Your liberty depends too much on the whims of the current rulers.
Even if one ruler respects liberty, the system is designed to destroy it. Because the next ruler probably won't- few, if any, have ever understood or respected liberty. It's not in their interest to do so.
But, if one did- You might have liberty until the next ruler comes into power, and then you could lose it all. Then the next ruler after that might be better again. Or worse. It’s a terrible system.
If rulers were scared to violate liberty- and I mean scared to death to violate liberty in the smallest way- then, perhaps, tolerating rulers might not be the worst thing. But the system isn't designed to protect liberty, it is designed to protect those who violate it. Again, it's a bad system. One that's incompatible with human flourishing and liberty.
Those who support such a system don't understand or support liberty. That's why they tolerate government. They want everything to be subject to government permission. They can't even think outside that box.
If you tell them that you don't like something, they automatically think you are saying it should be illegal and people should be punished for doing it. Even if you clearly say that's not what you're saying, it's as if they can't see those words. They hallucinate that you are advocating that liberty be violated. They literally can't think outside the statist box. And these are the people who are empowered to v*te to violate your liberty.
It's fascinating to watch happen in real time. It's frustrating to try to communicate with such people. Because you can't. They are immune.
These are the type of people who put their support behind a broken system and demand everyone play along. Liberty doesn't register with them. They just want their anti-liberty side to "win" for now. They are willing to hurt themselves to further that goal.
Thank you for reading.
"You might have liberty until the next ruler comes into power" contains, I suggest, a flaw.
ReplyDeleteIf a ruler actually granted liberty, the "system" would be demolished; that's what liberty is. There will be no "next ruler." I don't think any ruler will ever grant any such thing, which is why politicking is a waste of time; but if he did, would that not be true?
You're right. I was thinking in terms of a ruler granting limited liberty- I guess I can't even imagine a ruler willingly scrapping the entire system, as would be necessary to actually respect liberty. The system (the Deep State) would stop him before it got to that point, or would eliminate him immediately after and say he had no "authority" to do that, so the system is back.
Delete“It's frustrating to try to communicate with such people. Because you can't. They are immune.”
ReplyDeleteThe vast bulk of the human race are fully, thoughtlessly, invested in the concept of rulership – even those being ruled. Those few who have even passing and transient thoughts on the matter are terrified by the prospect of the personal responsibility entailed by self-sufficiency and individual liberty. They remain permanently stuck in the state of intellectual development characteristic of helpless, immature and dependent juveniles. Such an arrested state is pathological in nature; harmful to the individuals afflicted with it and the societies they comprise. It is a form of insanity.
“Insanity in individuals is something rare, but in groups, parties, nations and epochs it is the rule.”
----Friedrich Nietzsche
You and Nietzsche are both correct.
Delete