The one glaring problem in her work is the overall effect of her hammering mercilessly on behalf of freedom and the individual—after 400 pages, her prose takes on a programmatic aspect. It grips the reader with iron. The moral imperative to be free replaces the exhilaration of being free.
On the other hand, she obviously wrote her two great novels in the middle of a feverish exaltation. Every page burned. Most characters went down in flames. A few rose into the sky. She knew she was up against the most powerful forces of society, and she was not going to compromise or relent one inch. She fully intended to destroy collectivism at its root. On the basis of that decision, she refused to suspend her attack, even for a moment.
Most people who brush up against her work can’t stop to consider the depth of her admiration for the independent and powerful and creative individual, or the nature of her aversion to the collectivist who can only borrow from such individuals—and then distort and undermine what they have misappropriated.
She means to be extreme. It is no accident. With no apologies, she splits the world down the middle. In her own way, she is an ultimate riverboat gambler. She shoves in all her chips on the self-appointed task of illuminating the great dichotomy of human history and modern life: the I versus the WE.
“State is the name of the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies; and this lie slips from its mouth: I, the state am the people”
Statism is a pandemic religion, a psychosocial disease that has swept the world up in a web of political delusions. It has convinced people, through conditioning and propaganda, to be dependent upon the state. When really it’s all just smoke and mirrors thrown up by an entrenched authority so that it can maintain its power and control over the people. And that’s the crux: the power dynamic. People should have power over the government, not the other way around. As Alan Moore said, “People shouldn’t be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people.” Indeed, self-rule is far superior to state-rule. The problem is, most people aren’t aware of it.
Amidst this rampant statism stands the mass-man, the ignorant majority, the statist puppet, naïve to the political power swings surrounding him, dumb to the way things actually work. Sadly, statist puppets represent the majority of “we the people.” It’s not their fault, really. It’s simply how the majority of us were culturally conditioned to believe. We were all born into it, to a certain extent. But there comes a time when we must choose: become aware of how power works, or remain ignorant and powerless.
Here are four signs you may be a statist puppet.
I want to take a look at this strange institution we know as the Republican party and the course of its peculiar history in the American regime. The peculiar history both precedes and continues after Lincoln, although Lincoln is central to the story.
It is fairly easy to construct an ideological account of the Democratic party, what it has stood for and who it has represented, even though there has been at least one revolutionary change during its long history. I generalize broadly, because all major political parties since at least the early 19th century have most of the time sought to dilute their message to broaden their appeal and avoid ideological sharpness. But we can say of the Democratic party that through most of its history it was Jeffersonian—it stood for, at least in lip service, a limited federal government and laissez-faire economy, and it represented farmers and small businessmen, the South, the pioneer West, and to some extent the Northern working class. This identity for the most part even survived the War to Prevent Southern Independence. Clearly, the party in the 20th century came to represent a very different platform—social democracy as defined by the New Deal and the Great Society—and a considerably different constituency. In either case, onlookers have had a pretty good general impression of what the party stood for.
It is nearly impossible to construct a similar description of the Republican party. The party that elected Lincoln was pretty clear about some things, like the tariff, although it may have been less than honest about the reasons. It was obfuscatory about other things. Since Lincoln took power, it has been difficult to find a clear pattern in what the party has claimed to represent. The picture becomes even cloudier when you compare words and behaviour. This, I believe, is because its real agenda has not been such that it could be usefully acknowledged.
The main body here is already on the site in an another place as ‘About Me”. Felt that i should put on the main plate. I know what i am writing to some seems scary. It’s supposed to be, it is supposed to make you think. It is supposed to explain the truth in a way that the Zionist USA Federal Empire, made DAMN SURE you never heard. You the reader, have a right to know why i am doing this. Many reasons
Noblesse Oblige is not just a term to me.
One does ones Duty to the Light.
Standing against evil, is always the right thing to do.
In the early years of America, men were much more polite to each other.
Oh here and there some Zionist Puritan yankee told some lies about some Southerner, but the solution was simple.
Bitch slap the mouthy yankee across the face, points given for style if some yankee teeth hit the floor.
Allow him to choose his weapons.
Shoot him, or ran a sword through him!
One less Zionist telling lies in the world.
Made the Zionist chaff having to watch their smart ass mouths.
The wife and i have been living in this house for many years. When we moved in, the house was an old one added on to, and the only air conditioning for the South Texas heat was a couple of wall units. Guess a bird took a dump, and planted a mulberry tree right where the water dripped out of one cooler. Tree came up within inches from the house. Told the wife, i have to cut it off or dig it up. It can not grow properly where it is. I had no idea, that such a small shaft of a tree, could have such deep roots. I got it up, and replanted it back of the house a bit.
Years later, it has grown wild as an old Mulberry will. It has provided shade to the dogs, cats, chickens, kids and grandkids for years. Built the chicken house under it, keeps the South Texas sun off of the chicken house.
America as a whole, no longer possesses Honor! America sold that Honor for a perceived warmer place to sleep, a cold six-pack, and meaningless sex.
America was built on Honor and hard work. I said America. Washington DC is not now, and has never been America. Washington DC has never possessed Honor, the evil baby raping servants of the dark side hate truth, Light, human kindness, humility. They glory in evil, depraved practices. Washington DC and IT’s evil, are a cancer on the ass of America. IT needs to be surgically removed from the ass of America.
i TELL THE BEAST IT SHOULD DIE PEACEFULLY,
BUT IT ROARS BACK, IT DEMANDS CHILDREN AND BLOOD!
i TELL THE BEAST IT SHOULD DIE CIVILLY,
IT ROARS BACK, IT DEMANDS GOLD AND BLOOD!
i TELL THE BEAST IT MUST DIE WITHOUT IT’S BLOOD LUST FUTILITY,
IT ROARS BACK, IT DEMANDS SLAVES AND BLOOD!
i TELL THE BEAST THAT IT MUST DIE AS ITS TIME HAS GONE FLEETINGLY,
IT ROARS BACK, IT DEMANDS CONTROL AND BLOOD!
i TELL THE BEAST THAT THAT WHICH IS DEMANDS IT’S END
IT ROARS BACK, IT DEMANDS EVIL AND BLOOD!
OH LADY OF THE LAKE, THROW AGAIN THY SWORD!
The Ole Dog!
Most Americans, whether neo-liberal or neo-conservative, Democrat or Republican, do not show much understanding or respect for the principles of personal liberty. They criticize their political leaders, but one must recognize that their behavior simply reflects the values of the people who elected them to office. That means they are all to blame for greater governmental control over their lives and a decline in personal liberty.
My initial premise is that each of us owns himself. I am my private property, and you are yours. If one accepts the notion of self-ownership, then certain acts can be deemed moral or immoral. Murder, rape and theft are immoral because those acts violate private property. Most Americans accept that murder and rape are immoral, but most are ambivalent about theft. Theft can be defined as taking the rightful property of one American and giving it to another, to whom it does not belong. It is also theft to forcibly use one person to serve the purposes of another.
Federal spending can be described as government taking the rightful property of one American and giving it to another American, to whom it does not belong. Approximately half of the federal budget goes toward Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, food assistance, unemployment and other Progressive programs and benefits that fall into the category of forcibly taking from some and giving to others.
Many say that government spending guarantees one right or another. That’s nonsense. True rights exist simultaneously among people. That means the exercise of a right by one person does not impose an obligation on another. In other words, my rights to speech and travel impose no obligations on another except those of noninterference. The state has no resources of its very own. If government gives one person something that he did not earn, it necessarily requires that Congress deprive somebody else of something that he did earn.