At Least I Know I’m Free
Hidden in Plain Sight, Part Two
by Wilton D. Alston
by Wilton D. Alston
DIGG THIS
In my first
installment, I focused pretty much on the aftermath, albeit indirect,
of one set of events – the 9/11 attacks – and how they affected
our lives. Just as important as what happened that day in September
is how it changed our point of view long term. The phrase, "9/11
changed everything" is pretty well accepted among folks in
the U.S. I’m not sure I agree; and I am sure I’m
not alone in that sentiment. But frankly that’s probably a side
point.
Whether 9/11
changed everything or nothing, a vital plank in the fence that protects
our freedom would have to be the quality of the government under
which we live. More important is how we view those who ostensibly
lead us and how willing we are to allow them to lead us in a direction
that might not be quite what we had in mind. Throughout history
many approaches to government have come and gone. Almost to the
person, Americans express pride in our form of government, even
to the point that we would support traveling to distant lands to
teach others how our form of government works. (All too often this
"teaching" involves shooting people and dropping bombs,
but hey, some "lessons" are just harder to get across
than others I reckon!)
In any event,
one could argue that the crown jewel of our form of government is
The Constitution of the United States of America. And if one looks
closely at how the U.S. Government actually operates he will get
a crash course in that majesty, will he not?
The State
Doesn’t Give a Rat’s Anal Opening About the Constitution
Listen, at
some point we just have to wake up and smell the coffee. The number
of times the Constitution – the ostensible "highest law in
the land" – has been violated this week is enough that
the sons of liberty would have long since taken up arms. And yet,
for most Americans, it’s pretty much business as usual. (Heck, as
a matter of fact, I just realized I’m missing a football game! Maybe
this essay can wait.) From the most basic standpoint, it
seems pretty clear that President
Bush doesn’t have a close personal relationship with the Constitution,
but this view is shared by more than a few outside the Whitehouse.
A quick review of the happenings in just the last year or so reveals:
Is it really
surprising then, to find that most Americans view Congress as less
trustworthy than a gang of pirates? (Yes, I know Andy Borowitz
is a humorist, and I get the joke. But isn’t the best joke
the one that rings a little – or a lot – true?) Next thing you know,
somebody will accuse these fine people of, I don’t know, worrying
more about getting re-elected than actually doing stuff,
like, maybe actually reading any of the bills they sign.
Okay, so maybe,
just maybe, there have been a few infringements of the "spirit"
of the Constitution from time to time. Certainly, those rare occurrences
reflected the necessities of the moment and not a general pattern.
No one thinks that the government is composed of, or actually attracts
people who are power-hungry and evil, right?
The State
Will Do Almost Anything in Pursuit of Its Goals
Think I’m overstating?
Go to Google and search for "Operation
Northwoods." Certainly, one could argue that the plan
was never implemented, but they certainly went to a lot of trouble
didn’t they? But wait, there’s more.
Go to Google
and search for "Tuskegee
Experiment." If the government would conduct a 40-year
experiment on black men with syphilis, is there really anything
left outside the boundaries of ethics and decency? I think not,
but hold on though, there’s still more.
Go to Google
and search for "white
phosphorous." Can we seriously say that we are putting
"democracy on the march" when we employ a weapon
like this one so routinely? Can we really be surprised when
people eventually say, "no thanks" to our help in obtaining
the freedom that only they themselves can acquire anyway?
In the history
of the planet, only one country has deployed atomic weapons against
anyone in wartime – the United States of America. What is apparently
not widely known is that the terms of the Japanese surrender proposed
before the first bomb were the same as those proposed before the
second bomb were the same as those signed after the second
bomb. As such, I would assert that the bombs were dropped for almost
no reason. The Japanese were looking for a reason to surrender and
Truman wouldn’t take yes for an answer. Examined in that context,
one might understand a little anti-U.S. sentiment
in pockets around the globe, even if it is not based in Japan. The
real question is the same one I asked at the end of my essay
about the strange circumstances surrounding Pat Tillman’s death.
"Exactly how much longer are we going to let these people treat
us as they please?"
And while I’m
talking about WWII let me blow the smoke away from another well-worn
myth. Even if Japan really did perform an unprovoked sneak
attack on the U.S. there was never any real danger
of the U.S. being invaded and overrun. Regardless of one’s opinion
about retaliation or how justified retaliation may have been in
that scenario, one thing must be made clear. There will never be
an armed take-over the United States of America, unless the army
comes from another planet. How can I be so sure? The U.S. armed
forces, ostensibly the best in the world, can’t even "take
over" Iraq. Case closed.
Okay, so maybe
we’re a little confused about subtle concepts like how to best spread
the wonderful salve of democracy all over the Earth without also
dragging the decaying carcass of a coercive state right along with
it, but when it comes to the big stuff like selecting who
gets to wield the awesome power of government, we have our eyes
on the prize. Is that not why voting is so important? Let me put
it to you this way.
Voting Makes
No Difference, and Everybody Should Know That by Now
I’ve cited
this
essay in other
places so certainly I’m fully on-board with those who "just
say no" to voting. But the U.S. population at large seems
to be sleepwalking through history. Reading some of the negative
comments launched at Professor Shaffer’s piece over at DIGG.com
nearly took me over the edge. (As you may have noticed, that’s not
really a long trip – but enough about me.) Even if one ignores the
documented cases of voter
disenfranchisement and the likelihood that electronic
voting will actually result in more cheating versus less, voting
still doesn’t make much sense. Even if one readily imbibes all the
civic duty reasoning, the real shame is the comments that accuse
us non-voters of apathy. Apathy?
Apathy is when
you decide to not do something that you should do and as a result,
miss out on the positive effects thereof. I can absolutely and categorically
state that not voting deprives me of no such benefits. Ergo, I am
not apathetic. I am abstaining! One respondent to Professor
Shaffer’s essay said something along the lines of, "Not voting
allows the government to decide for me." (I didn’t know how
to break it to that respondent, so let’s just keep this next part
between us, okay folks?)
The "government"
– that is, the guys we "elect" – decide for us anyway,
and they do it all the time. In fact, a close examination of the
form of government we have shows that this is exactly
what is supposed to happen in a constitutional republic –
the people elected decide on behalf of those who elected
them. (Of course, with the whole secret ballot thing, one could
ask how our elected officials are supposed to know who those people
are, unless they show up, with money! But frankly, Lysander
Spooner already covered that one pretty well.)
The other funny
thing about our situation is that few regular Americans can actually
claim to be a part of the "helped them get elected" category.
For one thing, the major donors and lobbyists have much more
to do with any candidate getting elected than any regular citizen.
For another, the average American is too busy enjoying "Lost"
and "Grey’s Anatomy" to put a lot of quality time into
understanding much about the details of some obscure bill anyway.
(I can’t say I blame him. My personal favorites are "NUMB3RS"
and "Criminal Minds".)
Even if you
did care about a particular bill, Congress will still do
whatever it likes anyway. And whether or not you support a bill,
you will be paying for its implementation, with tax
dollars extracted at the barrel of a gun. In other words, you have
no choice, and you never did.
Conclusion
So where does
all this leave us? Let me be very clear. I have no intention of
sounding the warning bell. From my standpoint, all of this stuff
is part of the rancid, oily residue of a coercive state gone terribly
off track. But the people who control our government were way off
the reservation before I starting writing essays!
 As
such, please consider this information just another fine example
of "fun facts to know and tell" and nothing more. And
please stay tuned for another full-filled episode of "hidden
in plain sight" not coming to any theatre near you any
time soon.
Who knew a
particularly fruitful bit of (hopefully) intellectual catharsis
could be so therapeutic?
December
29, 2006
Wilt
Alston [send him
mail] lives in Rochester, NY, with his wife and three
children. When he’s not training for a marathon or furthering his
part-time study of libertarian philosophy, he works as a principal
research scientist in transportation safety, focusing primarily
on the safety of subway and freight train control systems.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Wilton
D. Alston Archives
|
