When to Condone Violence
It’s understandable that becoming a parent effects a powerful change in people. Humans are very protective over their children and a great deal of emotion links the child/parent relationship. It’s logical that anyone attempting to abduct children from parents will be met with great hostility. This can be easily observed and it’s a healthy response for parents to be protective of their children.
Because abduction is an act of force, it must be met with force to prevent it. There is no committee that will keep people from stealing your children. In fact, it is more likely that it is the committee and policies that decide to steal them. I’m very concerned about the hierarchical corruption and immoral practices of Child Protective Services (CPS). They won’t listen to reason at the moment of actual abduction, and seldom before-hand either. This action by the abductors must be met with force. I reiterate; it must be met with great hostility. The abduction of children by state committees must not be allowed less you place all faith of family in the hands of those who value none. In this situation, I condone an immediate outright violent response. The family unit has been under attack by committees for decades.
These abductions would never happen if we had militias. Now, most would argue I’m in error because we have “militias”. But I say: They are not real. American Militias are supposedly organized groups of armed citizens whose purpose is to ensure a free society through adherence to our constitution. This is not the case today. Our militias are allowed to exist only by cowering under the might of authoritarian tyranny if they profess to be peaceful. Forget pacifism, it can only bring unbalanced compromise; the citizenry loses liberty while the government enslaves them. You must practice peace but promise your capacity for hostility to ensure liberty.
Let’s examine the logic:
1. If you are a militia that forever practices peace, then you are useless to the citizenry. How can you be a militia if you are peaceful? Your function is to enact force against the injustices of committees. That force must be backed by effective ability, and defense against a committee action is rarely a peaceful conflict.
2. A free republic has no place for pacifism because you must struggle to protect it. This struggle involves inherent acts of force. Free societies have the weakness of being manipulated by the willful egomaniacs that want to authoritatively control the world. They enact democracy to divide and conquer the public, and only force can stop them. Force is all they know.
3. If someone comes to steal your property by force, you must simultaneously meet that action with abrupt and equal force to prevent it. Otherwise, the bully will continue to hassle you because you are a passive target. You must be vigilant to strike down injustices as they happen! You can try to use reason and logic to solve the issue, but that is not realistic because authoritarians consistently refuse to be reasonable. When it takes nine squad cars to enforce an unconstitutional inflexible policy against a family of four, the bastards plan to be unreasonable. It is always made obvious when they plan to be immoral and unreasonable. Even U.S. foreign policy reflects these practices; operating on erroneous or falsified information to invade sovereign nations before respectfully conferencing with them.
I haven’t got all the answers but I know how to explain what I see. I’m not blind to the corruption, nor will I be quiet in its presence. Just about everyone I speak to feels the jackals closing in on them. The young have the luxury of moderate ignorance but those of us that have experienced a respect for freedom know what has been lost. Ammunition can’t be cast and pressed fast enough to create a surplus. Firearms and firearm modifications are at the top of the daily topics. More people are growing their own food and home schooling their children. Faith in state services is at record lows. If I didn’t already believe I knew the outcome, I’d say we were on the brink of a hot-war revolution.
I want to switch gears now and write a little on how the USA got into this predicament. I don’t usually like to talk about blame but since it’s a popular filler for airtime on the chatterboxes of the internet and airways, I’ll go into a little of what I’ve begun to understand. It’s important to first get some perspective on the argument.
The USA was designed as a sovereign nation seeking independence from England when they decided to screw England over on a previous agreement to subservience and economics extending into the “new country”. England is ruled by bastards. England has always been ruled by bastards and will likely always be ruled by bastards. So it is no surprise that the newly liberated peoples of the new country decided to form their own nation after and during the slaughter of most of the native residents of the new country. “We The People” created a republic with a constitution of laws that all could agree adherence to. The USA believes in property rights (except for the rights of the native peoples) and thinks the individual (non-native) has a right to pursue a living that produces happiness and financial prosperity through free market capitalism. Before the defined system of capitalism, there were capitalists. A capitalist is an individual who trades any property and makes a profit. It’s not complicated; people have been profiting from trade since the existence of the idea of ownership. It’s a natural inclination to want to make more in your next trade than your previous exchange with that property. The best capitalists are the ones that add their physical work to the property before they sell it, and therefore, have an increased potential to profit from their trade. There was never a need to create the system of capitalism, but since the establishment of that system it has become easier to regulate it.
Here is where it gets really interesting. Few parts of the current United States of America resemble how they were founded. There can be no free market capitalism if there is regulation. And regulation is especially prevalent when concerning trade. Taxes are regulations, and there is no shortage of them either. The invention of trade regulation and profit taxing was devised by bankers, lenders, money-changers and so-called royalty. This is an authoritarian finance model focused on the centralization of wealth. A tax is a fee that is forced to be paid, and compliance to payment is a symbol of the subjects’ subordination. Commonly, payment of a fee is for a service but in this case we can call it a disservice. I’ve written about this topic in previous articles so I’ll get to the result. In summation, the blame for the USA’s current economic and tyrannical authoritarian problems can be placed on the regulators. Anyone who advocates trade regulation, in any of its forms (licensing, taxes, insurance, permits, fines, patent restrictions, and approval stamps); can be found in the company of the secretive, the established, the wealthy, and the top competitors. The secretive meetings are for fixing market prices, choosing political successors and designing bipolar regulations (beneficial for high-end corporations but devastating to low-end businesses).
In all amusing likelihood the human race was genetically engineered by a superior entity (God or Alien) to serve as a workforce under direction from the more intelligent entity. So the human race may have come by this subservient practice honestly. Our natural inclination toward authoritarian hierarchy may be strongly cultural and rooted from at least as far back as the Sumerians. But mere subservience within a hierarchy doesn’t produce or merit violence. And it shouldn’t. So why are civilians preparing for war? I have some logical theories.
I’ll gladly do what I’m told as long as I’m respected, it doesn’t conflict with my sense of morality and I’m paid enough for my services. So my dissent comes from either:
A. I’m not allowed to keep what I’ve earned.
B. I’m forced to follow immoral orders because I’m financially trapped in a job.
C. I’m not respected as a human being.
D. All of the above.
The answer is D. The government has been stealing your money. The government sides with banks and takes what is yours to give to them. The government forces its minions to perform immoral acts against you. The government doesn’t respect you, gropes you in public, demoralizing everything about you and the nature of being human; making you guilty for being alive. I’m pretty sure this is not our Constitutional Republic. So, yeah, you can see why Americans are preparing to attack the false government (FG). It’s an occupying force and it must be brought down. The FG realizes this and has spread our military across the globe to limit our ability to communicate with them. They got a lot of our military fooled into thinking they are legitimately in power. But the young soldiers are deceived or have no sense of reference for comparison.
When I read The Republic (Plato) I thought the noble lie was an amusing concept but I found many flaws in the argument. The foremost flaw being that lying is immoral, and thus the operation of the republic is immoral. Plato wasn’t really concerned with that because he was humiliating the idea of control. It was not meant to be taken in a serious manner. Anyhow, I never thought people would consider using it as the blueprint for a live government. But there are types of people that just take things so seriously or literally. Liberals, for instance, place so much value in the opinions of established professors, and the like, that when they hear a talk on these types of philosophical matters; they suspend sound judgment, critical thinking or even common sense. Conservatives, however, are so set in their ways from their hands-on experiences that they wouldn’t know a novel idea if it bit them in their 401K. These two classifications of behavior are thought of as polar opposites. It is designed exactly as you are intended to believe; always only two choices. Blue or Red. Divide and conquer. They don’t want you to look at the Green. The third option will always be discredited unless they own it too. So you cannot expect to beat the system by using its allowed methods. True liberation can only come from true opposition. And to oppose a force that is violent against its people, the people must be violent in its defense. And now you are in a de facto state of war, thus deception is your primary function.
So, one could argue that we are living in Plato’s Republic because we are deceived by our government, and they are also at war with us. Too bad it is all out of ignorance and misinterpreting an early concept.
-Jeremy Edward Dion
Related articles: Control by Force & Systems