The War on the Individual

[kres24GT]

As the Reps and Dems continue to wage this war against our individual freedoms and rights in the name of the socialists and fascists they base their policies on, how long until Americans say no more?

So far most of the freedoms robbed of the people have been freedom many Americans are too lazy or too stupid (than you government schools) to want to deal with anyway.

However as the freedoms of the individual are legislated away at record paces in the name of the greater good of society, how long until the people revolt? Or will American Idol keep them distracted long enough that they won't even notice they will eventually live in a statist government void of any freedom or individuality at all.

[stefan segal]

Kres...you have a good point there...

I believe that the government takeover of our "rights" and the reason we stand for it like sheep at the slaughter, are one in the same...we don't take personal responsibility.

The overall opinion appears that everyone feels they've outsourced their reaponsibility when they voted...that now is their time to sit back and bitch at CNN faces, then covey thoses bitches to their wives and neighbors.

The "Out damned spots...a pox pn both your houses" viewpoint, is just another face of the same attitude...good for nothing.

My opinion is to make what we have in place work...as to trash the whole congress, will only open the door for a new Mussolini to sit his fat ass on our collective necks...we are ripe for that event right now.

Active and proactive support of those with whom you agree in congress, will go much farther toward remedy than attempting to cut them all off at the ankles.

I read an article this morning that had to do with the big-gun liberal bloggers attacking a CA. dem represenative...they don't want to unseat her, but their stated target is to hammer her into a less butch (meaning big biz) position and thereby, to stop giving cover to repug extremists who vote the same way on this issue.

At first blush, I thought this rash and unfair, but by the fourth page of the article, I see that these bloggers are functioning as a powerful watchdog group on our reps...this is a good thing, as DC has a degrading influence on keeping one's nose clean. They know they are being WATCHED by millions of active voters.

Kres...it's an easy thing...a thing learned early in life, to take your checkers home if they don't let you win...then nobody plays.

But what you carp on daily is bigger than a checker game, and your total effect will amount to a passing bad smell...like a farting passerby.

You have the juice to be a help...to point out pressure points, if you simply accept the fact that because you live with too many others, life is flawed...but it is life, and not to make the best of what is, is a waste of a good mind.

Stefan

[kres24GT]

I don't agree with anyone in Congress. They are openly waging war against individualism.

Groups are much easier to pander to than individuals, tis no wonder this is the case.

Look at your buddy Edward's new healthcare plan. Gladly willing to sacrifice the freedoms of the individual for what he thinks is best for everyone.


Show me a current politician who is for the individual.

[Bill]

So what's your health care plan?

Politicians, by definition, represent groups of people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polis

[kres24GT]

So what's your health care plan?

Politicians, by definition, represent groups of people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polis


Groups and Individuals can co-exist, but not when we are trying to wipe out the individual all together.

My healthcare plan is simple, get government out of my business, health care included.

[Bill]

Well, what do you mean by wiping out the individual? Give an example of a recent anti-individual law, if you would.

I'm a pretty good example of rugged individualism, about as individualized as you can get in this society while still enjoying most of it's benefits. But I'd be the first to say I'm a rare case. And it took a lot of suffering to get here.

Most people couldn't do it, and wouldn't accept the privations of that lifestyle.

The thing is, the planet is getting more and more crowded - the nature of the urban lifestyle pretty much makes non-criminal individualism impossible.

[Linkster]

Bill - I totally agree about the individualism - however I guess my stance is even more out of pace with what certain nations want - as well as society :)
I dont really give two hoots about politicians, the groups that give them their power and the American "citizens" who roll over whenever they talk - the groups that exist to put these people in "power" are going to do whatever they feel like and quite honestly there is nothing anyone can do about it without being a group - thats the way a republic works.

So I guess every human has a choice to make - they can either join a group and follow along like sheep - or they can make their own life and make sure that everything in it is totally disassociated with anything that looks like a group and be a total individual - those are really the only two "paths". A person may lean towards one or the other, but like you Bill I have made my life so that I dont have to be a part of a group - and dont depend on anyone whatsoever for anything

[kres24GT]

Well, what do you mean by wiping out the individual? Give an example of a recent anti-individual law, if you would.

I'm a pretty good example of rugged individualism, about as individualized as you can get in this society while still enjoying most of it's benefits. But I'd be the first to say I'm a rare case. And it took a lot of suffering to get here.

Most people couldn't do it, and wouldn't accept the privations of that lifestyle.

The thing is, the planet is getting more and more crowded - the nature of the urban lifestyle pretty much makes non-criminal individualism impossible.


For the war on the individual, one only has to look how government does or is trying to regulate what we do with our bodies. FDA, drug war, abortion restrictions, sex laws, trans fat bans, etc. Government decides the benefit of society is better than the freedom of the individual.

[stefan segal]

I subscribe to two survivalist and a group of libertarian wackos who mentally beat off to someday some how, procuring thier own island and self sufficiency.

I hear all sorts of prophilactic measures against the comming famine, flood, pandemic disease, the government attacks to take thier guns, and the new civil war...what they seem to downgrade in importance is the hordes of armed starving city folks that in my estimation will make the Kansas Jayhawkers look to have been out on a summer picnic.

I have noted a lot of bug-out bags, and guns stashed thoughout the house and out buildings...and sealed plastic drums with food,, ammo and equipment buried in stratigic places on the property and on the way of their planned escape route.

All this self reliance you guys speak of, appears to be at the sufference of what comes up your driveway.

These groups expect to shoot their dinner...our massive gun toting population will kill everything worth eating in the first month...then what...cannibalism?

Don't get the idea that I'm standing off to the side taking potshots at you...it is a real problem that I have invested years into comming up with a plausible response...I'll have to report that I haven't found one yet that doesn't include the killing off 75% of the population first. Too many hungry people.

Happily, I have spent so many years at this, I have aged enough to be included in that 75% so the problem becomes simply achedemic for me.
Not that I've sold my armory or camp equipment...all stashed in my bug-out canoe...just in case:)

Stefan

[kres24GT]

I subscribe to two survivalist and a group of libertarian wackos who mentally beat off to someday some how, procuring thier own island and self sufficiency.

I hear all sorts of prophilactic measures against the comming famine, flood, pandemic disease, the government attacks to take thier guns, and the new civil war...what they seem to downgrade in importance is the hordes of armed starving city folks that in my estimation will make the Kansas Jayhawkers look to have been out on a summer picnic.

I have noted a lot of bug-out bags, and guns stashed thoughout the house and out buildings...and sealed plastic drums with food,, ammo and equipment buried in stratigic places on the property and on the way of their planned escape route.

All this self reliance you guys speak of, appears to be at the sufference of what comes up your driveway.

These groups expect to shoot their dinner...our massive gun toting population will kill everything worth eating in the first month...then what...cannibalism?

Don't get the idea that I'm standing off to the side taking potshots at you...it is a real problem that I have invested years into comming up with a plausible response...I'll have to report that I haven't found one yet that doesn't include the killing off 75% of the population first. Too many hungry people.

Happily, I have spent so many years at this, I have aged enough to be included in that 75% so the problem becomes simply achedemic for me.
Not that I've sold my armory or camp equipment...all stashed in my bug-out canoe...just in case:)

Stefan

I am not asking to be self reliant, I am asking for my right to choose to be self reliant. Please tell me when it is OK to rob people of their freedom in the name of the greater good? Who decides what is good for everyone else?

[Bill]

For the war on the individual, one only has to look how government does or is trying to regulate what we do with our bodies. FDA, drug war, abortion restrictions, sex laws, trans fat bans, etc. Government decides the benefit of society is better than the freedom of the individual.

Dude, you keep retreating into generalisms.

You should think about studying rhetoric. If you want to persuade people, you'll need to practice the skills of rhetoric.

The whole concept of government has always been that the benefit of society is more important than the freedom of the individual. That's what government has ALWAYS been about, back to the Code of Hamurabi and for as far back as we can see signs of organized humans, back to the very first cities like Jericho and Catal Hoyuk.

People don't WANT individualism - if anybody is waging war on the individual, it's the people, the polis.

To examine the examples you gave, the only recent one seems to be the trans fat regulations, and those are being done by the government that has the most freedom, the civil governments of cities.

And frankly, I think regulating trans fats in public businesses is a fairly reasonable exercise for public health. Individuals can still cook with that stuff as much as they like.

The drug war is one of the great american tragedies, abortion restrictions are an attempt by the religious right to manipulate people and gain political power, sex laws are a states rights issue (and mostly antiques).

And the FDA is simply corrupt - but is arguably better than letting business sell patent medicines.

I agree with your general thesis, but you gotta argue it better than this.

[kres24GT]

Dude, you keep retreating into generalisms.

You should think about studying rhetoric. If you want to persuade people, you'll need to practice the skills of rhetoric.

The whole concept of government has always been that the benefit of society is more important than the freedom of the individual. That's what government has ALWAYS been about, back to the Code of Hamurabi and for as far back as we can see signs of organized humans, back to the very first cities like Jericho and Catal Hoyuk.

People don't WANT individualism - if anybody is waging war on the individual, it's the people, the polis.

To examine the examples you gave, the only recent one seems to be the trans fat regulations, and those are being done by the government that has the most freedom, the civil governments of cities.

And frankly, I think regulating trans fats in public businesses is a fairly reasonable exercise for public health. Individuals can still cook with that stuff as much as they like.

The drug war is one of the great american tragedies, abortion restrictions are an attempt by the religious right to manipulate people and gain political power, sex laws are a states rights issue (and mostly antiques).

And the FDA is simply corrupt - but is arguably better than letting business sell patent medicines.

I agree with your general thesis, but you gotta argue it better than this.



I am not following. You want more examples of the war on individualism???

How about Ted Kennedy saying "we are at war with the individual"? What about Hillary Clinton saying "It's time to stop worrying about the individual."? What about Bush tapping our phones and wanting to read our mail?

What about the inevitable government health care which will most likely REQUIRE you to have health insurance? Why? because some people who want health care are too stupid to be able to afford it.

What about social security, which REQUIRES you to prepare for retirement? Why? because some people are too stupid to do it without being forced. What about when Bush proposes we actually let people keep and control a portion of this money (one of his few good ideas) and it is immediately dismissed.

What about welfare which forces the taxpayers to support a failed system that enables poor choices and encourages poverty and laziness.

What about McCain-Fiengold which inhibits free speech because a couple of Senators think they know how people should support canddiates for elected office?

What about the never ending federal and local bsuiness regulations passed to appease the ignorant masses, who are too stupid to not give their money to people who rip them off?.. meanwhile those of us hoping to one day start our own business must face an ever higher cost of compliance making ti nearly impossibel to compete against big business.



All of these things say that government knows better than the individual. And they don't stop. Instead of cutting the size of government, we are ever increasing it. Instead of trying to get people to be independent we are trying to increase their dependence on government.