Monday, January 9, 2012

Do We Really Have a Choice?

by Brent Lawler
As the latest Presidential election cycle rolls along I cannot help but think about how we are most likely going to be presented with another false choice between two progressive, big government candidates. Unless that is, by some miracle Ron Paul gets the nomination. Otherwise the only significant difference between the two candidates, besides rhetoric, is going to be on social issues.....as usual. Yet, even then we are presented with an anti-liberty, anti-self government, anti-individualist choice of which side we should support in forcing our beliefs on others? This is the antithesis of republicanism, and federalism.

Our federal government and both major political parties seem to have become the exact thing our founding fathers fought and died to free us from: Centralized, top down solutions that limit someones rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in one form or another, while bestowing special rights or privileges on others.

We are presented with the non-choice of voting for the one who says he will take away the other guys rights while claiming to protect our own.

I have some questions:

1) Why have we lost the ability to live and let live?

2) When did Americans start to desire being ruled from the top down, instead of local self-government?
3) Who cares what they do in the next city, county, or State as long as we are united under the banners of individual liberty, and defense from those who wish to destroy us...from within or from without?

4) Why do we feel the need on both side of the aisle to tell the other side what they must believe through the force of federal law?

5) When exactly did America politics become what Gary North has accurately described as:
".... a contest over which group gets to decide which Constitutional restraints to ignore."

But the real question is: Do we really have a choice?

Yes we do. But it is not the one we are presented with....

Come back to our founding principles America! Come back to the constitution!
Let's return to the concept of republicanism, not the confines of the Republican Party. (Or the Democrat party for that matter) Let's once again embrace the decentralization that is true federalism...not centralized Federal Government "solutions" to the problems they create.

Focus on your city, county and State....forget the Federal deception. A virtuous people who hold true to the mantle of individual liberty and self government-- that is where the true "solution" lies.

Focusing on ourselves and our own communities will lead us back to liberty and common cause. Trying to settle all of our differences on a national level will be an infinite exercise in futility.

Bottom up, or top down.......Your choice.

4 comments:

  1. Lets see. Abortion, abstinance, gay marriage, prayer in public school, seperation of church and state, pornography, gambling, Euthanasia, environment, prostitution, corporal punishment, etc. You know ;)
    Some issues you will find less difference than others. But on these types of issues are the only place left, in my opinion, that there are any differences.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My experience is that the difference is primarily in the rhetoric. Same-sex marriage came about because both parties wanted to use marriage / divorce issues for pork barreling and crony capitalism. There's a huge industry related to divorce. The federal government took over a big part of it by the usual means and created a new industry that pumps billions from the public coffers every year. They also control which banks process huge amounts of child support payments (which is profitable for them) and their fake industry partners actually just take a cut of it. Republicans have promoted the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in states which has a difficult time passing and is unconstitutional; given the current federally controlled status of marriage laws. They know all this. They're faking.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't disagree with your comment. I would definitely agree the differences are mostly rhetoric. I would agree that a large part of even their "social" positions carry the same motivations. But one side will support more personal liberty in these areas and one will not. Lets just say that I believe that while there are true differences in their beliefs here, they both use these issues to divide and distract.

    ReplyDelete