“As ye sow…” by Robert Gore
No matter its guiding “ism,” every government has granted itself the power to initiate violence against its citizens. Just because the ruling agglomerate asserts this privilege doesn’t render it philosophically valid. What it does is legitimate the initiation of violence for any and all causes—domestic and foreign—the government deems proper.
Having violated the first principle of nonaggression, nothing can stop that philosophical default from trickling down to the subject population. The ragged thief who holds up a liquor store lacks the polish and articulation of the politician who asserts the government’s first claim on a nation’s production, the central banker who depreciates its currency, or the general bent on global dominance who wages offensive wars, but philosophically they’re soul mates. In fact, the thief has a moral one up on the others: he doesn’t claim to be protecting the values he destroys.
This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link. For Robert Gore's novels:
https://www.amazon.com/Robert-A.-Gore...
Having violated the first principle of nonaggression, nothing can stop that philosophical default from trickling down to the subject population. The ragged thief who holds up a liquor store lacks the polish and articulation of the politician who asserts the government’s first claim on a nation’s production, the central banker who depreciates its currency, or the general bent on global dominance who wages offensive wars, but philosophically they’re soul mates. In fact, the thief has a moral one up on the others: he doesn’t claim to be protecting the values he destroys.
This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link. For Robert Gore's novels:
https://www.amazon.com/Robert-A.-Gore...
caution against hate; if you go to a battle to the
death against collectivists, can you be blamed for hating them?--Though I suppose the primary emphasis should be on love for the good, which you are protecting.
I found this paragraph tremendous.
"Individuals who assert the right to initiate aggression against whomever they choose are philosophically unhinged, candidates for an asylum or a penitentiary. Rejecting the first principle that must guide human interaction—that no one may rightfully initiate force against another person—such individuals have no rational foundation for their thoughts or actions. The “garbage in” of their philosophical premises produces “garbage out” emotional states, mental processes, and ultimately, lives. Having abandoned reason for coercion and violence, reality becomes a chaotic, incomprehensible void." Robert Gore
The non-aggression philosophy you described was the principle which the Libertarian Party was founded upon, though modern political candidates aren't always faithful to it. You'll certainly find many kindred spirits in the anarcho-capitalist community today, and they're getting ready to meet for Anarchopulco. I'm wondering now if enough people will be attending to fill a high school gym; I think it will be close.
I hope America is a horribly buggy alpha release of a constitutionally-limited democratic republic. I hope this a brief period in history, and within a few centuries we get it running stably and we address all the high-importance bugs you mention in the article.
I too.
It's like an amazing new invention whose imperfections start to be annoying.
Someone told me he was on a commercial flight with high-speed Wi-Fi Internet access, fast enough to stream video. It broke half way thought the flight. The crew apologized for the inconvenience. One passenger muttered that this was "just ridiculous", which sounded right until you consider high-speed streaming video on a flight would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. That's sort of how I think of these problems. A difference, though, is I'm confident they'll work out the bugs in new technology. We are over-confident that a constitutional democratic republic will not fail spectacularly. Things are amazingly good, but take the bugs serious!