GILDED DROPPINGS
 

It is a mystery that Liberty, Equality, Justice, and other idolized concepts -as understood and implemented by us- have been worshipped for so long by the same believers who had all the intellectual means to discern their counterfeit value.

On the surface, those concepts look precious, but their substance is cultural waste.

Let's take a few examples at random: 

LIBERTY. Life itself is the best evidence against our idea of liberty.

We cannot choose where, when and from whom we are born, but we pay the consequences. We cannot choose our sex, size, native intelligence, strength, health, appearance, nationality, race or any other genetic characteristics, but we pay for it.

Liberty is just a wishful word, which should be parsed in different and mostly related concepts to be expressed with words we don't have yet.

We also have the necessity of defending many aspects of "liberty" with opposites, like discipline, law enforcement, censorship.

It is very popular, for instance, to demonize censorship far beyond necessity.
Outlawing censoring of the press, as well as permitting its slandering abuses, for instance, is now a double-edged sword.
We don't need a far stretch of imagination to hear children think, "If they can do and show this sex, murder, perversion... on TV, movies, all kinds of publications, why is it so bad if we learn from it? After all, we would do no more than what they do...".
Who is going to discuss it with them with convincing authority?

FREE WILL is now a hot potato for theologians, philosophers, psychologists, politicians, legislators, anthropologists, biologists.

The various theories of "free will" were created, changed, discarded and rehashed before we began to look into genes and genetics....

Our hero cries: "..give me liberty or give me death!", and then he goes on living enslaved to his body, to the handicaps imposed by all his physical, psychological, emotional, intellectual, financial, and other conceivable and inconceivable limitations, in a society with endless legal, religious, moral, folkloristic, social, fashionable limitations and shackles.

Liberty, for that man or his peers, is only a relative concept.
One who is chained to a tree in a 30 square mile forest is "free" if his chains are broken and he is allowed to roam within that forest as he pleases.
I am not "free" if I am allowed to move at will within the American continent, but I am not allowed to leave it when I choose.

Any "liberty" contrived and claimed within the present constraints remains what it is: a contrived claim.

As we make laws to protect liberty, we increase the power of those who limit our liberty while empowered to defend it. The same qualifications that are used to justify their existence are used to wrong or enslave entire categories or populations.

To wit: "white supremacy", "human rights", "feminism", "affirmative action", "social justice"... Only superficial politicians, teachers, demagogues, religious fanatics and their groupies profess to believe in them.

EQUALITY of results is desirable and fascinating at first sight, but ugly, revolting and even lethal if realized.
When equality is implemented, differences cannot be allowed, no matter how we try to qualify both "equality" and "difference" to make them coexist.
That kills freedom.

Ambition, betterment, competition, evolution become crimes, because they destroy equality or are destroyed by equality.
Individuality, personal endeavors, learning, creativity, excellence of any kind, pursuit of knowledge, discovery, invention, originality, artistic expression, achievement, conquest... are all neutered by equality...

Those who qualify "equality" as "equal rights" almost invariably expect "equal results", even if they vehemently deny it.
Enforced equal results, regardless of personal  merits, are inhuman, anti-evolution, anti-liberty and anti-life.

It is true that human failings can cause oppression, suffering and inhuman disparity, but to correct them with equality would be like correcting size difference with stretching on the rack, decapitation or feet amputation.
 

GENERAL WELFARE is similar to giving enough money to everybody, so that everybody becomes financially comfortable. The purpose is to give everyone all the food, clothing, shelter, pleasure, leisure and other thinks he may need or wish.
The resulting lethal stagnation, inflation and general misery, famine and loss of everything desired and necessary, are the proverbial result of equal riches for everybody.

Poverty for a few members of society looks ugly, and often it is, but it is less evil than the nightmares caused by true general welfare.
Just try: you'll find out and neglect to record it...

General leveling welfare causes not only evil results, but it also eliminates the chances to find the social remedy to endemic poverty.
It becomes lobotomy for an entire nation, for it tends to drain the productivity incentive from welfare recipients and from anyone facing challenge. 

Today's welfare proponents say that it is inhuman to remain indifferent to the suffering of the poor. No one can disagree with that, but the meaning of suffering and poverty is relative, ambiguous and ever changing.

A benevolent, all-knowing and loving dictator? History has proven thousands and thousands of times that that is not only the eternal illusion, but that it has always becomes worse than what it was supposed to remedy...

"But with today's means and discoveries..." See? eternal illusion...

Many, if not most, today's American poor, for instance, would have been considered virtually well-to-do a century or two ago.
They would not be regarded as poor in most Third-World countries now.
That is, a century ago in USA, or nowadays in the Third World, most of today's American poor would have caused indignation or some form of censure if they asked for welfare as we practice it now.

On the other hand, if we succeeded in distributing the wealth in the perfect way, the normal course of events and human interactions would create a new hierarchy of values, merits and availabilities, appreciation of the most wanted objects, positions and possibilities, according to the abilities, ambition and diligence of each individual...

These and many other factors would inevitably position all members of our ideal society on each rung of the social and economic ladder.

At the end, those on the lowest rungs would be classified as poor, the lowest-level people in relation to everybody else, even if each of them possessed a house, a yacht, 2 cars, computers, all the desired money, appliances and more.
The very fact that everyone else owned more would make these wealthy "unfortunates" the insatiable pariahs of their society. 

Soon enough, the number of these new poor would become large enough to attract politicians into seeking their votes by first stirring up unbearable malcontent, then promising to help them, the "working people" (as if others and their employers did not work at all), to obtain justice.

Thus: back to the lowest, after reaching the highest.
History proves it abundantly, but many politicians don't want to be confused by the evidence.
On a larger scale, think of the countless cases of a king owning a smaller kingdom feeling horribly disadvantaged against other kings with larger kingdoms... War, kill, kill, and everything worsens for most, to the miserable advantage of a few wretched winners, who end up unhappier than before.

All the above is almost obvious, but we have not yet found other words to designate "liberty", "justice", "equality" in the very relative and limited sense in which we should use them.

Even in this book, we keep mentioning those crippled concepts with the conventional words, as the only available way to communicate, because we still have to define the proper concepts and their values.

The conventional perspective makes the above debunked terms (and their politicized meanings) perfectly valid and honorable, no matter how corrupted.
Regardless of what we say to the official pundits and their groupies, the truth doesn't come through if the fiction has more influential or louder voices.

The hermit or yogi shows a superior, if daunting, existentialistic wisdom-beyond-wisdom by settling in a cave and developing elimination of the desires and needs that make all the other mortals incurably unhappy for not reaching the unreachable happiness.
 

Please click here to send a comment or suggestion  

030504

Back to Main Page