The Source of the Problem
Read this essay from Rocky Frisco, via Bill St. Clair.
Then think about how best to keep your neighbor's hands off you and your property.
Only by facing and accepting what has failed can we begin to consider what might work going forward.
Let's win.
posted by Concerned American | 12:34 PM
12 Comments:
It is evidently time for Americans to rediscover the wirtings of Louis L'Amour and the philospohical foundations of the American West. It is 1860 out there again - and the Civil War with it's attendant Regulators and carpetbaggers is a-comin'.
One course is to breed the tendency out of humanity entirely. That's hard. Another is to try to reconcile ourselves to it and harness it to general advantage. That's what feudalism tried. A third would be to just continue handling it as it has been; try to restrain the tendency, and when the restraints break down, set about rebuilding them. That's a never-ending losing fight.
This reminds me somewhat of John Ringo's "There Will Be Dragons" and its sequels - a series of SF books about a post-Singularity civilizational collapse. One of the characters is an elf, one of a race of genetically engineered ultrahuman warriors. It is explained in one of the sequels that elves were designed to be immune to Stockholm syndrome: a human woman who gets raped can come to love her rapist, but an elf would be simply incapable of that; they'd never stop resisting, and would die first (or, more likely, kill their captors and escape). The thing is, Stockholm syndrome does play a role in assisting the survival of one's genes when presented with the simple fact of superior physical force. Civilization has pushed it back somewhat, but it is still pretty deeply ingrained in the nature of men and women, no matter how objectively objectionable we find it (his 5% and 1% figures are probably accurate as far as overt expression goes, but these tendencies are latent to a certain degree in a far far greater segment of humanity). Redesigning humans to be more elflike, while a potentially worthy goal, seems a path fraught with peril.
I would point the finger in the other direction. The 5% can't rule without the 95% permitting it. So why are the 95% submissive enough to permit it? Can we send our children to something which is the opposite of public school, and builds up strength and independence of will?
Nice theory, was George Washington a psychopath? Nathaniel Green? Psychopaths certainly obtain positions of power and leadership, but few. The explanation as to why the Republic is foundering is in the failure of men to do good. Not good as they see it, but good as it is. If psychopaths DID rule the world, it would be done with quickly. Anybody vacation in Zimbabwe(Rhodesia) lately?
Bullies and psychopaths have to be confronted when they're young. Waiting until they've gained public and private offices is generally too late. This is a cultural issue, a social issue and it goes back to having a strong local social network. Family, Neighborhood, Church. All have to spot the bully... you know how easy they're to spot... and either put them through a special program to find a positive outlet for their natural tendencies or classify them as permanently unfit for public office. Sounds radical, Orwellian, but how many "good" psychopaths do you know?
This IS a very good subject: why the Constitution has failed. Perhaps the clever psychopaths among the lawyers who drafted the Constitution were being careful, clever, ruthless and installed certain loopholes in a document obstensively designed to ensure limited government-at least that's the line sold to the American People at the time. Yet it barely passed ratification; the federalists resorted to secrecy, bribes, and threatened an economic embargo of Rhode Island to ram it through.
So, the other part is that certain clauses of the Constitution-like the Commerce Clause, amending any clause that has the word "reasonable" or otherwise does not have ironclad, plain wording deliniating an absolute right be amended.
Boston T. Party wrote extensively about the 1787 Constitution's problems in his 1996 book "Hologram of Liberty". Get it at www.javelinpress.com
If we concede the argument that our constitutional immunities are now forfeit, what conclusions must be drawn?
Lesson: when you lose the way, find a familiar landmark, reorient and proceed from there.
This suggests that we ought to return to The Articles of Confederation until such time as we can decide what to do next.
I know this earlier arrangement was deemed to be unsatisfactory because it failed to provide for a strong central government that could be organized for the common defense.
Well, we got the strong central government that Hamilton envisioned and Jefferson feared. Are we any better off for it?
The best we can hope for at this late date would be a rediscovery of the liberty we surrendered when the US Constitution was ratified. One step backward, two steps forward.
MALTHUS
What's the solution? As you have said in the past - resilient communities.
1. Strong families and close friends in strong homes. circle the wagons, double or triple up, get over your silly aversion to roommates, fortify the house, stock up on bullets, beans, and band-aids, train together in small unit scoot, shoot, and yak.
Strong neighborhoods (as in a tight association of neighbors who mutually aid and protect) with radios, patrols, teams, and an alert and response system - the hue and cry - sort of like bounding overwatch but for homesteads, since if one homestead is attacked, the other homesteads react to outflank, envelope, and encircle the attackers (just like those African farmers).
Strong towns. Squared away mayor, police chief, police dept, fire, sewage, water, hospital, and active veterans org and neighborhood watches with teeth.
coordination for mutual aid between towns and the outlying homesteads and neighborhood associations.
Strong counties, with a squared away Sheriff, an armed citizens auxiliary to support the sheriff (let him "deputize" all the able bodied males), a strong county level volunteer fire department/rescue/emergency org. and strong mutual aid societies that store up on beans and band aids - and wide awake veterans groups that help out with all of the above.
And THEN worry about the state.
Build up in that order. Clean up and square away your own house, your yard, your neighborhood, your own town, your own county. If we all do that, then the state will be easy.
HPL
PS- in direct answer to the thesis of the article, I think the answer is to strengthen "us" the non-psychopaths in society, and the non-government structures like family, voluntary associations of friends and neighbors, etc.
In answer to who shall guard the guardians, we should become our own guardians and the guardians of each other, rather than leaving that to "professionals" who tend to be the psychos.
Rather than trust in having benevolent "sheep dogs" with the rest of us sheep, wipe that condescending paradigm out, and let us all be like the African Water Buffalo - any one of the herd can kick your ass and the whole herd together can stomp a predatory pride of lions (or anointed wolves disguised as "sheep dogs" into the dust.
In other words, YOU be a warrior, and your brother, uncle, son, grandfather, daughter, wife, grandmother, all be warriors.
The answer to the 5% who are psychos is that the 95% who are not need to be warriors.
Specialization is for insects.
Like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/027072.html
Mencken, from Notes on Democracy:
What the common man longs for in this world, before and above all his other longings, is the simplest and most ignominious sort of peace- the peace of a trusty in a well-managed penitentiary. He is willing to sacrifice everything else to it. He puts it above his dignity and he puts it above his pride. Above all, he puts it above his liberty. The Fact, perhaps, explains his veneration for policemen, in all the forms they take- his belief that there is a mysterious sanctity in law, however absurd it may be in fact. A policeman is a charlatan who offers, in return for obedience, to protect him (a)from his superiors, (b)from his equals, and (c) from himself. This last service, under democracy, is commonly the most esteemed of them all. In the United States, at least theoretically, it is the only thing that keeps ice-wagon drivers, Y.M.C.A. secretaries, insurance collectors, and other such human camels from smoking opium, ruining themselves in the night clubs, and going to Palm Beach with Follies girls. It is a democratic invention. Here, though the common man is deceived, he starts from a sound premise: to wit, that liberty, is something too hot for his hands- or, as Nietzsche put it, too cold for his spine. -H.L. Mencken, Notes on Democracy
Sean writes: "Nice theory, was George Washington a psychopath?"
Yes. But you can't see it, because to you George looks like the kind of dominant and successful personality you'd want leading your tribe of 150 people. You are evaluating him using instincts that have served humans well for nearly all of their time as a species distinct from the apes. Until now.
Computer programmers know that every time an important number like user count doubles, the existing system won't work well without a redesign. From 150 to 300,000,000 is 21 doublings. The behavior of a system with 300 million users in it should not be expected to resemble a system with 150 users in it. Especially when those users seem to have brain hardware limitations that have only enough slots to allow close relationships with 150 people.
George Washington was a psychopath. You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes. ...
"amending any clause that has the word "reasonable" or otherwise does not have ironclad, plain wording deliniating an absolute right be amended."
The wordings "congress shall make no law" and "shall not be abridged" didn't work. These words can't be made any more plain.
"when you lose the way, find a familiar landmark, reorient and proceed from there.
This suggests that we ought to return to The Articles of Confederation until such time as we can decide what to do next."
A larger number of smaller States is better than the opposite. However, liberty theory has advanced in 230 years; now we know that if ever you concede ruling peaceful people is morally correct, at that very moment you are entirely lost.
"And THEN worry about the state."
What you describe is the State, and very similar to the one-church religious communities that persecuted religious differences in early New England. I don't want the State at any size.
Anon said:
"I would point the finger in the other direction. The 5% can't rule without the 95% permitting it. So why are the 95% submissive enough to permit it? Can we send our children to something which is the opposite of public school, and builds up strength and independence of will?"
Yes. It's called home school. And make part of their schooling serious no bull martial arts (like boxing, kick boxing, mixed martial arts, judo, jiu jitsu, wrestling); shooting; lots of time hiking and camping and learning outdoor survival skills; reading history and the great books, so they can tell when they are being sold a bill of goods and can understand human nature and the sad cycle of history.
You will not find that in any public school or even in a conventional private school, but you can do that yourself.
HPL
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home