Everyone has things they are afraid of; I’m afraid of heights. My fear is based upon something that happened to me when I was very young. My parents took me and my younger brother to the Bay Area one weekend when I was young and one of the places we visited was Seal Point. I was too short to see the seals below, so my father picked me up and held me over the wall so I could see the seals below. I don’t remember seeing any seals; all I remember is being terrified that my father might accidentally let go of me.
I think it is normal for people to have certain phobias; it is part of the human psyche to be afraid of certain things. However, they say the best way to overcome your fear is to confront it; not run and hide from that which causes you to be afraid. I’ll get up on the roof of my house to clean the rain gutters, and although I still get those butterflies in my stomach, I don’t let that fear dominate me. Am I cautious while I’m up on the roof? You bet your ass I’m cautious; especially when I get close to the edge. But if I had let my fear control me I’d never have gotten on the roof in the first place.
Our country was established as an independent nation by men who believed that all men were created equal; that they were endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among those were the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. However, being created equal does not equate to ending up in positions of equal status in adulthood; which is something the SJW, (Social Justice Warriors), fail to understand.
The SJW’s in America believe that if a person cannot achieve equality on their own, then those who have achieved a certain status in life should have a portion of what they have earned, or obtained, taken from them and given to those who have not achieved it based upon their own efforts. What the SJW’s in America fail to realize is that this equality is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. What that means is that we should all be equal in our chance to succeed, but whether or not we succeed or fail in life is an individual responsibility.
The author of our Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, spoke often about this. As early as 1787 Jefferson would write, “The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.” (Source: letter to M.L. Hommande)
That sentiment was later reaffirmed in Jefferson’s first Inaugural Address, “...a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government…“
Then, in 1816, Jefferson wrote, “To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” (Source: letter to Joseph Milligan)
Does that sound anything like the society we live in today; a society that, for the most part, believes it is acceptable to take things from others so that those who have not achieved success in life can live equally in comfort and security?
A perfect example of that principle is minimum wage laws. By forcing, by law, employers to pay a certain wage to their employees the law is taking away an employer’s right to determine how much that particular jobs is worth. People complain that they can’t feed their families on the wages earned in a minimum pay job. Really; then why don’t you find a job that pays enough so that you can survive on the wages you earn?
In a free market society the pay given for a particular job should be determined by whether or not the employer can find people willing to work for the pay that they are offering. If I ran a business and I was only offering $8 per hour for my employees, I’m going to keep paying them $8 an hour as long as I had people willing to work for that pay. But, if I could not find people to work for that pay then I would have a choice to make; shut down my business, or pay wage that would attract people to that job.
What people don’t seem to realize is that if you force, through legislation, an employer to pay their employees more, they are not going to swallow that loss; they are going to pass it on to those who purchase the goods they manufacture, or the services they provide. So what you have done is you have raised cost of living; for everyone; including the employees who are the beneficiaries of these minimum wage increases. Everyone will end up paying MORE for the goods and services they utilize; not only nullifying any benefits of a minimum wage increase, but also causing those who earn a higher wage to suffer the consequences of the increased cost of goods and services. When that happens nobody wins; only those who get to thump their chests and say that they are working hard to make life better for the poor.
Last time I checked America was supposedly based upon the concept of freedom; the free exercise of our liberty and of our unalienable rights. But when government, or one segment of society, deems that it can limit or restrict that freedom to benefit another portion of society, then the entire fabric upon which our country was built begins to unravel; and what you end with is either a democracy, or more accurately, a mobocracy.
Thomas Jefferson addressed that topic as well when he said, “The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.” (Source: letter to Dupont De Nemours, 1816)
What I find both humorous and infuriating is the fact that those who call for these type measures are apt to loudly proclaim that they are working hard to defend minority rights. It doesn’t really matter who those minorities are; be they immigrants, gays, the poor, they are all a subcategory of the species homo sapiens; HUMAN BEINGS. According to our Declaration of Independence, all human beings are created equal with certain unalienable rights.
Therefore, if our government was established to secure those rights to ALL MEN, then the ONLY laws that should be passed are those that make it a crime for anyone to deny or restrict those rights; not to benefit one segment of society at the cost of the rights and liberty of another.
Let’s say there were but 3 people living in this country. They gathered together and determined that they needed to establish a government to secure the rights of all 3 of them. They chose the person they felt was the wisest, or best one to hold that position of leadership. Then let’s say that one of the other 2 convinced the ‘leader’ to enact a law, or rule, that restricted the right of the other; would that not be in opposition to the purpose for which the leader was elevated to a position of leadership?
The same principle applies to large groups of people; such as the entire population of a country. When a majority seeks to limit or restrict the rights or liberty of a minority, then that too goes against the purpose for which governments are established among men. Now I want you to read something, and read it carefully. Author Ayn Rand once said, “The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”
It’s funny that our government can enact laws protecting certain endangered species of wildlife, but the endangered species of liberty loving individuals does not get the same protection from their government; or society in general. In fact, it almost seems like society and government are on a mission to totally exterminate those who seek liberty and the free exercise of their unalienable rights.
One of the biggest motivators people have for doing things is fear. If you fear something you will do whatever you can to eliminate the cause of your fear, or provide some measure of security against it. But as I said earlier, you can run from your fear or you can confront and overcome it. Most people choose the first option, they seek to run from, or get someone else to provide a level of security against whatever it is that frightens them.
People fear what they don’t understand; therefore they have the choice of either seeking to understand what it is that is causing them this fear; or to remain ignorant and in constant fear of that particular thing. If you want my honest opinion, mass ignorance among the people of a country is the biggest thing to fear, as it leaves the people vulnerable to manipulation by those who decide what they should be afraid of.
There is a truism about human beings in that, once the people form an opinion about something, it is next to impossible to change their minds on it. Government knows and utilizes that to their advantage; as does the news media. By creating fear, telling you what you should be afraid of, they are able to get you to accept things you wouldn’t accept under normal circumstances; which is why I absolutely despise the term, ‘new normal.’ New normal suggests a shift from what was once was normal, but has since been changed or been abolished because of certain circumstances, to create a ‘new normal.’
Freedom and liberty used to be normal in this country, but it has become abolished because circumstances have caused people to surrender it for the false promises of comfort and security. More often than not, fear is the guiding force in determining how much freedom a people are willing to give up for the promise of a better future; for comfort and security. Therefore those who control the flow of fear, control those who react to that fear by surrendering their freedom to be free of it.
Have you ever heard of the term mass hysteria? In the studies of sociology and psychology mass hysteria refers to the phenomenon that transmits a collective illusion of threats, (be they real or imaginary), through a population or society. Now pay close attention to this part; a common mass hysteria occurs when a group of people believe they are suffering from a similar disease or ailment; which is sometimes referred to as mass psychogenic illness, or epidemic hysteria.
America, or at least a good portion of it, is currently suffering from that type of mass hysteria now, due to their fear of this Covid virus. The news media, and certain elected officials, (such as California Governor Gavin Newsom), have been highly effective in fanning the flames of this hysteria; causing some people to react way beyond what common sense and knowledge about this virus dictate.
As I also said a bit earlier, once people set their mind to something, it becomes next to impossible to change them. So it is with those living in fear over this Covid virus; it seems that no matter how many facts one provides about this virus, or the steps taken to prevent its spread, the people refuse to consider them; reacting entirely in response to their fear of it.
TV used to run a series entitled Star Trek: Next Generation. Among the cast members was Brent Spiner, who played Lt. Commander Data, an android who was built without emotions. During one episode he had an emotion chip installed which allowed him to feel emotions such as fear and anger. Those sensations were too much for him, so he had the chip removed so his thinking process was based solely upon logic and fact. Oh if only people were the same; or at least equipped with a switch that could turn off their emotions for the time being so they could examine things logically.
Just look at what has happened to our country, our economy, based upon fear. We were told that we must shut down the economy to combat the spread of this virus…and we complied without thinking. Yet big box stores such as WalMart, Home Depot and Costco remained open. So, using logic, I guess they are saying that in stores like those, the virus cannot easily be transmitted, but in shopping malls, bars, gyms and churches it can.
How, if I might ask, is that logical; especially when face masks are worn and proper social distancing guidelines are adhered to? It isn’t logical, but logic goes out the window when fear takes over the human mind.
Then, where I work, they have set up crews on each shift to walk around the plant with spray bottles so that they can sanitize the common areas to ensure that the virus does not remain on any surface and be spread throughout the plant.
Well gee, let’s say I sanitize a certain table or chair at 4:00 p.m., and then move on to another area. Let’s say at 4:10 someone infected with the virus, but is as of yet asymptomatic, (meaning they are not exhibiting symptoms), sits down at that table. I might not be able to get back to that table and sanitize it for another couple of hours, so anyone who sits at that table after the infected person leaves has possibly contracted the virus.
Wouldn’t it make MORE sense to leave a bottle of sanitizer at each table and have each person sanitize that table when they were done sitting there, instead of having a crew walk all over the plant; only sanitizing each area every couple of hours? But again, that’s common sense; and that also goes out the window when people let fear take over.
Then there is the whole issue of wearing face masks; which if you ask me is a ridiculous waste of time and totally ineffective for the general public. I have been saying this since I first saw people begin wearing face masks, and I was laughed at and told that I was not taking this virus seriously enough. Yet I’ve not worn one outside my home, aside from when I am at work, since this virus first made its appearance; and I’ve yet to contract it.
Recently the United States Surgeon General, who is the head of the public health services for the U.S. government, recently said, “What the World Health Organization [WHO] and the CDC [The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] have reaffirmed in the last few days is that they do not recommend the general public wear masks.”
This is primarily for two reasons. The first reason is that many of the masks being worn do not fit tightly to the face; thereby allowing the virus to enter in through the gaps where the mask is not in contact with the skin. Furthermore, scientists have shown that the virus particles themselves are small enough to easily pass through the fiber of any maks available to the public. That’s the first reason.
The second reason is that people are wearing the same mask all day long; and throughout the day they are constantly touching other surfaces which might have the virus on them, then touching or rearranging their masks; thereby actually spreading the virus from one point to another. Doctors, especially surgeons, are trained to not touch their mask, or any unsanitized surface, after putting the mask on; the public isn’t, and therefore most of the people wearing masks are actually placing themselves at more risk than they would if they didn’t wear the mask at all.
It doesn’t really bother me if those around me want to let fear dictate how they will live their lives; what impositions upon their freedom they will accept to alleviate their fear. What bothers me is when society, or the government, seeks to impose those same restrictions upon those of us who refuse to let fear govern our lives.
If this virus truly frightens you so much that you will accept these restrictions upon your freedom, then maybe you ought to just stay home; leaving those who don’t live in fear live their lives free of the restrictions upon our freedom you think we must submit to just to make you feel safe.
Again to quote from Ayn Rand, “Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual).“
A similar quote by Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson states, “The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”
My rights and my liberty are not subject to a public vote, the whim of elected officials, nor the degree of fear you might have over me exercising them freely. If you agree that they are, what is to say that the tide may someday turn and the rights you cherish come under attack because a majority does not like the fact that you have those rights; that they FEAR you having them and seek to take those rights away from YOU? Therefore it would behoove you, if you cherish your rights, to do your utmost to defend mine.
Rights are gifts from our Creator to His creations; they are not subject to a vote, or to the legislative authority of an entity created by man. As gifts from our Creator they do not require permission, in the form of a permit or license, to exercise; and as gifts from our Creator they are beyond the reach of the ability of men to punish their free exercise.
If you believe I must wear a mask when I am in your presence, or that I need a permit to carry a firearm on my person to protect myself, then you don’t understand the nature or origin of YOUR rights. For what is to say that I might ask where your permit to breathe or to speak is. You might say that you don’t need a permit to do those things, that they are your rights. Well so is MY right to be armed for my own defense, and my right to take my chances of being infected by this virus when leaving my home.
You say, but I might pose a threat to others by my not wearing a mask. I say that is the creed of cowards; for life itself is full of risks and dangers, and that no matter of laws, permits, and guidelines can eliminate them all. My rights do not end where your fear of them begins; so long as I do not ACTUALLY bring you harm, or deny you the ability to live your life free of restrictions upon your rights, then you CANNOT deny me the free exercise of my rights and liberty; and if you think you can, then YOU are a tyrant and don’t deserve to be listened to or obeyed; for as Thomas Jefferson chose as his personal motto, “Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.”
So if you think you can impose restrictions upon my rights and liberty based solely upon your FEAR, I have but two words for you:
FUCK YOU!!!
~ The Author ~
Neal Ross, Student of history, politics, patriot and staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Send all comments to: bonsai@syix.com.
If you liked Neal’s latest column, maybe you’ll like his latest booklet: The Civil War: (The Truth You Have Not Been Told). Life continues to expand for this prolific writer and guardian of TRUE American history.