‘Everyone Wants To Be Free!'

Well, that’s bullshit. Do you honestly believe because you desire something that others do as well? Why? Because you’ve met some people online and they agree with you? Say you’ve encountered 15,000 people online who desire the same kind of liberty as you do. So what? 15,000 versus 333 million appears to be a little ridiculous.

“But what if we all move to a place with a small population and vote each other into power? Then we can repeal laws at will and start to whittle government down to as small an entity as possible, and everyone can be free!” Sounds like a great plan. But (yes, this time there is “always a but”), do you have anyone in this group who may hold cultural opinions that offend any of the other residents? Does someone in the group secretly believe that a white supermajority is an ideal polity, even if they have ignored that belief for the current project? And does someone else in the group hold the position that this kind of “bigoted” belief is “irrational and repugnant?” If they do, how do you view your group moving forward in its mission when news of this tension spreads among the members?

The people who cry the loudest that “they just want to be free” are very often more interested in having their opinion be the dominant opinion. Especially when it comes to cultural issues such as sex and gender, homosexuality, race and IQ, and any other divisive issue that dominates the current Spirit of the Age. People have been brainwashed by government programs such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to believe that the worst thing a person can do is hold the “wrong” opinion on race, gender norms, or whatever “marginalized community” is currently being promoted by the regime. Without fail, these tensions always end in division. The people who most often say “live and let live” lose their minds when you apply that to freedom of association.

Could a smaller number work better? Maybe. What I contend works best is to lay aside concerns over what the politics of a local area will look like and first concentrate on what your values are. If people can live peacefully around one another without having to write laws on paper, that tells me that cultural values align. After that, any laws that are repealed or added only serve to formalize how the members already interact with one another. This is non-controversial and is only rejected by those who seek to impose their cultural beliefs on others. Whether that be a Christian monarchy or a re-establishment of Weimar-style degeneracy, no one should be forced to live in a culture which does not align with their belief system. The one who desires to do so will eventually become subversive.

Some will argue, and they may be right, that a Christian monarchy and a degenerate state cannot coexist too closely to one another. That’s fair, but we have to start somewhere. Remembering that one of these groups invading the other could destroy both, we would logically want them to avoid each other. But when you take into consideration that there are people out there who believe that everyone else will adopt their views if they just hear their message presented in the right way by the right person, you must come to grips with the fact that the only way you can keep your polity’s order is to have it populated by people who don’t need a piece of paper to become productive, and not destructive, participants. If this sounds like it will take a lot of work, that’s because it will. But anything worth preserving will take one’s utmost effort and diligence. Or you can settle for the status quo, which is what most “activists” end up doing because they’re not willing to do the hard and sometimes unpleasant work needed to establish and preserve order.