Three steps forward, two steps back; so humanity advances.
Ideas are the foundation of the brain standard, one of which is that only individuals have rights. This cuts through the collectivist dreck that passes for thought among most of the world’s so-called intellectuals. The variations of collectivism all disguise nothing more than brute force hiding behind propaganda. Their inevitable failures stem from their essential flaw: those that control the collective claim rights that negate those of the individual.
There are grounds for hope. From the ruins of impending collapse there will be some who reject collectivism and are committed to rebuilding on a foundation of individual rights. How they will protect those rights and whatever territories they stake out are what theoretical physicists sometimes call “engineering problems.” One advantage they’ll have, though, as the brain standard constituency—they’ll be smarter than their adversaries. Attention, imagination, and intelligence will be keenly focused on building from the ruins and protecting what they’ve built.
Here’s a thought experiment. Imagine someone invents a cheap, portable device that defends its bearer and his or her property from all violence from all sources, but has no offensive capability. The device is so cheap that virtually everyone can buy it, and charities are set up to donate it to those who can’t. The device is universally available and creates a world without violence.
How would such a world function? People would have to produce to survive, but absent mutual agreement no one would have an enforceable claim on anyone else’s production. There would be no coercive transfers of money or property. Disputes would be settled by negotiation and mediation. A body of civil law similar to English common law would develop. Surely such a society would figure out a way to deal with nonviolent crime.
The negation of violence would eliminate government’s nominal rationale: protecting citizens from violence. In the absence of government (and its violence), individuals and society as a whole would be free to advance as far as their capabilities will take them.
This extreme hypothetical offers a stark contrast with the absence of anything resembling freedom anywhere in the world today. Government and collectivism are top-down codependents based on violence and coercion. Their current manifestations are replaying the dreary and what should be the common knowledge lesson of history: they inevitably fail, often after a great deal of bloodshed.
Once they start down the authoritarian road they only can bring more brute force and coercion. It has been proven throughout history, they are following in there recent hero’s footsteps Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot. They believe this time they will prevail, rulers of the new world, looks like they just might pull it off this time.
“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, selfappointed [sic], or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny” James Madison (The Federalist Papers, No. 47, February 1, 1788, https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-41-50#s-lg-box-wrapper-25493412).
“It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” James Madison (The Federalist Papers, No. 51, February 6, 1788, https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-51-60#s-lg-box-wrapper-25493427).
“And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Lord John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, commonly known as Lord Acton, In a letter to Bishop Creighton, 1887
Excellent, thanks for the links.
Great article, except: “As open to criticism as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution may be” There is only one criticism I can think of and that is the failure to make the chains on the government strong enough.
Great article Mr. Gore, and a very nice thought experiment.
Alt media? (is there such a thing) There are many very good writers
espousing a similar point of view. Criminals (bottom line) from all
strata are getting away with their crimes, thus continue. I never want
to think about the consequences for the individual but they are there
in multiple forms regardless social status. Regardless of cooperation
or rebellion, (do not comply) society as we knew it, is long gone.
I heard an interesting idea this morning regarding the digital $.
They will start with the entitlement class, SS, and all welfare monies,
and from there expand. What say you?