I Can Think Of No Reason To Add Anything To This.
Recently by Mark R. Crovelli: The Trouble With Rick Santelli
Few people in the world seem to appreciate just how awful it is to be a government police officer. It’s not that the job involves particularly physically demanding work, or that the job is particularly dangerous. In fact, the work is not nearly physically demanding enough (as the cop fatness problem demonstrates), and neither is it particularly dangerous (being a cop doesn’t even make the top ten most dangerous jobs). Nor is the job terrible because of the unstated obligation to wear a tawdry mustache in public. Instead, what makes the job so horrific is the fact that it requires living a completely contradictory moral life.
Unlike normal human beings, whose jobs require adherence to the same moral standards that apply in their private lives, police officers are required to act in ways they would never even consider in their private lives. For forty hours a week (or more, if they are trying to milk their departments’ overtime rackets), police officers are required to forget the moral standards that govern their private interactions with their own friends, families and neighbors and adopt the moral outlook of the sociopath and the gangster.
Specifically, the job of the police officer involves giving orders to strangers and locking them up in cages if they choose not to obey. Unless the police officer is a complete sociopath, he would never consider acting in such a way in his private life. With his blue polyester in the closet, for example, the off-duty police officer would never consider putting his grandpa in a cage if he refuses to obey orders. He would never consider electrocuting his children or his grandmother for refusing to do what he tells them. He would never consider beating up his neighbor if she refused to stop her car and show a picture of herself embossed on government plastic. But he is expected to do precisely these types of things to people he doesn’t even know in his “professional” life if they refuse to do what he and his bosses tell them.
The fact that many, many police officers are indeed complete psychopaths should thus not come as a particular surprise. Indeed, the job is tailor made for the psychopath and the sociopath who is comfortable with feelings of cognitive dissonance. People with normally calibrated moral compasses would shudder to think that they would be required to lock people up in cages, electrocute them, or beat them with clubs for not doing as they are told. It would confuse and trouble the normal person to think that by putting on a blue polyester suit, mustache, and riding boots it was suddenly morally acceptable to order people around at the point of a gun (not to mention the icy shudder they would feel at the thought of wearing the ridiculous kit itself). It would horrify the normal person to think that part of his job involved smashing down strange people’s doors, taking their children, shackling them, locking them in cages, stealing their drugs and guns, and shooting them if they happen to resist.
The man with a normally calibrated moral compass is equally disturbed to contemplate that the purported justification for acting in these barbaric ways was that politicians, of all people, told them to. It is not as though God Himself or the Pope gives the police officer sanction to lock people in cages and to order them about. Quite the reverse, the sanction comes from people of such sterling moral character as the coke-snorting drunk driver, Bush II, and the drug-cartel-connected perjurer, Clinton I. The sociopath and the psychopath are not troubled by the fact that their only justification for ordering strange people around is that a pack of corrupt millionaires in Washington or Denver told them to, which is what makes such people sociopaths and psychopaths in the first place. The normal person, in contrast, is not willing to do things to other people that they clearly resent or despise, or to order them to do things they oppose, just because a politician says so.
The person with a normally calibrated moral compass would begin to wonder why the moral standards that govern his private life with friends and family, and which produce relative peace and harmony in that sphere of his life, do not apply to all situations. Why, the normal person will inevitably wonder, is there any peace in his family, when no one wears a special blue suit or has the right to order everyone around and shackle resisters? How is it possible that he can get along with his friends at the bowling alley, when none of them is assigned to break into cars to search for substances the politicians dislike, and none of them has a right to steal anyone else’s children? In short, the normal person will begin to wonder why the people who claim to “protect us” are not held to the same moral standards as everyone else.
The answer to these questions is simple, even if the person with a normally calibrated moral compass often cannot see it through the clouds of propaganda that have been spewed over police officers and politicians. The answer is, quite simply, that the defense of people’s lives and property is a job just like any other, and it ought to be provided on the free market just like every other good and service by people who are held to exactly the same moral standards as the rest of the civilized world. The uneasiness that the normal person feels when confronted with the existence of a group of fat blue-polyester-clad thugs who are not bound by normal moral standards is completely understandable and justified. There is no need for these thugs at all, and there is definitely no justification for exempting them from the moral standards we hold every other person to.
The provision of bread and chairs and computers does not require exempting anyone from moral standards, or empowering them to beat people up and order them around. All that is required is to open the door to competition, and people fall over backwards trying to please customers in their quest to make money. The same is just as true of defense services, which can and ought to be opened to competition between private providers so that consumers of these services can choose what kinds of defense services they want to purchase. In that case, the providers of the services can be held to exactly the same moral standards as everyone else. Their sole purpose would be to protect their customers’ lives and property – not to enforce arbitrary and unjust rules written by rich politicians on unwilling strangers.
The key to liberating the police officer from the contradictory and perverted moral life he currently leads is simply to privatize the provision of defense services. Freed from the need to push arbitrary and unjust rules written by rich politicians on strange people, the police officer would then be a moral equal to everyone else in the world who was striving to make money by serving consumers. He would also, one hopes, be liberated from the requirement to wear the most ridiculous bureaucratic costume ever devised by man.
March 24, 2011
Mark R. Crovelli [send him mail] writes from Denver, Colorado.
Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
by C.J. Maloney
by CJ Maloney
Recently by CJ Maloney: Count Our Holiday Blessings: At Least We’re Not Starving
Is it possible The People should ever be their own enemies?
~ Fischer Ames (1805)
Remember the “Ground Zero Mosque” controversy? It took place last summer in New York City when some people – with no sense of how a democracy works – had the foolish notion to build on property they owned an Islamic cultural center to worship God as they pleased. In both Constitutional law and simple humanity they were well within their rights but their proposed location was, unfortunately, just two blocks from where the Twin Towers once stood. Crushed under a wave of populist indignation, the Islamic center has yet to be built.
Admittedly I hadn’t thought about it in some time, and would gather that most New Yorkers hadn’t thought about the “Ground Zero Mosque,” either, since the tabloids stopped telling us to think about it. The angry mobs that once gathered outside the proposed location have taken their pitchforks and torches and run off toward other distractions. (Call of Duty: Black Ops was released, for one.) Now emotions lay at low tide, all is calm. So it’s time to take stock of what it cost us.
The fact that a most basic human right – to worship in peace as you please – came under blatant assault in America, in our greatest, most liberal city no less, is tragic but predictable. This is what you get from nine (and counting) years of living under endless war, breathing the harsh, poisonous air of an increasingly militarized society, and the effects were shown in the tepid defense my great state’s political grandees’ offered in response to this populist rejection of religious freedom.
The political leaders of New York were, with but rare exception, either outright scoundrels or mealy-mouthed cowards. Steve Israel, my local House representative, took a few moments to defend our Constitution in a fuzzy, kind of, sort of way that characterizes those without any spine. “While they have a constitutional right to build the mosque,” he began (and history would be kinder to him had he stopped there), “it would be better if they had demonstrated more sensitivity to the families of 9/11 victims.”
So there we have it. Our Constitution, Israel laments, is too insensitive. Freedom isn’t free, the saying goes, and here Israel is unwilling to pay even the price of hurt feelings. Mr. Israel’s feeble gesture sums up all that New York’s timid Congressional representatives could muster in defense of religious freedom; highlights how bereft our leaders are of any courage to stand up to a howling mob.
The farce deepened as the one politician who came out the hero of this sad tale was none other than the Golden Tongue himself, Barack Obama, a man not exactly known for political courage. “In this country we treat everybody equally and in accordance with the law, regardless of race, regardless of religion. I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding.” For once I applauded the man and realized I was wrong about one thing – he has read the Constitution.
The entire sad episode of the “Ground Zero Mosque” gave warning that democracy is no bulwark for liberty; it never has been and cannot be. I look at America today and see the wisdom in Bertrand de Jouvenel’s assertion that democracy is “the time of tyranny’s incubation.” (de Jouvenel, 1978, 15) Americans have forgotten to remember that Hitler – who was elected – is not only a symbol of the vile Holocaust but of sweet democracy, too.
Like many of our ancestors these newly arrived Muslim immigrants pinned their hopes on America’s reputation as a nation of law and not of men but found, in this case, that reputation to be far short to its reality. Today, America’s reality starts for the Muslim immigrant as soon as they disembark onto freedom’s golden shores.
Where once our forefathers, upon entry into New York harbor, came up from steerage to gather on the ship’s deck and watch the Statue of Liberty slide by, today’s immigrants come through an airport. What do they think when they first spot a line of freedom-loving Americans, standing meek with shoes in hand and pants around the ankles as surly TSA agents bark orders and jam their hands into our crotch? Do any of them take a moment to think about the lawlessness they had fled and wonder, “Why did I bother?”
Don’t be alarmed, new Muslim-Americans, all you see and hear about you is from what democracy is made! As H.L. Mencken noted long ago, a citizen of a democracy will be met everywhere by “an assumption of his disingenuousness and dishonour.” (Mencken, 2009, 156) So take off your sandals, lift your robe, and wait for Uncle Sam’s frisk.
I don’t claim this anti-Muslim populism to be anything unusual. History tells us that all human societies need a dog to kick. Without exception every race and nationality has been through the ringer at one time or another and, also without exception, every race and nationality has behaved like a beast when given the opportunity to pummel some minority in their midst. Every dog has its day, and every society has its dog. Current dog in America are Muslims within our borders. Native born or no, these poor people now find themselves cursed to be Muslim in a land that doesn’t want them.
James Madison once looked about him at 1774 Virginia and its wave of religious persecutions and exclaimed that he had “nothing to brag of as to the State and Liberty of my country…that diabolical Hell conceived principle of persecution rages among some.” Now, over two hundred years on, some Texas Congressman named John Cornyn declared of President Obama’s defense of religious freedom “the president himself seems to be disconnected from the mainstream of America.” No truer words can be said of 2010 America. Democracy has spoken; The People have made themselves heard. Freedom of religion is conditional upon the mob’s approval, the Constitution be damned.
As things currently stand any Muslim who comes to America in search of freedom is to be pitied – they are like a drowning sailor climbing into a sinking lifeboat.
Mencken, H.L. Notes on Democracy (Dissident Books, New York, 2009)
De Jouvenel, Bertrand. On Power: The Natural History of Its Growth (Liberty Fund, Indianapolis, IN, 1975)
December 24, 2010
CJ Maloney [send him mail] lives and works in New York City. He blogs for Liberty & Power on the History News Network website and the DailyKos. His first book Back to the Land (Arthurdale, FDR’s New Deal, and the Costs of Economic Planning) is to be released by John Wiley and Sons in February 2011.
Copyright © 2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
This video is a good illustration of how voluntaryism works. Bullies, whether on the playground, wearing a badge or in military uniform will back down eventually if enough people will refuse to cooperate with their intimidation tactics.
There are not enough bullies in the world to make everyone do what they want them to. Refuse to cooperate. Pick your own battles. It may cost you but eventually they must capitulate. We can not let the Neanderthals of this world continue to run it. Whether they be in the work place or in the White House…Resist Tyranny!
Freedom must become the most important thing. First you must find inner freedom which comes through relationship with The Creator through His Son. Then freedom on the outside for all when The Kingdom comes.
Watch and learn:
The freedom to choose has been The Almighty’s way of dealing with Man from the beginning. When we support aggression against people for their free will choices, apart from those choices that aggress against another, we take on a role that even The Creator Himself, usually, at this time, does not. That is not to say that people do not reap what they sow, only that that is a matter between them and The Creator.
There are no reasons to have any but an extremely minimalist government. The role of governments, if any, should be to secure the freedoms of individuals to live as they choose so long as it does not infringe on the rights of another.
As believers, we are to be a light to the world. Too often, it seems, we seem to have helped spread more darkness than light through our tacit agreements with government aggressions against our own citizens as well as those of other nations.
Declaring war on anything that causes a problem, whether terrorists or drug addicts, is a violation of the command to love those who hate us and bless those who despitefully use us. If aggression is called for, then we should deal with the individuals who cause direct harm to others rather than every person who might be associated with them.
Criticism that Christians are militant is, often, correct. Unfortunately, it is, usually, not a militancy for The Messiah and His Kingdom, but rather, a militancy for political power. This will, inevitably, lead to greater aggression against citizens through laws that further subject the individual to increasing government tyranny.
The truth is that most of us are selfish. Most of us have no problem giving to our church or some ministry, but will pass by the poor, the homeless, the dirty with more than a little disdain for them. We judge that if they would just live right, well, then they would not be in their current position. We, above all else, do not want to get “involved” with them. Even these assumptions are correct we are in sin.
What is our sin you may ask. The pride of life. We pretentiously believe that what we have done has anything to do with our station in life. Sorry folks, that is the height of self righteousness. We are nothing and have nothing apart from His goodness and Grace toward us. We DO NOT and CAN NOT deserve anything.
This is THE first element of a life in Him. Our acknowledgment that we are the greatest of sinners. That we, I, crucified The Messiah. Me. No one else is more responsible for His death than I am. No one else is more responsible for His death than YOU. Without that realization, it is impossible to come into relationship with Him.
It is the desperate awareness of our complete and total insufficiency that brings us to the foot of that tree. Sin is the blackest of black. It does not matter how many sins we have committed. We were born sinners. The vilest of all sinners is no worse than the “sweetest” little girl or boy. At the foot of That tree we are all sin. We all nailed Him to it. That must be a personal revelation. Frankly, apart from it I seriously doubt whether anyone can be born again.
An exchange MUST take place. He takes my sin, I receive, by grace, His righteousness. The result is an abiding awareness that those who are worse off than I need Him. The only way they can find Him is through love. His Love expressed through me. You see, it His kindness, His LOVE, that leads us to repentance.
Forced submission is no submission at all. We expect that by being tougher on those who violate moral standards that we hold we will, somehow, convince them to change. While it is true when individuals have directly harmed someone else this may (may) be effective, it is just as true that when arbitrary laws where no one is directly harmed are enacted and enforced it often breeds greater contempt.
This is why few people incarcerated for drug offenses ever reform. Why? They know that they were not causing direct harm to anyone. Unless they were selling to minors or sold goods that were substandard or somehow tainted, everyone who bought from them was making a free choice to do so. It is, strictly, a contract between two adults. It has nothing to do with anyone else.
The violence that occurs within those groups of people who are involved with the sale, purchase, and use of drugs is, mostly, a result of the criminality of those activities. How many deaths occurred in even the past decade as a result of illegal alcohol or cigarette sales? I doubt that such statistics are even kept, though some bureaucrat in government might do it to justify his continued employment.
I suspect that if there have been deaths that it is likely a result of government agents interfering in what ought to be free commerce between individuals. But, of course, government must have it’s cut even if it costs the life of a citizen or 2 now and then.
And that brings us to the terrorists. Have you noticed that our “liberation” of Iraq and Afghanistan has resulted in an increase in radical Islam? If not, you just haven’t been paying attention. Fact, you agress against people’s homes and families. You ruin their nation and their future generations with depleted uranium and they get upset. Hmmm.
We could argue all day about whether we needed to attack all of Afghanistan for the acts of, at most, a handful of radicals. The fact is that we did not go after Osama bin Laden. This is established fact and can easily be researched on the web. We knew where he was and did not go after him. We attacked , mostly, innocent civilians and continue to do so. Why, because we could. Might makes right.
They will do things our way or else. Many of us, including myself, supported this initially because, stupidly, we believed our leaders. They lied. Governments are prone to lies, it is the nature of those in power to do whatever is necessary to remain in power. I am not talking the fluctuations between parties. They are the same coin. Heads or tails, tyranny is tyranny in either of their hands.
Here’s something to think about. According to scripture no man is my enemy. Muslims are not the enemy. Our battle is not against flesh and blood but against principalities, and powers and the rulers of darkness in this age. They control the terrorists as much as they control that neighbor who mocks you for being a Christian
That is why believers must stand for what is right no matter what. What is right is not necessarily what will keep “our side” in power. We have a responsibility to stand against tyranny no matter where it comes from or whom. To be light. To say that is wrong. To proclaim mercy and The Love of Messiah to a lost world. Truth of scripture and His Kingdom are our weapons. This is where we so miserably failed.
The previous administration committed crimes against humanity, and most “Christians” supported it. They knowingly used weapons with depleted uranium, that’s radiation folks, against foreign nations. That violates the Geneva Conventions, no matter how it is twisted. The way we have treated prisoners is also a violation which the lawyers, (liars is more like it), again twist. Now Obama is continuing to follow the same course and has actually ramped up the wars by sending 30,000 more troops.
We wonder why our economy is tanking, (it is, by the way, no matter what “they” tell us). Why in The Gulf do we have potentially one of the worst ecological and economic disasters that this nation has ever faced. Well, remember reaping what we sow? We better change our attitude. It is not the unbelievers at fault here. Pagans do what pagans do. The question is what will the people who say that they are YHWH’s do.
WE must turn from our wicked ways and quit worrying about what those outside of the camp are doing. Daddy is going to judge this nation by our attitudes. Have we cared for the poor, the widows, the orphans as He commands in scripture?
Have you, personally, visited those in prison or invited someone homeless to stay in your home? Or taken someone less fortunate to lunch, not McDonalds but where you would want to be taken if you were in their position. I suspect most of us don’t even go around people “like that”. You know, Yahshua was known as a friend of sinners, the harlots, the drunkards…Are you?
Oh, this thought occurs to me. What if they take advantage of me? What if they harm me? Well, you and I take advantage of Yahshua every time we commit a sin. It is as though we crucify Him all over again. Spect that hurts Him huh?
He who has judged without mercy will himself be judged without mercy.