Szandor Blestman dot com

A viewpoint free from corporate influence

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home

The Obvious Hypocrisy of Tyranny

E-mail Print PDF

If tyranny was a living being, it would be a strange and marvelous creature. By that I don't mean it would be a good thing, I mean it would be something to gaze upon and marvel at, much like a dangerous or poisonous animal. One could appreciate its qualities, but one wouldn't want to get too close for fear of being attacked or bitten. In many ways, tyranny engrosses the human mind, hypnotizing the observer with its brilliance and power. At the same time the observer knows he should back off and carefully put some distance between himself and the creature, yet he is enticed to creep just a little closer, to see just how close he can get to test his mettle. This is a dangerous practice which we know can end up in disaster.


But tyranny is a clever predator indeed. It likes to hypnotize its victims. It likes to entice them closer. It's much like a Venus flytrap, sending out an enticing scent to attract the fly and then closing around it when it enters. It operates much like humans did when they first learned to domesticate animals. It sets out food inside a pen for the victim and then once that animal comes to eat closes the pen and then the animal is trapped and has to count on something other than itself for its survival. Ah, but there's something even more insidious to tyranny than that. Tyranny has to deceive to survive, but it also wants those who serve it to participate. It wants to change the moral into the immoral. It wants to make its victims into small versions of itself as it feeds upon the innocent who blindly follow like sheep to the slaughter.

That's why hypocrisy is such a hallmark of tyranny. It has to be, otherwise human morality would not allow it to survive. No one, or almost no one, would want to admit that they were evil. Even Lucifer himself makes the claim that he is "the light" and is working toward the "greater good." When talking about intention, which I believe should be considered, it is notable to understand that often times good intentions can result in horrendous consequences. It is not just the intentions that matter, but the means by which one attempts to bring about those intentions. It is, for instance, hypocritical to tell others that they can't video supposedly public servants doing their job in public and then to use video cameras to spy on everyone else without warrant supposedly in an attempt to provide security. Yet it seems to be quite important to tyranny that those subjected to it believe it is necessary in order to achieve some kind of good intention.

This helps explain why politicians are able to promise one thing while delivering another. It helps explain why they can tell bald faced lies and still get re-elected. It helps explain why George W. Bush could make the promise of smaller government, a humble foreign policy and no nation (empire) building while campaigning and yet proceed to grow the federal government by leaps and bounds, dictate to other nations, start wars and expand the empire after he gets elected. It helps explain why Barack Obama can promise a roll back of the Bush administration's policies, a foreign policy of tolerance and peace, and government transparency while campaigning and yet proceed to strengthen Bush era unconstitutional legislation, continue allowing human rights violations by US military and intelligence organizations, and crackdown on more whistleblowers than proceeding administrations while becoming one of the most secretive administrations ever after being elected.

The biggest hypocrisies take place when these people take their oaths of office. They vow to uphold and defend the constitutions (of the US and, at a more local level, of their states) against all enemies, foreign and domestic, then they turn around and become the very enemies they just vowed to defend against by creating laws that violate the individual rights of the people, which these constitutions explicitly forbid. They more or less have to do this if they want to increase their power, and most politicians do want to increase their power, because these constitutions are written to limit their power. Politicians, then, are making an oath to obey the law and not become tyrants, and then turning around and doing the very things that tyranny demands.

What we seem to have forgotten is that constitutions are not laws that apply to the populace, they are laws that apply only to politicians. They are the highest laws of the land because they are meant to regulate those with the ability to cause the greatest harm. Constitutions also, unfortunately, do not carry with them any recommendations for discouraging the breaking of the law. In the meantime those who would profit from using those in power to create a restrictive society can provide an incentive for them to do so. Politicians who dishonor their oaths and break the highest law of the land do so with impunity while those who protest prohibitions and break bad laws have to worry about government retribution and the wrath of the tyrants. The administration and the critters inhabiting the halls of congress should have to worry about the people, we should not have to worry about them and their enforcers.

Hypocrisy is the way of the collectivist. It is not the way of the individualist. Even though they may wish to become tyrannical, those in power still seem to want your consent to do so. They want you to participate in your slavery. The way out of this is to choose to not give your consent. The way out is to insist on freedom. It is to realize that in order to be free, you must allow others to be free. It is to realize that when one person is tyrannized, we are all tyrannized. Understand that just because someone speaks out for something you might disagree with, or against something you might agree with, that you must allow him to so that you might also be able to do so. Understand that that same someone should be allowed to speak his mind to those in power, especially at a public venue, and not be limited to some "free speech zone" where those in power will not hear him. Respect his right to do so and your right to do so will also be respected should a time arise when you feel it is necessary to express your views to those in power.

Understand that people own their own bodies and should be allowed to determine for themselves what they want to put into them. No one should ever be forced to put something in their body that they don't want to put in their body either. By allowing others to consume what they wish to consume, you help create a precedent that will make it far less likely that anything you wish to consume will ever be prohibited. By standing up for another's right to refuse to be forcefully medicated you help create a precedent that will make it far less likely that you will ever be forcefully inoculated.

Understand that by owning their own bodies, people also own the fruits of their labor. If that fruit comes in the form of fiat currency, they should be able to decide what they want to do with that currency, whether they want to spend it or save it, who they want to do business with and what products and services they wish to prioritize in their lives and voluntarily purchase. No one should be forced to give a portion of the product of their labor to any other individual or group of individuals, no matter how important those others might believe their service is. The immorality of this type of system should be obvious to all. Anything important enough to be worth doing should be worth doing on a voluntary basis. Anything that needs to use force and coercion to fund itself is not a legitimate endeavor.

The individualist is not hypocritical. To him, freedom is the answer no matter the question. As long as no harm is being done to another and no one else's property is being damaged or stolen, then people should be allowed to do as they please. The collectivist will claim the same morals, but with exceptions. I can own a gun, but she can't because, blah, blah, blah. I can express my opinion, but he can't because, blah, blah, blah. We can print money out of nothing, but they can't because, blah, blah, blah. I can take certain substances into my body, but you can't because, blah, blah, blah,. You can't run a ponzi scheme, but we can because, blah, blah, blah. You can't forcefully take money from others to provide protection, but be can because, blah, blah, blah, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum.

Those who would impose a tyrannical collectivist system on you understand that most people don't want such a system. That's why they need you to believe you are free. That's why they want you to believe that you need them. That's why they are forced into hypocrisy, for if they kept their promises they'd make themselves irrelevant, and if those who wish to truly make us free were allowed to run fair political campaigns against the collectivists the tyrants would lose and become irrelevant. By merely having a centralized authority with the ability to force their will upon the populace tyranny exists. Until we all learn to stop co-operating with such powers, the tyranny will grow until it metastasizes. Until we stand up and refuse to accept the excuses for the hypocrisy, we will be subject to the tyrannical whims of those who rule.

I am proud to announce that my latest book "Caged in America: A Collection of Essays Celebrating Freedom." by Szandor Blestman is now available at smashwords.com. Also available exclusively at smashwords is the latest installment of my next book "The Blessings of Freedom; Creating Prosperity in the 21st Century." Chapter 5 of the serialized version is available here.

If you enjoy my writings, please visit szandorblestman.com to make a donation.

Below is a list of all my works available at smashwords.com. Please help me by purchasing one or more of my ebooks and writing favorable reviews if you like them so that others might also enjoy them.

Caged in America: A Collection of Essays Celebrating Freedom. By Szandor Blestman

Ron Paul's Wisdom, A Layman's Perspective. A Collection of Opinion Editorials. By Szandor Blestman

Galaxium. A screenplay By Matthew Ballotti

The Colors of Elberia; book 1 of The Black Blade Trilogy. By Matthew Ballotti

The Legacy of the Tareks; book 2 of The Black Blade Trilogy. By Matthew Ballotti

The Power of the Tech; book 3 of The Black Blade Trilogy. By Matthew Ballotti

The Edge of Sanity. By Matthew Ballotti

The Ouijiers By Matthew Ballotti

 

Comments (2)
  • Hromano1030  - Good Article
    avatar

    Very good article, although I wish it were longer. Maybe ideas on how and what to begin standing up to first.

  • sblestman
    avatar

    Thank you Howard for the compliment. That's funny because most of the time I'm told my articles are too long. As for what to stand up to first, my personal belief is that we should concentrate on ending the Fed and getting back to honest, constitutional money. That would be striking at the root, IMHO. I think that what someone stands up to, or stands for, has a lot to do with the individual. Whatever it is, the person should be passionate about it for there's a good chance that when trying to restore freedom to any aspect of life it's going to be a long, difficult row to hoe, so to speak.

Write comment
Your Contact Details:
Gravatar enabled
Comment:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img]   
:D:angry::angry-red::evil::idea::love::x:no-comments::ooo::pirate::?::(
:sleep::););)):0
Security
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.
Last Updated on Saturday, 02 March 2013 12:12  

Easy Paypal Donation

Support the work of Szandor Blestman

Powered by easy paypal donation

AddThis


Advertisement

Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner