From the April 2009 Idaho Observer:

Fear and freedom

By Hari Heath

In these uncertain times, fear is a frequent companion for many. Not always a great wave of fear, but rather a constant series of ripples, keeping us to a course that would not otherwise be of our choosing. Quietly, over time, those who have learned to use the tool of fear have built a path and kept us treading upon it. With the prod, the whip and the promise of more green over yonder, we humans have been herded along, until most fear to leave the path that has been laid down for us. Where does it lead? Who are the social engineers that built this "society" and what are their plans for us?

Why do we yield our fundamental freedoms so easily? Why do we cling with such blind loyalty to those who loot the core values of our humanity—things that we would never surrender if we were still in our right minds?

Can we admit to the condition in which we find ourselves? Is our embarrassment so great that we avoid such thoughts all together and fill our mind instead with the mythology and belief structures promulgated by society’s herders? Can we depart from the path laid for us long enough to look back and see the subjugation to which we commonly consent? Will you imagine, even for a moment, what you could become, if instead you abandoned fear, embraced freedom and chose a new path all your own?

Master vs. servant

There is a question that, if properly reflected upon, can illuminate our present condition: "Does the master ask the servant for permission before the master conducts his or her affairs?"

Upon reflection, ask yourself, "Who is the master and who is the servant in our present ‘society?’"

Ostensively, people elected to or employed by government are public servants. Is this really the case? Have they become our masters or do we ask our "servants" for permission before we conduct our affairs?

The opportunities for our consent to their dominion over us are many: Driver’s license, marriage license, minister’s license, contractor’s license, attorney’s license, building permits…

Submission is not just "permission." It can also be purchased. Do you have an idea that can enhance the socialists’ "society?" Apply for a grant. Form a corporation. Lobby Congress. Offer an opportunity to increase our servants’ power. Welfare is not just a program for poor people.

Beyond mere consent and benevolence are the demands and commands of our "servants."

Taxes and regulations form the soft enforcement mechanisms. Taxes demand our consent by paying tribute to their "society;" regulations form the boundaries of the paths we are allowed to tread.

The list could go on indefinitely. With each legislative session it increases, seemingly without end. More licenses to apply for; more benefits to obtain; more permits; more programs; more taxes; more opportunities for compelling our consent. When we fail to submit voluntarily they invoke an infrastructure of fear. Hard enforcement begins when they unleash the Dogs of War: Police, prosecutors, judges, prisons.

How dare you?

How dare you get in "your" car and drive down "our" road without "their" permission?

How dare you form a matrimonial bond with your mate without first obtaining your servants’ permission—a marriage license sanctified only by a state licensed minister?

How dare you engage in a profession, relying solely on your reputation and conduct as a guide for public confidence, not the scheme of licensure and presumed regulation?

How dare you build your house without a permit, conformance to the building codes, grade stamped industrial lumber, "approved" products and a licensed contractor?

How dare you try to live in that house without paying the annual rent—err—property taxes and any other tax you are deemed to owe?

How dare you seek justice in a "public" court without first obtaining the "services" of a licensed attorney?

The infrastructure…

The infrastructure of fear is designed to keep you in check at every turn of the path. That fear quietly ripples through your life like an electric fence around a pasture, the high voltage is ever ready should you step out of bounds. Such aggressive containment is balanced against ample greenery for our consumption. In the modern societal sense the greenery is not mere pasture fodder but the dispensation and dispersal of credits from our creditory system of finance. Play the game well, follow the rules and you will be rewarded by abundant credit in your accounts.

Intrinsic to their "society" is the conditioned belief that their all-pervasive control grid is necessary for us to live peaceably together in our servant’s pasture. Without their guidance and control we would decay rapidly into wildness, anarchy and mayhem, we are told. We must conform, learn to enjoy our condition and pay tribute, for we would become beasts without "them."

Frederick Bastiat admonished us thusly: "Do not listen to this sophistry by vested interests. The acceptance of these arguments will build legal plunder into a whole system. In fact, this has already occurred. The present-day delusion is an attempt to enrich everyone at the expense of everyone else; to make plunder universal under the pretense of organizing it."

Nothing new

Bastiat’s quote above, from 1850, reminds us that our condition is not really anything new, just a revised version of an ancient game plan greatly enhanced by the latest technology. Let’s go back further, to the time when European Man had not yet transitioned from monarchies to the notion of self-government and the sovereignty of the individual.

In 1690, John Locke had his Two Treatises of Government published anonymously because the rulers of the day were not kind to their adversaries. The First Treatise eloquently and articulately assailed a notion that was popular at the time: The Divine Right of Kings. Modern humanity has moved well past that notion in the 300 plus years since, but Locke’s Second Treatise provides a political philosophy and analysis that is still relevant today.

Excerpted and compiled here from Locke’s Second Treatise, in the language of those times, are some of his essential concepts to help us ponder our condition in this age:

"To understand Political Power right, and derive it from its Original, we must consider what State all Men are naturally in, and that is, a State of perfect Freedom to order their Actions, and dispose of their Possessions, and Persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the Law of Nature, without asking leave, or depending on the Will of any other Man...

"Men being, as has been said, by Nature, all free, equal and independent, no one can be put out of this Estate, and subjected to the Political Power of another, without his own Consent. The only way whereby any one divests himself of his Natural Liberty, and puts on the bonds of Civil Society is by agreeing with other Men to joyn and unite into a Community, for their comfortable, safe, and peaceable living one amongst another, in a secure Enjoyment of their Properties, and a greater Security against any that are not of it. This any number of Men may do, because it injures not the Freedom of the rest; they are left as they were in the Liberty of the State of Nature…

"The Natural Liberty of Man is to be free from any Superior Power on Earth, and not to be under the Will or Legislative Authority of Man, but to have only the Law of Nature for his Rule. The Liberty of Man, in Society, is to be under no other Legislative Power, but that established by consent, in the Common-wealth, nor under the Dominion of any Will, or Restraint of any Law, but what the Legislative shall enact, according to the Trust put in it"

We may have once had a "Trust" or compact forming the American "Common-wealth"—the Constitution—but if it ever was operative as written, it certainly is not functioning as the "Legislative Authority of Man" in America today.

A state of war

Instead, we find our selves subservient to and in a state of war with the fascistically commingled legislative, commercial, administrative, corporate, executive, and judicial elements, which pretend to form "our" government. What does Locke have to say about this "State of War?"

"The State of War is a State of Enmity and Destruction; And therefore declaring by Word or Action, not a passionate and hasty, but a sedate, settled Design, …because using force, where he has no Right, to get me into his Power, let his pretence be what it will, I have no reason to suppose, that he, who would take away my Liberty, would not when he had me in his Power, take away everything else.

"…One may destroy a Man who makes War upon him, or has discovered an Enmity to his being, for the same Reason, that he may kill a Wolf or a Lyon; because such Men are not under the ties of the Common Law of Reason, have no other Rule, but that of Force and Violence, and so may be treated as Beasts of Prey, those dangerous and noxious Creatures, that will be sure to destroy him, whenever he falls into their Power.

"And hence it is, that he who attempts to get another Man into his Absolute Power, does thereby put himself into a State of War with him; It being to be understood as a Declaration of a Design upon his Life. For I have reason to conclude, that he who would get me into his Power without my consent, would use me as he pleased, when he got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it: for nobody can desire to have me in his Absolute Power, unless it be to compel me by force to that, which is against the Right of my Freedom, i.e. make me a Slave. To be free from such force is the only security of my Preservation: and reason bids me look on him, as an Enemy to my Preservation, who would take away that Freedom, which is the Fence to it: so that he who makes an attempt to enslave me, thereby puts himself into a State of War with me. He that in the State of Nature, would take away the Freedom, that belongs to any one in that State, must necessarily be supposed to have a design to take away everything else, that Freedom being the Foundation of all the rest: As he that in the State of Society or Common-wealth, must be supposed to design to take away the Freedom belonging to those of that Society or Common-wealth, must be supposed to design to take away from them every thing else, and so be looked on as in a State of War.

"And therefore it is Lawful for me to treat him, as one who has put himself into a State of War with me, i.e. kill him if I can; for to that hazard does he justly expose himself, whoever introduces a State of War, and is an aggressor in it."

Those were strong words for those times. So strong that it was published anonymously. Even now, as humanity has moved well beyond monarchies and at least towards the appearance of representative government as the global norm, are we not still in a state of war against our public servants? Honestly, what is our condition?

Beyond pastoral plunder

What we are witnessing in these times is not just the day-to-day management of our servant’s pasture in a pastoral plunder scheme. They are accelerating to ever more extreme measures to keep us in check. They have reached the climax of their game plan. We have worn out the path they have laid for us and it is time for us to move beyond them, but our "servants" appear to be pushing us towards a new holding pen:

Army troops in the streets, for what real purpose? A police state and surveillance grid to protect whom from what? Bailouts and handouts to pay what with what? Control and corruption of the food supply? Eugenics, genetic modification and mind-control to alter the core of our being? Licensure, categorical banning and eventual confiscation of the weaponry necessary for the security of our free state?

As Locke said, "let his pretence be what it will, I have no reason to suppose, that he, who would take away my Liberty, would not when he had me in his Power, take away everything else… And hence it is, that he who attempts to get another Man into his Absolute Power, does thereby put himself into a State of War with him; It being to be understood as a Declaration of a Design upon his Life."

Our own way

It is time to depart from their path and make our own way, even if our new trail doesn’t go far or hold immediate promise. We are not beasts, fit only to roam the path within the boundaries of our "servants’" pastures. Fear is not our birthright, Freedom is! We are our Creator’s children, not the children of a parent state.

Their power is in our weakness; when we believe we are alone and incapable of remedy. They are powerful because we believe in their power and fear them. Together, in mutual support, we are powerful and they become powerless.

By the time these words are in print, several thousand "Tea Parties" will have occurred across the land with many thousands of people protesting the tax and spend looters who are ruining our nation. The Oath Keepers, organized only a short time ago, now has many military, police and civilians affirming or reaffirming their oath to support the Constitution and issuing a refusal to participate in the unlawful plans of our miscreant servants posing as public masters.

Our managed separation into factions of left vs. right and other manufactured paradigms is failing, as people rediscover truth and merge towards unity. We are not alone and we are capable of remedy.

As the creditory system of finance collapses, the swarms of officers sent hither to harass our people and eat out our substance will retreat, retire or refuse to serve an unlawful government of looters. We can then abandon our fear-based-conditioning and embrace Freedom and Liberty, where the path leads to a pasture that is your own.

As Frederick Bastiat sayeth:

"What is Liberty? Actually, what is the political struggle that we witness? It is the instinctive struggle of all people toward liberty. And what is this liberty, whose very name makes the heart beat faster and shakes the world? Is it not the union of all liberties - liberty of conscience, of education, of association, of the press, of travel, of labor, of trade? In short, is not liberty the freedom of every person to make full use of his faculties, so long as he does not harm other persons while doing so? Is not liberty the destruction of all despotism - including, of course, legal despotism?

Finally, is not liberty the restricting of the law only to its rational sphere of organizing the right of the individual to lawful self-defense; of punishing injustice?"