Ronald R. Cherry
Freedom is slavery
By Ronald R. Cherry
George Orwell, in his book "1984," noted that totalitarian government, such as that found in Socialist Oceania, depends on the ability of government to convey big lies to their subjects, such as "War is Peace," "Ignorance is Strength," and "Freedom is Slavery." Under totalitarian government, freedom of the individual is called slavery, and slavery of the individual is called freedom.
"And if liberty is to be attributable of the real man and not of the scarecrow invented by the individualistic Liberalism, then Fascism is for liberty. It is the only kind of liberty that is serious — the liberty of the State." Benito Mussolini
Is human freedom really the individual's slavery to the State — in order to give the State total freedom? Freedom is often referred to as liberty, but what exactly is liberty? We sense freedom in our minds and we feel it in our bone marrow, but how do we put it into words? Liberty as defined by our Founding Fathers was not the same as "Liberty" defined by European Socialist Philosophers and Dictators. Thomas Jefferson, better than anyone in history, defined human liberty in his 1819 letter to Isaac H. Tiffany.
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." Thomas Jefferson
Liberty is not wrongful government freedom to enslave the individual as claimed by Mussolini; liberty is domination of government by the equal rights of individuals as stated by Thomas Jefferson. Wrongful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will with no limits, or within limits drawn around us by the unequal (inferior) rights of others. Tyranny (from the point of view of the tyrant) is unobstructed action according to the tyrant's will with no limits, or within limits drawn around the tyrant by the unequal (inferior) rights of others; i.e.: the tyrant possesses wrongful liberty. Tyranny (from the point of view of a serf) is obstructed action according to someone else's will (the tyrant's will) within limits drawn around us by the unequal (superior) rights of others (superior rights of the tyrant and his favorites).
Envision 1,000 people in the Superdome — each naturally different from every other — each a unique individual — yet each naturally surrounded by an equally protective bubble — each individual equally protected in their life, liberty and labored-for property. Under equal rights, each individual possesses maximum freedom of activity — each individual has maximum human liberty — maximum "unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others." As soon as any group of individuals unjustly possess superior rights, they become surrounded by larger protective bubbles which, out of geometric necessity, unjustly reduces in like measure the freedom of activity — the liberty — of everyone else. Imagine a King or Prince, or the Pigs of Animal Farm, surrounded by bubbles tens or hundreds or thousands of times larger than that of everyone else — the rest of us restricted within limits drawn around us by the superior rights of others.
A writer at American Thinker recently asked the question: "But if total equality under law were truly sought — meaning that no man would have a governmental privilege or power that another lacked — what would become of those who administrate law?" Those who administrate law are supposed to be a mere collection of people — the people of government — people who have a job to do within the limits of our Constitution — and nothing more. Federal Government is a small group of other people, but the people who administrate law, like all people, are supposed to possess their equal rights — and no more — or as Thomas Jefferson wrote: "To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse." We the People through our Congressional representatives can endow those who administrate law with privileges required for their tasks, but the people of government must never possess superior rights to life, liberty or property — equal rights endowed not by government but by our Creator — so it follows that "those who administrate law" should not become superior before law. The people of government should not function under separate and arbitrary law which gives to them superior rights because, as we noted above, unequal (superior) rights is the definition of tyranny. If the people who administrate law possess superior rights protected by arbitrary superior law, then the American Revolution would be reduced to an empire of men and not of laws — we would have the opposite of a Constitutional Republic which, as John Adams noted, is "an empire of laws, and not of men."
Human liberty, having been endowed to all of us equally by our Creator, is a part of our human nature. God is free, and so too are we, having been made in the image of God. Our sacred right to liberty is therefore unalienable and only limited by the equal rights of others — as stated in our Declaration of Independence — equal rights to life, liberty and fruit of labor in pursuit of happiness. This was the argument of Thomas Jefferson and the American Revolution. The Socialist argument is in effect that a small group of special people — those who administrate law — possess superior rights — that they are the ones made in the image of God — not each and every individual. If the American principle of equal rights is correct and that of Socialism wrong, then how are equal rights protected? Again, Thomas Jefferson answers:
"Bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights [along with the majority], which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression." Thomas Jefferson
As things now stand, the United States no longer functions as a Constitutional Republic because the President and his executive branch, Congress, and the Supreme Court function under separate arbitrary law which renders to them superior rights. What we now have is a self-serving ruling class, the members of which, like the Pigs of George Orwell's Animal Farm, are "more equal than others." As the Kings and Princes of Medieval European Feudalism, a new ruling class of "those who administrate law" for their own benefit is evolving. As things now stand, "those who administrate law" see to it that, under separate and arbitrary law, they end up with a golden parachute for retirement — thereby becoming more equal than those of us who must subsist on Social Security — a retirement system too meager for their expensive tastes. "Those who administrate law" see to it that, under separate and arbitrary law, they receive superior healthcare — thereby becoming more equal than those of us who must subsist on "Obamacare" or Medicare — inferior systems of healthcare too meager for their expensive tastes.
Paranoia is defined as irrational belief, where suspicious paranoia is belief in that which does not exist, and where blind paranoia is lack of belief in that which does exist. It seems to me that too many Americans suffer from blind paranoia — unable to see in broad daylight that which is right before them — that The United States has degenerated into an emerging tyranny of unequal rights and unequal law. If we are to preserve the American Revolution we must shed our blind paranoia — we must wake up and see the truth. If we are to re-establish justice, we must restore to ourselves and our posterity the real social justice in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution where equality of rights is protected by equality before law.
© Ronald R. Cherry
February 17, 2011
George Orwell, in his book "1984," noted that totalitarian government, such as that found in Socialist Oceania, depends on the ability of government to convey big lies to their subjects, such as "War is Peace," "Ignorance is Strength," and "Freedom is Slavery." Under totalitarian government, freedom of the individual is called slavery, and slavery of the individual is called freedom.
"And if liberty is to be attributable of the real man and not of the scarecrow invented by the individualistic Liberalism, then Fascism is for liberty. It is the only kind of liberty that is serious — the liberty of the State." Benito Mussolini
Is human freedom really the individual's slavery to the State — in order to give the State total freedom? Freedom is often referred to as liberty, but what exactly is liberty? We sense freedom in our minds and we feel it in our bone marrow, but how do we put it into words? Liberty as defined by our Founding Fathers was not the same as "Liberty" defined by European Socialist Philosophers and Dictators. Thomas Jefferson, better than anyone in history, defined human liberty in his 1819 letter to Isaac H. Tiffany.
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." Thomas Jefferson
Liberty is not wrongful government freedom to enslave the individual as claimed by Mussolini; liberty is domination of government by the equal rights of individuals as stated by Thomas Jefferson. Wrongful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will with no limits, or within limits drawn around us by the unequal (inferior) rights of others. Tyranny (from the point of view of the tyrant) is unobstructed action according to the tyrant's will with no limits, or within limits drawn around the tyrant by the unequal (inferior) rights of others; i.e.: the tyrant possesses wrongful liberty. Tyranny (from the point of view of a serf) is obstructed action according to someone else's will (the tyrant's will) within limits drawn around us by the unequal (superior) rights of others (superior rights of the tyrant and his favorites).
Envision 1,000 people in the Superdome — each naturally different from every other — each a unique individual — yet each naturally surrounded by an equally protective bubble — each individual equally protected in their life, liberty and labored-for property. Under equal rights, each individual possesses maximum freedom of activity — each individual has maximum human liberty — maximum "unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others." As soon as any group of individuals unjustly possess superior rights, they become surrounded by larger protective bubbles which, out of geometric necessity, unjustly reduces in like measure the freedom of activity — the liberty — of everyone else. Imagine a King or Prince, or the Pigs of Animal Farm, surrounded by bubbles tens or hundreds or thousands of times larger than that of everyone else — the rest of us restricted within limits drawn around us by the superior rights of others.
A writer at American Thinker recently asked the question: "But if total equality under law were truly sought — meaning that no man would have a governmental privilege or power that another lacked — what would become of those who administrate law?" Those who administrate law are supposed to be a mere collection of people — the people of government — people who have a job to do within the limits of our Constitution — and nothing more. Federal Government is a small group of other people, but the people who administrate law, like all people, are supposed to possess their equal rights — and no more — or as Thomas Jefferson wrote: "To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse." We the People through our Congressional representatives can endow those who administrate law with privileges required for their tasks, but the people of government must never possess superior rights to life, liberty or property — equal rights endowed not by government but by our Creator — so it follows that "those who administrate law" should not become superior before law. The people of government should not function under separate and arbitrary law which gives to them superior rights because, as we noted above, unequal (superior) rights is the definition of tyranny. If the people who administrate law possess superior rights protected by arbitrary superior law, then the American Revolution would be reduced to an empire of men and not of laws — we would have the opposite of a Constitutional Republic which, as John Adams noted, is "an empire of laws, and not of men."
Human liberty, having been endowed to all of us equally by our Creator, is a part of our human nature. God is free, and so too are we, having been made in the image of God. Our sacred right to liberty is therefore unalienable and only limited by the equal rights of others — as stated in our Declaration of Independence — equal rights to life, liberty and fruit of labor in pursuit of happiness. This was the argument of Thomas Jefferson and the American Revolution. The Socialist argument is in effect that a small group of special people — those who administrate law — possess superior rights — that they are the ones made in the image of God — not each and every individual. If the American principle of equal rights is correct and that of Socialism wrong, then how are equal rights protected? Again, Thomas Jefferson answers:
"Bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights [along with the majority], which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression." Thomas Jefferson
As things now stand, the United States no longer functions as a Constitutional Republic because the President and his executive branch, Congress, and the Supreme Court function under separate arbitrary law which renders to them superior rights. What we now have is a self-serving ruling class, the members of which, like the Pigs of George Orwell's Animal Farm, are "more equal than others." As the Kings and Princes of Medieval European Feudalism, a new ruling class of "those who administrate law" for their own benefit is evolving. As things now stand, "those who administrate law" see to it that, under separate and arbitrary law, they end up with a golden parachute for retirement — thereby becoming more equal than those of us who must subsist on Social Security — a retirement system too meager for their expensive tastes. "Those who administrate law" see to it that, under separate and arbitrary law, they receive superior healthcare — thereby becoming more equal than those of us who must subsist on "Obamacare" or Medicare — inferior systems of healthcare too meager for their expensive tastes.
Paranoia is defined as irrational belief, where suspicious paranoia is belief in that which does not exist, and where blind paranoia is lack of belief in that which does exist. It seems to me that too many Americans suffer from blind paranoia — unable to see in broad daylight that which is right before them — that The United States has degenerated into an emerging tyranny of unequal rights and unequal law. If we are to preserve the American Revolution we must shed our blind paranoia — we must wake up and see the truth. If we are to re-establish justice, we must restore to ourselves and our posterity the real social justice in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution where equality of rights is protected by equality before law.
© Ronald R. Cherry
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
