereign, and any interference which refuses to recognize this sovereignty, such as penalizing and discouraging self-defense and slowly eroding our household automony and authority, will profoundly disrespect all the others.
Where is this all leading?
Many pundits say that we must fight to win the hearts and minds of America, but it’s more than a simple battle: it is a never-ending fight for our way of life to avoid a horrible destination of a living death. This is to create and maintain the connectivity to the future generations.
For generations past, gunnies and the liberty nuts have warned about the dangers of intrusion and of threats to our Bill of Rights. They are correct, if world history, especially of the last century, is any indicator, and it is.
But new high technology of worldwide communications, of surveillance and of light-speed data-sharing potentiates immensely this move against the United States and her sovereignty. It becomes a looting, removing our objection as an obstacle.
For generations, the liberty nuts have warned America about encroachments on our rights as an unrelenting move to enslave us. Not entirely hyperbole, this living death can come not as an eventual end, but as a pall of a fate of nothingness; little by little, our resistance to this pall is pared down through politically correct abuse and punishment for our resistant ideas, of zero-tolerance policies to silence parents, of campaigns to remove pundits who say aloud their resisting values, and other methods to discourage resistance in America.
But this is not leading to Slavery. In the literal sense of the word, I doubt Americans will ever wish to own other people.
But there is a payday in creating Dependency in America.
This is why liberty enthusiasts champion freedom. But it's not enough. It’s equally important not only to get out of the water, but to see the shark. It’s equally important not only to want freedom, but to see what is coming between you and your personal sovereignty, in effect talking us out of our liberties.
Hurricane Katrina exhibited – in fact, genuinely unearthed – the greatest disgrace American Blowhards had vowed to eradicate: a disgrace which continues at this very hour – the disgrace of dependency in the name of compassion, equality, tolerance and of course, let us not underestimate it – horribly misguided cooperation.
This is the perfect example of what happens when the goodness of American core values are silenced and dependency prevails in even a small corner of the country.
It is clear that this rhetoric about compassion, equality and the rest were only tools to create dependency, quite a profit for some. Looting for the rest of us.
As I write in my book, Transfer Of Wealth, many of these homes see an abortion of a new horrific kind for America; where the household is the strength of the nation, some households are discouraged, talked out of realizing their right to companionship, commitment and happiness for the sake of dependency on specific tax relief, public assistance and other disincentives to building a home; as such, some households aren’t even born.
You can see now that sovereignty is not all about guns. Guns are about sovereignty.
It’s about liberty versus dependency, the malignant, misguided insistence of officials who absolutely need to be needed. The core of that value is dreadfully un-American.
It’s not about guns. It is about resisting the removal of, one by one, every obstacle to bring Americans closer and closer to an ultimate dependency on a punitive, or-else basis.
Where our liberty is backed by force -- our force -- we are being talked out of our weapons, all of our weapons: protest, privacy, our personal authority, official dialogue, state and personal sovereignty, self-defense. [Violent crime is a mistress of officials, a real payday in prestige, administration, jobs and political sway.]
The chief obstacle to this looting of America is our personal pre-eminent authority, our sovereignty. Disarming America -- by way of discourgaing resistance on all fronts, especially self-defense -- intrusions and impositions such as National ID Cards and RFID Chips slowly impress unwary Americans of benefits while asking them to open their purse and pay for it all with a little more sovereignty. And then a little more.
Until it's all gone.
Where the American Household is the Stronghold of resistance to adversity in America, the move is on to remove it in the quest not to impose Slavery, which would never stand, but to impose Dependency, which would be embraced.
Then it would be enforced.
Is there a difference?
_________________________
John Longenecker is author of Transfer Of Wealth, available worldwide. His website is www.TransferOfWealth.net His e-mail is John@TransferOfWealth.net, and he welcomes all correspondence.
1 Comments:
For me, the 2nd amendment is clear. Civilian ownership of weapons is a fundamental right. Though my interpretation, the amendment was written in context of King George (or whichever english king) disarming civilians for the purpose of safe-guarding his troops during the colonial oppression. IMO, the context was written with an understanding that power corrupts or attracts corruption, even in a democracy and gun ownership is one way of countering this.
Seeking to change the 2nd amendment, to me, represents an opinion and belief which is above the law and not existing within it. How lightly we become little dictators in our own right, protecting only what we agree with or what we don't fear and how we so callously execute what we don't understand or what we disagree with.
This right is something I cannot totally appreciate or understand, regardless, it is an uncontested right. In no way, should this right be eroded and undermined and like all rights, needs to be defended.
I do understand that modern socialism isn't often sought after as an idea, but as a means to an end for social engineers and their genocidal intentions. It allows for unimaginably wide spread corruption as backs begin to be scratched and places extra controls of the dissemination of information consumed by the public. The end result seems to be the alienation of most of it's supporters as the inner circle becomes tighter and more like-minded.
Post a Comment
<< Home