I have seen this more than once and it always perplexes me. How can someone say they would rather be seemingly safe but controlled rather than seemingly safe but free? Can liberty and freedom be subjective? Can someone hold themselves more valuable as a slave to a state or another entity or person than as a free individual? Do some not recognize freedom and all its benefits?
This issue came up the other day in a conversation by a friend. She was expounding on what she sees as a growing problem with home-school parents. She was/ is dismayed by a home-school group member who is telling new home-school parent to refuse to comply with laws. Their unwillingness to sign paperwork or refuse to register to the state or county in accordance with laws. She further tried to explain the freedoms that home-school advocates and participants currently enjoy because of these laws. "We have worked hard for this freedom." is her closing line. My wife responded in her typical manner, telling her that adherence to law is not freedom, but subservience, in different words.
The misconception and possible delusion that is placed in the idea that law gives freedom is easy to spot and easy to address. Compulsion to follow laws and dictates is hardly free from coercion, it is forced to comply and if permission can be granted it can also be revoked. This is the major issue with the idea that asking permission to do any act is somehow being and remaining free. Any act is free to do or free to not do without punishment is freedom, every act of permission, licensing, and permitting is an infringement on the natural rights of individuals. Every time a government agency requires signatures, fees and compliance it can revoke access, use and recreation. The very idea of freedom is free from compulsion in any way.
Can people not recognize Freedom?
I truly believe that some people cannot recognize the freedom they have or the ways in which it is suppressed by government. Take the same concept of licensing. If a man is free to fish, should he be required by law to obtain permission and a license to do so and if this man refuses to submit to asking for permission should he be punished for not having a license? In the minds of many the question is unequivocally a violation of the mans natural freedom. His state of being and all actions that do not impede on the rights of other should not be hampered or constrained by bureaucrats and their heavy handed state sponsors.
Can we not see what freedom is? Can we not recognize that the state of the world today we, as humans, have enslaved and caged ourselves by the ultimate Utopian idea of government by popular opinion and laws dictated by an immoral central authority? Can we ever gain true independence from outside governance? What does it take for the majority of people to recognize their natural state of freedom is contradicted by the use of force and violence for practicing self rule and self governance?
Is Liberty Subjective?
How can one person claim to be free by following orders? How can one person shout for safety while shrugging personal freedom, casting it aside to the edicts of some higher power made of publicly voiced opinion of moral and value? All men can be responsible for their own choices and in those choices some view liberty, the act and state of being free as less valuable than a state of uniform security and the ability to not be held accountable or responsible for their actions. I believe that Liberty has become regarded as a second hand asset rather than the first rule of nature. It has become so trampled by misinformation, programming and propaganda that people would gladly shackle their own ankles to remain in favor of the omniscient big brother government, their salvation from evil and protector of morals.
No comments:
Post a Comment