I used to be incapable of serious thought. I seldom cared about matters of government because they didn’t really affect me. I always thought government was for dealing with the outside world (other nations) instead of inventing new layers of protocol to control its subjects. It was around the first time being detained by police that my concern for government began. I became determined to figure out how it functioned and who would benefit from our obedience. Immediately, I assumed society was to benefit. Then I thought of all the good people that let others manage things for them. If all these good people remained passive then who were the others? Why do they have this hunger to create control pyramids and climb to the top of them? Do they want to get to the top for the right reasons? Are they struggling to get to the top to be responsible for representing and managing our interests? Or are they trying to get to the top because they think their life will be easier? One thing is for certain, building and participating in a control pyramid enslaves all but some are freer than others.
Freedom cannot be found among the popular. Popularity assumes you’re often not responsible for what others think of you. Tales of events taken out of context, travel faster than you ever will. You’ll be confronted by strangers who feel they already know you. People of great popularity or influence must be strong enough to use it responsibly, lest evil prevails. Having subjects to govern doesn’t mean you do less, rather you do more. The paradox of freedom is that great people sacrifice theirs to ensure it for others. The anonymous remain free as long as the influential are compassionate. When policy loses its propensity for sympathy, then it’s time for the anonymous to devour the influential.
I’ve become serious because the influential are greedy, irresponsible, and unaccountable. We’ve failed to restrain government; it has inflated its authority and grown beyond control. Our policies have become indifferent and no one accountable is available for questioning. Government is trying to interject more of its authority into family and natural living. At what point should we ignore their demands and reject their agenda? Not even families living in the woods can be safe from mercenaries enforcing policies enacted by tyrannical collections of influential men. This was proven in 1992 in northern Idaho on a family that attempted to live a natural life. I didn’t fully understand the seriousness of the Ruby Ridge event at the time. Because of fear, policy, and a little bit of groupthink brainwashing; communications between the Weaver family and federal agencies broke down and led to slaughter. Even the news media was entirely biased and would have sent the whole family to the gallows based on the suggestion of federal agencies that they were scary radicals. If there was no other time to become serious, this was it. That event affected us all and now no one is safe for being free.
(popularity, influence, power, control)
-Jeremy Edward Dion