Skip to main content

Libertarians Burned at the Stake

How many times have you heard libertarians proclaim with thoroughly ego-pleasing self-righteousness, "We never compromise our principles," using such refusal to compromise as an excuse for allowing their values to be compromised by those who are smart enough to really not let their principles be sabotaged?

Principles only exist to serve values. Your spirit's highest value is the fullness of life. Your ego's highest value is your destruction and ultimately your death. So facing every decision, wondering if a principle applies, a question must be asked: does following this principle in this instance serve life or death?

It is believed Joan of Arc refused to compromise her principles. It is said her fate of being burned at the stake was due to her uncompromising stance. So was death her highest value? Or did she maybe fail to question whether there might be an even deeper principle she wasn't seeing, or whether her ego was tempting her to inflexibility in order to destroy her?

Individuals become libertarians because they are sensitive enough to be in-touch with their natural soul-level urge to experience freedom from being ruled by the ego-vested interests of others, which is the same as saying libertarians feel strongly the deep inner desire to experience life in it's fullness.

It is not logical and hardly life-serving to worship principles in and of themselves, divorced from the context of one's highest goal. When faced with a decision, does adhering to a particular principle serve life or death?

Let's imagine in our modern American context a Democratic Party candidate unabashedly favors dictatorship by his favored class of elitists. He justifies his stance by believing that it serves "every one's highest good." But he nonetheless clearly favors dictatorship. This Democrat is unashamedly a "dictator at heart."

Meanwhile, a Republican Party candidate, for all her faults, despite her seeming inability to take the Democrat's worship of dictatorship seriously, is obviously not a "dictator at heart." She may have a split mind confused by conflicting values and issues, but she would not support dictatorship if someone or some circumstance jolted her into seeing clearly.

These two candidates are polling evenly at about 48 or 49 percent each. One of them is going to win the election and rule.

Given this context and imagined scenario, a libertarian is faced with a choice. He can refrain from voting and wish the threat of dictatorship would magically go away. He can vote for a third party candidate "on principle" and hope that the election will not be won by the "dictator at heart." Or he can cast a vote in self-defense knowing that in such close elections sometimes the "dictator at heart" will actually be defeated with the help of votes like his.

If he chooses the third alternative, is he voting on principle? What if there is a principle that says, "Given the existing context in which I live, I will do whatever I can reasonably do to keep a 'dictator at heart' from winning an election and ruling my life!"

What if there is a principle at work in the electoral universe which says if libertarians fail to do everything within reason to keep dictators from winning ... then enough dictators will win to firmly establish their dictatorship?

Maybe libertarians need to ask themselves: "Would I rather discover the deeper underlying principle, or would I rather let myself be burned at the stake?"

To understand the insane psychology of modern "liberal progressives," read Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged."

"God's laws will keep your minds at peace, because peace IS His Will, and His laws are established to uphold it. His are the laws of freedom, but yours are the laws of bondage. Since freedom and bondage are irreconcilable, their laws CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD TOGETHER. The laws of God work only for your good, and there ARE no other laws beside His. Everything else is merely lawLESS, and therefore chaotic." -Jesus Christ in A Course in Miracles

"I think of myself as a freedom zealot."


Popular posts from this blog

The Winning Tao Of Liberty

One who follows the Liberty Way with people, 
does not use weapons to enforce his will. 
Initiating force always leads to pain and suffering. 

With the Liberty Way where armies once gathered,
briars and brambles now blossom. 

A liberty leader exercises his leadership, 
and that is all. 
If he uses force, it is not to seize for himself. 

He skillfully overcomes liberty's enemies, 
but is not proud. 
His progress might be admired, 
yet he is not boastful. 
His work may even win accolades, 
still he does not brag. He fulfills his purpose for liberty, 
because he knows he has no other choice. 

The Liberty Way is fulfilling one's purpose without using force. 
The above is a liberty interpretation of a passage from the ancient spiritual classic Tao Te Ching.  As in all spiritual works which have been venerated worldwide down through the centuries a difference is recognized between (1) the use of force by ego determination for ego purposes, and (2) the use of force in defense of the freedom to act …

How Liberty Lovers Can Assure Winning

The freedom-loving Libertarian Party has been active 46 years, yet manages to gather only a minuscule percentage of the vote. Many would say this is pathetic.

The Republican Freedom Caucus in the House of Representatives heroically saves America from a disastrous re-application of the ObamaCare premise that dictatorship of people's health insurance is government's business ... a rescue effort for which they should be presenting themselves as national champions. Instead they allow themselves to be portrayed as villains. Maybe not pathetic, but a mixed bag.

It's not that freedom is no longer considered a value among Americans. It's that modern freedom lovers haven't yet learned how to win fully, completely, without limitation. Liberty lovers achieve only partial victories because we do not have a winning mindset.

To achieve complete and lasting victory liberty lovers need to transform their minds and think like winners.

To do this we must first train ourselves to …

The Libertarian Way: So Much More Than The NAP!

How often do we hear the word "libertarian" being used in contexts relating to politics or some kind of political understanding? Even most dictionary definitions of "libertarian" emphasize political implications.

Yet libertarians will never experience the full personal benefit of their libertarian impulse, and never be completely successful in any political activism they undertake, unless they understand the Libertarian Way is much deeper and more basic than concern with political conditions.

Before there is politics ... before there are relationships ... there is life. When human beings feel their deepest-rooted inner desires (as opposed to addiction to intellectualism for the purpose of avoiding the depths of their being), they sense inside themselves a yearning for the fullness of life to shine forth and be experienced.

"Fullness" is the key. Liberal-progressive dictators will tell you their programs and agendas help people have a better life, but th…