-
One reason dizzy liberals hate and try to suppress principled
- freedom advocates so much is that
we individualists often render value
- judgements -- and when the Liberal
Mentality hears someone render a
- value judgment WITH WHICH HE DISAGREES,
the liberal wants to try to
- pretend that the value judgment
is "invalid" because "there are never
- any absolutes" (a statement
which, if true, is self-contradictory and
- therefore false). So, when
a rational individualist renders a value
- judgement that a liberal doesn't
like, the liberal often tries to attack ALL
- value judgements as invalid rather
than dealing with the specific issue
- at hand -- and sometimes even accuses
the principled individualist of
- wanting to "legislate morality"
.
For example, if the rational individualist claims that using heroin and
cocaine can be addictive and is bad for ones health,
the liberal relativist
- reacts very defensively and with
barely suppressed guilt symptoms,
- stamping his foot in indignation
and screeching something like "What
- right do you have to impose
your moral judgements on me or other people!
- I have a right to do what I want!"
Notice that the rational individualist
- has in no way used force, either
personal or political, to impose his views
- on the "liberal" or anyone
else -- nor has he advocated using the force of political legislation to
impose his observations about private personal
- behavior or anyone; but, the "liberal"
-- almost always intelllectually
- dishonest to the core -- wants
to try to get away in portraying those who express moral sentiments as
somehow threatening to impose their morality
- on others. What the "liberal"
really feels threatened by is not legislation
- but the idea that the morality
of human behavior might not be arbitrary and
- relative but is based on absolute
standards and rational principles which if ignored could affect his life
and happiness. (Of course this same liberal
- sees nothing wrong or hypocritical
with HIM using Big Government to impose HIS notions of morality on other
people -- from compulsory school attendance laws, forced bussing of school
children, anti-discrimination laws, Affirmative Action, compulsory seat
belts, FDA restrictions on what vitamins you can
- take, laws against "quack"
cancer cures, compulsory helmets for cyclists, compulsory Social Security
taxes, restrictions on use of ones own land, antitrust laws, income taxes,
price controls, and many other coercive interventions against peoples'
freedom to engage in capitalist acts among consenting adults.)
Of course, the irony is that ONLY under freedom -- a system in
- which government is restricted
by a policy of Laissez Faire -- are
- (adult) individuals recognized
as responsible human beings who are
- free (from coercive interference)
to do with their own bodies (and
- properties) whatever they want
as long as they do not violate (through
- coercive interference) the same
right of other people to do what they
- want with THEIR own bodies and
properties. This INCLUDES the
- freedom to do some things the rational
individualist himself may
- disapprove of -- such as self-mutilation,
using LSD or heroin, putting
- gerbels up ones rectum, eating
banana peels, drilling holes in the top of
- ones skull, sniffing glue, watching
Jerry Springer or Geraldo Rivera,
- or reading Newsweek magazine.
Immoral and foolish behaviors are no
- less immoral or foolish when they
are not prohibited by government. It
- is not the proper role of government
to regulate peoples' personal,
- private behavior or interfere with
purely voluntary (market) relations. Government should protect peaceful
folk from violent crime instead.
Under the Laissez-Faire Republic which we advocate, people would
be free to perform immoral follies on up to and including
suicide -- as long
as such actions do not involve the initiation of
the use of coercive force
- in violation of the rights of others
to their own persons and properties.
- Under freedom, ALL individuals'
rights to person and property would be recognized, respected, and defended
by law, including that of the "liberals"
- as well -- but not JUST the freedom
of "liberals" to indulge in their own
- whims. The law would also
protect the freedom of other people to disagree with the
"liberals" and even the freedom of speech and of press to express
disapproval of the immoral personal behaviors or foolish
practices that are condoned and championed by the "liberals"
and other moral relativists. It is this freedom -- the freedom to
disagree with and disapprove of their pet
- vices and social programs -- that
enrages "liberals" so much -- and why the "liberal"-left
has sought to suppress any and all dissent and disagreements with its agenda
by using its fascistic program of "political correctness" on
college campuses and in the kept media. Their goal is to stamp out
all
- publicly expressed views contrary
to their own -- and especially those that reject epistemological and moral
relativism in favor of rational standards
- and absolute principles and values.
The implicit reason liberal relativists want to try to pretend that
- "there are no absolutes"
or that morality is "relative" is that they
- want to reject any and all PRINCIPLES
as such -- not just political
- legislation imposed by the power
of the state, but also any NON-
- IMPOSED rules dealing with good
conduct and bad habits to avoid.
- They want to be able to flaunt
their vices & follies publicly while
- imposing a gag on anyone who would
dare call their behavior "immoral"
- or foolish or imply that there
could be any rational, absolute standards
- for behavior beyond their own personal
whims or momentary feelings.
- They want the "luxury"
of pretending that any and all chosen behavior
- has no consequences, no relevance
one way or another to human life
- and morality. They want to replace
rational principle with their own
- arbitrary whims. Of course, this
is a recipe for disaster, both in the life
- of an individual and in the course
of a nation.
The advance of human progress and civilization has been the result
- of the discovery, recognition,
and implementation of sound principles
- and the abandonment of the arbitrariness
of whim and the irrationality of superstition. By their vehement
rejection of rational principles and absolute standards, today's left-wingers
and "liberals" have abandoned progress and civilization and true
science in favor of their own mystic religious cult, no longer pretending
(as did Marx) that their socialism is "scientific" or even
- rational.
Beyond that, it must be kept in mind that relativism in the
- areas of truth and morals necessarily
leads to absolute tyranny in
- politics. If reality is seen
as subjective and relative, that is, if
- reason is abandoned, then reality
can no longer serve as an
- independent frame of reference
on the basis of which disputes
- may be resolved, so that the only
other way disputes can be dealt
- with is by brute force -- might
makes right. Thus, the relativist
- premises of modern "liberalism"
lead inevitably to more conflict
- in society and eventually to some
form of statist tyranny.
Force -- especially the legal force of political government --
- must never be allowed to be wielded
by subjective Whim. Our
- Founding Fathers knew this. That's
why they wanted to bind down
- men in government by the chains
of a written Constitution. The
- idea was to have a government hemmed
in by rules -- not government
- by the arbitrary and capricious
whims of any group or person.
Government by whim is unlimited and unlimited government is free
- to control and enslave the people.
If peaceful people are going to be free,
- they must enslave their government
by imposing hard and fast rules on
- what politicians and bureaucrats
may do. It is a mistake for people to have
- faith and trust in their elected
officials. Bind them down.
The relativist premises of modern liberalism are contrary to the
- vision, intent, and spirit of the
American idea of using law to impose
- limitations on political government.
It is high time Americans reimposed Constitutional limits on government
by putting it under an iron-clad strait
- jacket called the policy of Laissez
Faire based on the rational principle of individual human rights.