If you can be kidnapped ("arrested") for- and charged with- "assaulting an officer" or for "resisting arrest" when you have clearly done neither, why not fight the cops like your very life depends on it?
Because it does, you know.
.
Monday, May 20, 2013
Adam Kokesh's arrest
I am not an advocate of using institutionalized kidnapping- euphemistically called "arrest" when committed by people who work for "government"- to remove "undesirables" from society. But when that kidnapping is used against a person who wasn't doing anything wrong it is even more disgusting.
It doesn't matter if the kidnap victim was Adam Kokesh or that genocidal monster, Abraham Lincoln- if the victim isn't initiating force, stealing/defrauding, or trespassing on PRIVATELY owned property, the "arrest" is wrong. If you won't speak out against the unjust kidnapping of your worst enemy, then you need to reexamine your commitment to liberty.
I have been frankly horrified at the things I have seen written relating to his "arrest" at the Smokedown Prohibition V event. Gun owners, especially those who were not in favor of his planned armed march on DC, have been acting like statists.
The War on Politically Incorrect Drugs and The War Against Gun Owners are not separate issues. They are both aspects of liberty, which can not be cherry picked to make you feel better. You don't have to smoke Cannabis or own guns to support the absolute human right of everyone to do either or both. Among other things. But if you claim to love (and understand) liberty, you don't look convincing when you seem willing to throw someone else to the wolves.
Maybe Kokesh was seeking to be arrested. Maybe he wasn't. Maybe the feds wanted to get him out of the way so they wouldn't have to face the armed march in July. Maybe it isn't smart to put yourself in a position to invite being kidnapped when you are planning something "bigger" for the near future. Maybe, maybe, maybe...
You can always second-guess anyone's actions. You can even disagree with what they are doing. But if a person is not doing anything wrong, then you shouldn't ever support their abuse at the hands of government employees. I can't support the abuse of anyone by government employees at any time, but that's just me.
Free Adam!
.
It doesn't matter if the kidnap victim was Adam Kokesh or that genocidal monster, Abraham Lincoln- if the victim isn't initiating force, stealing/defrauding, or trespassing on PRIVATELY owned property, the "arrest" is wrong. If you won't speak out against the unjust kidnapping of your worst enemy, then you need to reexamine your commitment to liberty.
I have been frankly horrified at the things I have seen written relating to his "arrest" at the Smokedown Prohibition V event. Gun owners, especially those who were not in favor of his planned armed march on DC, have been acting like statists.
The War on Politically Incorrect Drugs and The War Against Gun Owners are not separate issues. They are both aspects of liberty, which can not be cherry picked to make you feel better. You don't have to smoke Cannabis or own guns to support the absolute human right of everyone to do either or both. Among other things. But if you claim to love (and understand) liberty, you don't look convincing when you seem willing to throw someone else to the wolves.
Maybe Kokesh was seeking to be arrested. Maybe he wasn't. Maybe the feds wanted to get him out of the way so they wouldn't have to face the armed march in July. Maybe it isn't smart to put yourself in a position to invite being kidnapped when you are planning something "bigger" for the near future. Maybe, maybe, maybe...
You can always second-guess anyone's actions. You can even disagree with what they are doing. But if a person is not doing anything wrong, then you shouldn't ever support their abuse at the hands of government employees. I can't support the abuse of anyone by government employees at any time, but that's just me.
Free Adam!
.
Why fear "falling" when you can fly?
(Previously published in The Libertarian Enterprise, May 19, 2013)
Sitting outside, watching some birds swooping around in the sky, gave me some insight recently.
I try to put myself in their place- high above the ground with nothing but air holding me up- but I get vertigo just thinking about it. I try to imagine what it would be like to naturally exist in that environment- without fear. It's hard for me to do.
Yet the birds are no more afraid of heights than I am of horizontal distances. That is because they have the inborn ability to navigate that vertical space. They are in no more danger of falling than I am of "falling" across a field and bumping into the side of a house.
You don't fear that which you naturally navigate.
Which birthed a revelation: Statists are afraid of liberty because they haven't discovered their natural abilities. On the other hand, I'm not afraid of liberty because I can navigate it with confidence- I can't "fall".
Sure, someone can shoot down a bird, and sometimes circumstances shoot down a libertarian, too. That's no reason to sit hunkered over in fear. It's a reason to stay alert and learn to swerve and swoop. And accept that sometimes bad stuff will happen anyway.
Everyone has the potential to "fly" in liberty just as well as you and I do. They just have to try their wings. When you see a statist trying to convince you that you can't fly in liberty, or that he can't, or that too few people could for it to "work", have pity on him. He's just scared, more than anything, of his own untested abilities.
Don't let him convince you that it is impossible to do what you have been doing all along.
.
Sitting outside, watching some birds swooping around in the sky, gave me some insight recently.
I try to put myself in their place- high above the ground with nothing but air holding me up- but I get vertigo just thinking about it. I try to imagine what it would be like to naturally exist in that environment- without fear. It's hard for me to do.
Yet the birds are no more afraid of heights than I am of horizontal distances. That is because they have the inborn ability to navigate that vertical space. They are in no more danger of falling than I am of "falling" across a field and bumping into the side of a house.
You don't fear that which you naturally navigate.
Which birthed a revelation: Statists are afraid of liberty because they haven't discovered their natural abilities. On the other hand, I'm not afraid of liberty because I can navigate it with confidence- I can't "fall".
Sure, someone can shoot down a bird, and sometimes circumstances shoot down a libertarian, too. That's no reason to sit hunkered over in fear. It's a reason to stay alert and learn to swerve and swoop. And accept that sometimes bad stuff will happen anyway.
Everyone has the potential to "fly" in liberty just as well as you and I do. They just have to try their wings. When you see a statist trying to convince you that you can't fly in liberty, or that he can't, or that too few people could for it to "work", have pity on him. He's just scared, more than anything, of his own untested abilities.
Don't let him convince you that it is impossible to do what you have been doing all along.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)