 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back |
Previous on Jeremy Bosch Memorial HOF |
Next on Jeremy Bosch Memorial HOF |
|
Sergeant Joe Friday
(66.98.148.14) on 9/21/2007 - 11:35 a.m. says: ( 15 views
)
|
"Okay Nine, Step Out"
|
CONTEXT ADDED BY ADMIN:
END OF CONTEXT
Let me ask you something, Nine. When the mailman comes out on that RFD route and delivers that monthly government check to you, you figure you earned it, right? Yeah, well so do I. Back when you put on that uniform, you swore to defend the rights of all citizens, regardless of race, color or creed. And those are the people footing the bill for that check of yours. And when you worked to protect those fellow citizens of yours, there wasn't much room for individualism, was there? No, it requires team work, but now you want off the team. You did your tour and now you want to cash out of society and get an instant education on the state of the world. You call that individualism.
Let me tell you a story of another veteran who wanted a little individualism. He did his duty, did his tour, then he got out and started looking for some answers on the state of his country. But he didn't go to scholars. No, he went to a group of people who just told him what he wanted to hear. He got to reading and before he knew it, his idea of individualism somehow meant less rights for others. But, it was his rights he cared about, not anyone else. So, he figured he'd do a little something to educate the world. He blew up a courthouse in Oklahoma, taking down the lives of over 250 people, but their rights weren't all that important to him because his rights were more important. Yeah, it was all about him because his individualism was tops. He got his fame and he got his forum to tell off the world. And he got his last government check in the amount of two pints of mint chocolate chip ice cream and a big dose of government sponsored Sominex.
You live out their on your land, with that arsenal you've built up and you figure yourself for an individualist. But, get this, Nine - that land is only yours because a government document says it is. Yeah, it's your land, baby, and no one can take it from you, right? Well, get this - that land used to belong to some people this country doesn't care much about anymore because they got shoved off it by your kind of people. Because their individualism was more important than their rights, dig?
Now, here's the real question for you - what are you gonna do when some ancestor shows up and wants his land back? Oh, you can call on someone like me, sworn to protect the law, but I'm betting you show him your deed in the form of a 30-30 rifle, and when that happens I'm gonna be leaning on your front door. You'll get a government sponsored trial and maybe a government sponsored lawyer. And when it's all over, you'll be adding some numbers to that name of yours and you'll be sitting in a government sponsored cell down in Atmore. You'll get to continue to tell off the world, but it won't be with a keyboard and a mouse - it'll be with a Number 2 pencil on a Big Chief tablet. And after your government paid lawyers exhaust your appeals, you'll finally get to sit on a throne big enough to accomodate your ego, and she's called Yellow Mama.
It's your choice, son.
As it is, I have been conducting an ongoing research since my retirement and many of my long held beliefs on what has been the course of the history of the world have changed. I have come to believe in an ongoing conflict between two separate ideologies/theologies/philosophies (total gestalt of the opposing conflicts. I refer to these two as the Individualists vs the Collectivists.
The Individualists I call the thesis and the Collectivists the antithesis in accordance with the Hegelian construct.
The Individualists grew out of the hunter-gatherer construct and emphasised the developement of the individual - he who was stronger rose to the leadership. But this leadership was tempered by a realisation that leadership could only take the people he led to where they wanted to go. A good example of this type of construct I found in a study of the Great Sioux Nation and the way their cheifs were selected and how they could be removed. The loose pattern of decentralized authority amongst the Lakota Dakota, Ogllalah and others shows the basis of the ideology that becomes a historical reference for the beginnings of the gestalt of concept that resulted in the Constitution of The United States. I also find reports of other similar basic constructs with the decentralized structures of other native american peoples. I consider that the ultimate statement of what the individualist construct is, is contained in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.
The antithesis construct comes with the developement of agriculture and the ability of man to concentrate himself into cities. With this also came a wholesale change in theology as a state church was established as in Babylon and Egypt. The concentration of people into small areas of this caused problems such as crime that gave rise by the pack tighted people to establish a more centralized authority. The need for a medium of exchange gave rise to the advent of the banking system which evolved that came to exercise techniques to concentrate the wealth in the hands of the state. In Babylon, these banks were run by the Priests of the Temple of the Sun God who used clay tablets as their fiat currency. (Though there is a growing body of evidence that the Sumerians first developed these techniques of banking and were copied by the Babylonians) Now, since the state was run by the priesthood and their high priest was the King (whose word was law), then you had all the essentials of the state in one neat package. The emphasis in this construct is the good of the group and freedoms of the individual are often curtailed. This is why I think of the Federal Reserve as a tentacle of the Whore of Babylon. not out of any particular religious conviction, but because I like the deragatory nature of the term.
Now, out of this is supposed to come a systhesis which combines the best of both constructs. As yet, I haven't found it though I continue to search. In the meantime, I'll adhere to the individualistic construct.
|
|
