It is an unfortunate phenomenon that the cycle of politics brings power-wannabes to the surface at any given opportunity. Their language bongs like an unwanted and unwarranted foghorn inviting war rather than remedy. Hence the repeated rhetoric that doesn't make any more sense the second, third, or forth times it is said, than it did the first. Their hope is that in the repeating, it will eventually be accepted. It's not a behavior reserved to liberals or conservatives, but anyone wanting their day in the sun and an opportunity to postpone the sunset.
I wrote this as a comment after one of my Facebook friends voiced her objection to vitriolic attacks by people who did not like that she did not agree with their views. Meanwhile, another friend was suffering the same battle from one who called him an "idiot" because they did not agree with him. I too, have witnessed this disturbing behavior: On one occasion a person shoved his religious card down the throats of people engaged in a conversation on my Facebook page so badly; calling everyone who did not agree with his perspective bigots, lacking spirituality, and insinuating they were not living their Christian religion if they did not agree with him, that one of my friends actually folded up shop and left Facebook all together. She had had enough.
In all three instances, insults laid at my friends came from Libertarians—not the traditional “liberal Democrats”. Just after posting my comment (quoted above), which did not point to any one person, as you see, the Libertarian Party withdrew 'following' me on Twitter. I had to laugh. But my comment, not addressing any singular entity or person, is simply a matter of truth about people’s behavior in general. To see that it bothered someone is telling. Are they promoters of “power-wannabes”? To be clear: This article is not about the Libertarians or any particular philosophy, per se. I myself have been categorized as a Libertarian. * (I am not, but am actually a Constitutional Republican, and a Centrist/Classic Liberal, which is someone, who follows the Constitution as the Founders prescribed.)Common sense tells me this scenario could have as easily happened among any persuasion in politics or other arena.
But this set of actions brings up a critical point about the failings of American politics: There seems to be great misunderstanding about what our freedoms entail. It is ironic that there are those in general who espouse freedom, but believe insults are freedom. It is additionally ironic that some of those—even some who use insults while espousing pure freedom—want to destroy Federalism, which is the very character of the Constitution that protects us.
To understand: the Constitution provides to the Federal government key powers to protect its states. Then, the states are at full liberty to protect their respective people. And that in a nutshell, is Federalism. I would warn everyone to beware of anyone espousing personal freedom and denouncing government as inherently evil, when it is only people that can be evil. We do not need revolutionaries—people desiring to overthrow the government. We do not need a coup d’etat. We need to defend the Constitution. The attitude of removing government from us will actually destroy our freedoms and leave us with no protection at all. We do not live in a pure and innocent world where all understand the nuances of self-government. Hardly. And the present circumstance bringing this article demonstrates the point.
Every two years I make this plea: Look beyond the continual rhetoric. As usual, it is running rampant as a river torrent in spring. But unusually, the rhetoric is chameleon-like, taking on many forms, and changing as the circumstances require. Some in every faction—liberal, conservative, (or the ‘ultras’), religious, or via a political philosophy—are using similar words that arrive at very different conclusions as a way to entice people to support their or their group’s power. But because the sound bytes are similar, but the conclusions are not, arguments degenerate to winning people over through insult. As if intimidation would work as a form of conversion. I'm not talking about the candidates, though they are not exempt. I'm referring to typical American activists.
We must be careful in our scrutiny of people volleying for their causes. It will fail if we observe words only, without noticing behavior—or worse, notice and justify it. We are doomed to repeat history by it. For many who wave the flag of liberty now are no better than history showed headband waving "Hippies" and “the anti-establishment” of the 1960s to be, who simply sought to break rules, laws, and social mores they did not want to oblige; No better than the Communists, like Castro and Hitler, who promised solutions for all, but ultimately only provided them for themselves; Or even those such as Catherine the Great, and FDR who espoused national leadership based in freedom—at least until they were the leaders.
Beware: Liberals are not the only ones selling snake oil. Republicans and Democrats are not the only ones gaming the system. Activists are coming forth from everywhere seeking control and their day in the sun and it matters not as much which group they are among. The real test of genuineness will not be just in “what” they teach of freedom, though there is treachery there too, but in the “how” of them. ** That requires not only that we understand Constitutionally based Federalism and espouse the freedoms it supplies, but that we honor it with the greatest and best character. Anyone who does not understand that does not qualify as an expert or leader of our system of freedoms and should not warrant our listening ears.
As Samuel Adams said,
...If we are universally vicious and debauched in our manners, though the form of our Constitution carries the face of the most exalted freedom, we shall in reality be the most abject slaves."
*The concept of a pure state of natural man, as many Libertarians espouse is not
a close possibility in our present, mortal state. The concept is legitimate; the
practice is not. —Hence the reason for the Constitution, which protects most and
best, but not absolutely, our rights.
**Take the Tea Party and 912
movements for example, who demonstrate peacefully, without insulting others,
creating hostility or inciting anger among the people, or mocking decency. All
the while getting their point across about freedom. This is the essence of true
freedom as designed in the Constitution—self-governance.
