A Ringing Non-Endorsement

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 08:05:51 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

Larken Rose endorses nobody for president. That's right. He thinks that you should refuse to vote, ever, for anybody. He's right, of course. But I'm going to vote for Ron Paul, anyway. But not because I think voting is OK, or he's got a snowball's chance in hell of fixing anything. Because I like the guy and voting for him will be fun. Also, his campaign might just change a few minds.

Let me just add here, if you intend to vote for anyone OTHER than Dr. Paul, you might as well put yourself in shackles right now, because you are volunteering yourself (and everyone else) into absolutely slavery. Why? Because EVERY other politician in office or running for office believes that THEY and they alone have absolute discretion over how much they will rob you and how much they will control you. They acknowledge no limits to their power. They all view you as their slaves. If you vote for them, you are AGREEING with them; you are endorsing your own enslavement, and all that is left is the pathetic attempt to get a relatively benevolent slave-master (which won't happen either).

And just in case you didn't get the idea in that article, Mr. Rose followed up the next day with The Experiment Failed. The Constitution didn't prevent the U.S. from turning tyrannical the first time. Why should it be different should we manage to restore constitutional government again?

The great American experiment, an attempt to have a system of government whose purpose is to preserve and protect individual liberty, ABSOLUTELY FAILED. Denying that fact at this point is just silly. So why exactly does anyone think that trying the same thing again would turn out better? Let's take it beyond the slim possibility of getting Ron Paul elected President. Let's suppose we figured out a way to resurrect Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and the rest of them, and give them control of the government. What reason is there to think we wouldn't end up where we are now?

And to further clarify, early this morning, Larken sent out Time to Give Up? Yes and No.

Imagine you lived in a primitive tribe which, when there was a drought, would offer up human sacrifices to their gods, and pray to their gods for rain. They did this year after year, but droughts would still happen. Then one day, one dude says, "Hey, guys, have you noticed that this human sacrifice routine DOESN'T WORK!?" That radical might go so far as to advocate the "extreme" position that the tribe should STOP sacrificing people altogether.


To put it another (slightly cliche) way, the primary problem is not the shackles on your body, but the shackles on your mind. Imagine two slaves a couple hundred years ago: one who believes himself to be the rightful property of his "owner," the other who believes that he owns himself. The ONLY recourse of the first is to ASK his owner to "give" him freedom, while the second knows he has every right to claim his own freedom by any means necessary. The first is doomed to be enslaved forever, because he has ACCEPTED the idea that someone else has the RIGHT to rule him.

You can more of Larken Rose's TMDS (The Most Dangerous Superstition) essays at billstclair.com/tmds.

Add comment Edit post Add post