By Tim Lynch | October 7th, 2021 |
Prior to the American Revolution, the notion of civil government was a philosophical footnote, versions of it having only been tried in Ancient Greek democracies and the Roman Republic. Each of these eventually devolved either into tyranny by dictatorship of the majority in the prior case, or tyranny by executive usurpation by the Caesar in the latter. Following the fall of the Roman Empire, the ensuing Dark Ages in Europe represented perhaps the darkest time in human history for the liberty of the individual. Governments either crumbled, leaving the people to fend for themselves, or became iron-fisted monarchies, demanding the feudal servitude and absolute loyalty of their subjects.
The settling of a continent previously unknown to Europeans changed the course of the world and of humanity. Forged from the fiery resolve of people determined to be free from the chains of monarchy and rule by edict was a new nation founded in the revolutionary ideals of liberty and the rule of law. The idea that governments should be established to protect the rights of those consenting to be governed was as new as it was radical, and just as our founders and framers were willing to fight a war against the world’s most powerful military in defense of this idea, the British Empire was just as willing to use its military might to crush any threat to the Crown’s power posed by the rebellious American colonists.
So, if obvious abuses of power and violation of standing English law raised the blood of American colonists enough to risk certain death at the barrel of English muskets or hangman’s nooses, why are the abuses of power by our own government today not equally as obvious and why does there seem to be so few willing to fight against these abuses, or even to point them out? Or perhaps there is a more pressing question to me with respect to the current affairs of this nation and the world:
Am I the only one with the unexplainable feeling in the pit of my stomach that something just isn’t right?
Every day, we are bombarded at the speed of light with information that contradicts the world we observe around us – a fact that is only even possible to ascertain if we actually observe the world around us. So few people actually seem to engage in this arduous task anymore. As such, influential people such as celebrities, authors, professors, the news media, politicians, and bureaucrats alike are all able to distribute “facts” that were falsehoods yesterday, or “falsehoods” that were facts the day before. Assertions by the ruling class used as justifications for the continuation and expansion of their power simply don’t add up anymore to the discerning mind. As a person whose beliefs are derived from empiricism, a theory that truth is derived from observation and scientific experimentation, I have to concede that perhaps there are valid explanations that would fill in the gaps of my knowledge and that is the reason why so many things don’t seem to add up in my mind. However, my limited knowledge is just extensive enough, and my senses still sharp enough, that I do not believe this to be the case.
Let me say that it is very difficult for me to say that something doesn’t feel right without being able to provide empirical findings that are both measurable and capable of being reproduced – but nonetheless, something doesn’t feel right. I intend to bring to light just a few of the things that leave me with that gut feeling of uneasiness, that animal instinct alerting me to be aware that a threat that cannot be seen is near.
We are told only to trust certain medical opinions from certain doctors, medical organizations, and public health sources, while rejecting the opinions of others with the same degrees from the same universities. Why?
We are told that vaccination protects individuals from disease, but that unvaccinated individuals pose a threat to the vaccinated. How?
We have been told for decades that “herd immunity” is the sum total of immunity from a vector in a given population from all sources, both natural immunity from exposure and recovery and artificial immunity through inoculation, but only this year, that definition has changed to refer only to the percent of a population who has received a vaccine. There has been no explanation for this change. Why now?
We are told that the State needs the unilateral power to take action to protect public health, but they’ve taken no action that has statistically or measurably protected it; in fact, all they have taken are civil rights and civil liberties under the guise of public safety. Why have more people not taken to the streets to protest these actions?
Big Tech has protected the liberal establishment and the Democratic Party, while censoring only conservatives or those who question the moral and philosophical authority of the Left. Who can name a liberal voice that has been silenced, unless they were calling into question the motives of the current ruling party?
Why is it so easy to connect the actions of government officials with the actions of pharmaceutical companies, the media, Big Tech, academia, and foreign governments if they are not marching in lockstep with one another, separated only by the technicality that they are not operating as one machine? And if the government and these other parties are so aligned in their agendas as to seem like they are coordinating their actions, at what point do we no longer consider them separate and treat them as one leviathan of tyranny?
Every day we see more and more of our freedoms usurped by the alphabet agencies of government, unelected by the people, unaccountable to them, and growing in their influence over our lives at a frightening pace. They impose taxes against us without representation, they enforce ordinances which we had no hand in creating, and they dictate punishment through adjudication by courts not accountable to the people. All the while, the elected officials in the People’s House and their Senate willingly and even happily hand over their justly derived authority to these agencies of the State, with only the slightest semblance of accountability in elections dictated by party politics and influenced by money from the same list of outside agents from the previous paragraph. Only in theory do we still have “representatives” who speak for us and act on our behalf. So how is this government any different that the British Empire, except in pretending that we, the people, still have any control at all?
The actions of the State already affect every aspect of your life. More and more, the confusion of the world seems by design to keep you disoriented and afraid. Artificial divisions are erected by would-be academics and career politicians and proliferated by social and corporate media. It’s us against them, you against everyone, everyone against you, black versus white, liberal versus conservative, party versus party, neighbor versus neighbor, and brothers and sisters against one another. You may have sacrificed some of your freedom as an acceptable price for what you believe will be a lasting shelter from the perceived dangers of this fabricated world. But in payment for this false security, you have not only permanently surrendered your freedom, and with it a part of your life; you have offered that the State now has the authority to take mine, and this I do not accept. I challenge each of you to consider your answer to these three questions:
How much of your freedom do they have to take before you’ll notice it’s gone?
How far is too far? What is the line in the sand that you do not want them to cross?
What will you do when – not if – they cross it?
The Liberty Register 