Archive for November, 2012

Principle 2: Community Violence (Government)

November 12, 2012

The Government, in my mind, is the most fearsome monster ever imagined.

To understand why, you need to understand why we have government at all, and why government should instead be called “Community Violence.”

Governments form to fight wars and rid the world of evil. We count on our government to blow up the bad guys before they blow us up. We count on them to find and catch and prosecute the criminals.

When governments turn to do harm to the people, where are the people supposed to turn for protection?

Our country started with the idea that while governments can and should protect the rights of the people, when they begin to infringe on those very rights, it should be altered or abolished. That’s what compelled the Founding Fathers to rebel against England.

Most rebellions end up with a worse government than the one they started with. France’s rebellion of the same time period is certainly a case. So our Founding Fathers thought long and hard about what kind of government would not only preserve our freedom, but be superior to the system that the English had set up.

They settled on a government with strict limitations. Community violence could be used, they wrote and explained, but only in certain cases.

Our governments of today have exceeded all reasonable bounds. We are no longer free, not when you compare our freedom with that of our ancestors. Government controls every aspect of our lives. It controls what we are free to eat or do, what kind of businesses we can run and what kinds of things we can talk about. It has been a gradual movement from freedom to the current “soft” tyranny we are experience, but we cannot deny it any longer.

What would freedom look like? Quite different than what we have.

Rather than turning to gangs, poor minorities would be starting businesses doing all sorts of things. From the minority who wants to braid hair, to the kid who wants to shine shoes, to any number of menial businesses that require no education at all to run successfully, the poor minorities could be active participants in our economy. Instead, there are roadblocks from every government agency. You’d need an advanced college degree even to start your business. Trust me, I know, I tried. I was unable to navigate the mountains of regulations. Not for lack of trying, of course.

Police forces would disappear. People would be called upon to defend their own property and lives, and each others. Gangs wouldn’t be a problem. You see, if a gangmember threatened your business, you would form an ad hoc militia with your neighbors and drive them out with the point of your guns. Despite all the movies to the contrary, life in the “Wild West” was really quite peaceful. Crime was rare.

The laws would be much different. Even schoolchildren would be able to figure out what is and is not legal. You wouldn’t need a lawyer to go to trial, except in rare cases. In fact, most issues would be settled outside of court. Our litigious society would quickly turn to self-reconciliation.

Elections would be different. Anyone could say or do anything they wanted, with any funds they wanted to use. There wouldn’t need to be any reporting of any kind, since there is no legal requirement to report the exercise of your free speech rights.

The medical system would be different. Employers probably wouldn’t offer health insurance, since you probably wouldn’t want health insurance. The costs of health care would be so low, thanks to the elimination of all regulations and taxes, that you would be able to pay out of pocket for almost any treatment. Experimental, expensive treatment would, of course, be only available to the richest among us. But as with everything in a free economy, it isn’t long before costs drop and supply increases. After all, if I were a drug company, I would rather sell a drug that $10 million people would use for $100 than 100 people would use for a $1 million.

What about crime, fraud, corruption? A free society protects itself against these  things rather easily. Normally, these types of people aggregate to institutions of power. Case in point, the global warming movement. There is absolutely no weight behind any of their absurd claims, and yet here we are. Why? Because they are working through government. If they had to instead compete in the free market of ideas, we would’ve recognized and rejected their baseless allegations immediately.

When we turn to Community Violence to provide social services, we are asking the fox to guard the henhouse. Government tends to attract people who are less than scrupulous. They have no qualms taking our money, spending it on the poor, and then claiming credit for it. The only way to eliminate this kind of abuse is to stop the practice altogether. Government should be for those people who want to hurt and kill bad guys who threaten our freedoms. Let the churches and societies care about the poor.

Principle 1: Liberty

November 8, 2012

Conservatives believe in liberty.

Libertarians believe in something else.

Let me explain.

It seems odd that my first post about explaining conservative principles targets the libertarian viewpoint rather than the liberal one. But this is the core critical principle behind everything else we believe.

Conservatives and Libertarians agree that men are free to choose. To the conservative, this is God’s ultimate gift to mankind. To the libertarian, this is a fact of nature.

The conservative believes one thing that is in conflict with the libertarian: We believe we are free to do good. Namely, that our freedom expands when we do right, and contracts when we do wrong.

If I choose to eat healthy, exercise, and not do things like drink heavily or smoke, then my physical body will be as healthy as it could be. I will be able to work long hours. I will be able to play and recreate outdoors. I will be able to wrestle with my kids. My mind will be as clear as I can expect it to ever be. My economic contributions will help other people improve their economic situation. My contributions to family life will help build a stronger society. There is a lot of good that will come of it.

If I choose to eat junk food, slob around, drink heavily and smoke, then my physical body will not be as healthy as it could be. I will not be as great a benefit for society as I otherwise could be. There is an opportunity cost to myself and society by doing this, meaning good things that would have otherwise happened will not happen.

Now, I’m not saying that government should regulate what we eat and how we spend our time. We’ll talk about what the government should do or should not do later on. But I am saying that conservatives do not think the freedom to do what we like includes the freedom to eat junk food, slob around, drink heavily and smoke. That is, if we choose to do those things, we’re doing wrong, and we know it even though many do it.

The libertarian might believe that it really doesn’t matter what I do with myself, as long as I don’t hurt others. They often forget that by reducing your economic ability, you are hurting others. Even private actions, such as engaging in extra-marital relations or smoking a joint have long-term and expensive costs to society.

Thus, when God gave man freedom, it came with strings attached. If we choose to do good, then our freedom expands. We can choose to do more things. If we choose to do evil, then our freedom contracts. We will have fewer choices later on.

This core principle, the strings that are attached to our freedom, is our moral duty or responsibility. At the same time we say you are free, we say that you are NOT free to do everything. There is a sort of contract between you and God and society, and it reads something like this:

  • God gives you freedom and life
  • Society promises to not interfere with most things
  • You promise to use your freedoms wisely, for the benefit of yourself and mankind.

Now, let’s talk about where our liberties end.

Libertarians are right: actions which directly harm people are prohibited. Mostly. The basic rule is found in the Mosaic Law: eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. If you hurt your neighbor’s eye, you must restore that eye or you must pay a penalty of the eye, etc… This is the basic idea behind our tort laws, which can be traced back to the Bible. This is also why it makes a whole lot of sense to charge polluters for the cost of cleanup, and then allow them to pollute anyway.

Libertarians forget that we also have duties, things we must do.

  • We have a duty to protect ourselves, our family, and each other from those who would violate our liberties.
  • We have a duty to use our liberties for our benefit and the benefit of others.
  • We have a duty to provide for our own food and shelter and wants, rather than relying on others to do so.
  • We ALSO have a duty to help others provide for themselves, not to make them dependent or lazy, but to help them obtain the means to obtain their own support (more on this in a later post).

Conservatives understand where the freedom to do as we please ends and where we are “enslaved” to our liberties through out duties. We cheerfully and happily accept our duties as a small price to pay for our liberties. Some examples include:

  • Soldiers who volunteer to fight so others don’t have to. People who pay their taxes knowing it is used to support those soldiers.
  • Business owners who pay their taxes, knowing that it is used to provide common infrastructure for themselves, their business partners, their customers and competitors.
  • Individuals who pay their taxes, knowing it funds the legal system which protects their individual rights.
  • Individuals who give away their time, talents, and resources without expectation of remuneration, so that others can enjoy a better life.
  • Churches which stand up for moral issues, such as the sanctity of marriage and the protection of unborn life.
  • Organizations formed, without expectation of profit, so that people can learn or develop talents of their own.

Unfortunately, liberties and duties are not simple. It takes careful study and thought to understand how and why charity is a critical component of capitalism, pacificism requires a military, etc… We could spend our entire lives studying our rights and duties and never come to a complete understanding of them.

Nevertheless, we ALL have a duty to understand our rights and duties for ourselves. If we do not understand them, we will fail in our duties and lose our rights.

What I Learned from Obama’s Re-election

November 8, 2012

Here’s a summary of things I take away from Obama’s re-election.

First, the statist does not want to run a campaign against the conservative.  Case in point, never once did Obama take on Romney’s conservatism. Why? He knew it would make him lose. Instead, he attacked Big Bird, “binders full of women” and “vote for your lady parts.” Oh, and “Romney’s a liar”. Never once did Obama try to show how conservatism was wrong. Why? It can’t be done. You sound stupid when you try to do it in America. “You didn’t build that.”

Second, all those people who say the Republican Party should move left are full of stupidity. We didn’t lose because we didn’t get enough moderate or liberal votes. We lost because 100,000 republicans in swing states decided they did not want to vote this time around. Had we encouraged them to vote, they would have, and probably a lot more than 100,000. There is no reason why we couldn’t have the numbers Bush had in 2004. If we had the numbers McCain had in 2008, we would have won.

Third, the left is utterly powerless. What I mean by this is that they must run a particular campaign if they expect to get any votes at all. Obama’s campaign was about as pathetic as you can get, and yet, he still earned 10 million fewer votes than he got last time around. It’s laughable, really. They have worked themselves into an ever-shrinking box. Our  friends keep getting richer and smarter and have more kids. Their supporters get drugged up, die young, and don’t have kids. We have the demographic advantage. They’ve already slaughtered millions of potential voters, and as time goes on, that gap, the abortion gap, is growing, because those aborted babies will never have children of their own. That’s what happens when you embrace the ideology of death rather than life. Your people end up dead.

This homosexual marriage thing: I have half a mind to let them try it. I know what will happen. They will be depressed, end up committing suicide or killing each other or getting some awful disease and dying. Their values will die out in 1 or 2 generations, tops. Meanwhile, us who believe in and practice traditional marriage will raise bright, happy minds who will raise bright happy minds etc… If you really disagree with homosexual marriage, you will be the best parent possible and have as many kids as you can to put your money where your mouth is.

And the entitlement mentality! They have hit a point where too many people ask for too much for government. Medicare is bankrupt. So is social security. So are the welfare programs. If your political power depends on giving people free stuff, and you run out of free stuff, you lose your political power.

Fourth, whatever we do, we must NEVER compromise our core values of conservatism. We must NEVER give an inch, NEVER agree with any statist ideas, NEVER fear the outcome. When they mock and insult you, stand tall, and tell them what you believe, and why you believe it. You don’t have to become little and tiny like they are. You can still use logic and reason and point out their logical fallacies and contradictions and remain civil.

Fifth, there are more than enough republicans and conservatives to win any national election handily. How do I know this? Because conservatives across the country got elected to the House, while Romney did not. This means the conservative banner marched forward, over the liberal banner, even though we lost the big race. Think about what that means for a moment.

I’m going to be talking more about conservative values and why they are the only values you can have if you care about people. I’ll be explaining why statism kills, the murder kind of kill, not the executing criminals or fighting a war kind of killing. You’re going to see people’s lives ruined thanks to the statist policies of the Obama administration over the next four years.

By the end of it, you’re going to stand with me to elect the most conservative person we can find as presidential nominee. If we can’t get the Republican Party nomination, then we’re going to start a third party. Why? Because we WILL NOT win if we get behind a moderately conservative candidate. That argument simply cannot be made any more. If we split the vote three ways, so be it. That’s how Lincoln won. Remember, it was the Whigs (ending slavery is too risky and makes people unhappy), the Democrats (slavery or bust!) and the Republicans (we’re not going to tolerate slavery for 1 more second). Except now we have our moderate republicans (oh, we need to get the moderates to vote for us), the democrats (statism or bust!) and the conservatives (end statism right now!).

Our job is not to convince the left or the moderate to vote for us. We honestly don’t need their vote. They are too stupid to understand our country’s past and future, and if we earned their vote, it would mean we’re pretty stupid too. We could spend all our time explaining to them what needs to be done, but they are not going to listen to us anyway. I mean, these people are beyond logic and reason. So let’s forget about them, because they are a minority anyway. Let’s focus on getting conservatives to vote enthusiastically for conservatives. Those people in our country who know how to think will find us eventually, and then recognize the truth for what it is. We don’t need to work on people who aren’t looking for truth anyway.