Inevitably, political discourse reverts to discussions on the nature of government. It is impossible to ignore
the historic record that the "State" has succeeded in fostering the misery of humanity. The legitimate need to organize society
is rooted in the desire of man to achieve reason and order to his community. But in practice, the means to accomplish sensible
organization - always turns to the most sinister side of human nature. It is because of this base character, that the inescapable
abuse of government - is the fate of the human condition.
Those who rally to the captivating call of Patriotism, confuse an affection for country, with a devotion to
the State. The two are not identical, but those who view them as equivalent, bear the disgrace of the deeds and betrayal of
the very country that often deserves our respect. Fleeting moments of benevolent governance is the best that the world has
ever seen. The mindset that accepts any government as legitimate, without the consent of the individual, denies the construct
that achieves and authorizes a valid State.
No better example throughout the annals of government dominion, that illustrates the inherent evil nature
of State rule, is the practice of slavery. From the inception of civil administration, the dictum of a chief or leader has
been the norm. The manner of his selection most closely represented his ability to command supremacy by way of force. The
prevailing practice of slavery has been the dreadful measure of virtually every society. The "Bondsman" was the back upon
which kingdoms were built. The universal acceptability of enslavement, provided the control - the monarchs of all types,
maintained their rule.
Few exceptions to this model for government can be cited. Until we approach the Renaissance and Enlightenment,
the notion of inborn natural rights, is seldom reflected in civil regimes. The application of slavery would begin to modify
its most hideous use, but in the age of empires, it was extended to even the most remote areas of the globe. Where the custom
was less pronounced the conquering State, would make it routine.
With the emergence of ideas that valid authority requires the permission of the governed, civilization began
to take on the character of becoming civilized. But the endless struggle over human bondage, continues and modifies in form
and degree. The methods become more refined and sophisticated, but the permanent conflict between the individual and any and
all forms of governments that seek to rule over them, is eternal.
Is anyone willing to defend the practice of slavery in any of its machinations? So why are so many eager to
come to the defense of the government that they reside under, when the fundamental principle upon which those States rest,
is the lust for the power to control all aspects of society? Can anyone objectively deny the overwhelming empirical
evidence that governments view and treat the citizen as chattel, and a vassal to the State?
Until citizens come to understand the true nature of the relationship between themselves and their civil suitor,
they will continue to be raped with each succeeding euphemistic enactment of law. An analogy may convey this dilemma best
. . .
Consider government as a land fill. Eminent domain was used to steal the real estate, since only individuals
posses property rights. Public ownership, through government confiscation is as absurd as communal benefit, from bureaucratic
largesse. The intended purpose of a dump is to deposit the used and discarded trash of a society. Humans consume and empty
the remains of their physical sustenance when their value is exhausted. Government seeks to demand function from their citizens
as tribute for their existence within the district of the State. The administration claims the right of ownership of the garbage
lot, and you must pay to recycle your natural functions.
The citizen is prohibited to chuck his junk in unapproved areas. But he is told that he can be involved in
the process of selection, for the individual is free to choose representatives because they can vote. Of course the government
approved magistrate will arbitrate any disputes. So we are told that the obligatory trade off to remove our garbage, requires
recognition that government must have the final word on where it must be kept.
The rubbish begins to heap in a pile of debris as we continue to live our lives. The never ending bulk of
litter requires that bulldozers be kept in constant motion to build the mound of compost higher. We are told by officials
that all this waste comes from us. Never is there a hint that any of it was the creation of the State. When the heat of the
noon day sun beats down upon the residue, the odor of decay turns to a vile stench. But is this pungent stink really the end
result of the emissions of the inhabitants or is it because of the rubble in design from the contractor who operates the facility?
We are all captives to our own garbage, but our responsibility is to remove it from the sight and smell of
our neighbors. Our environment is refreshed and reclaimed when we recycle our fundamental right of authority over
government and place the burden of adhering to accountability in their performance to the will of the citizen, as the basic
rule of the State.
Government want you to believe that you produce all the waste and that they are the reclamation experts. That
without their plan, their regulations and their permission, the garbage will just keep growing. Is a healthy environment really
maintained with this kind of a permit system? Or is all the filth just reduced to one location - run by the clever polluter
on a grand scale ?
John Wesley on slavery:
"Slavery imports an obligation of perpetual service, an obligation which only the consent of the master
can dissolve. Neither in some countries can the master himself dissolve it, without the consent of Judges appointed by the
law. It generally gives the master an arbitrary power of any correction, not affecting life or limb. Sometimes even these
are exposed to his will, or protected only by a fine, or some slight punishment, too inconsiderable to restrain a master of
a harsh temper. It creates an incapacity of acquiring anything, except for the master's benefit. It allows the master to alienate
the same, in the same manner as his cows and horses."
Government's innate failure is to act as if they are the master. We, the People are the only recipients of
natural rights and government must be tamed to be our servant. If you allow yourselves to be abused as an animal, you will
continue to be subjected to the indignities of domestic beasts of burden. The STATE can never become you master. Your Patriotism
is falsely placed in its service. And the only result of such a misguided viewpoint is the foul-smelling discharge that packs
the land fills . . . Are you a cow or a horse, or are you a sovereign individual?
SARTRE - May 16, 2002