Tea Partiers Epitomize the Tension Between the Individual and the State
Communitarianism posits the notion that all rights and privileges flow from the community at large and take precedence over individual rights. Taken in small doses, communitarianism can be a necessary adjunct to modern governance in that it promotes public-private partnerships that are much preferred to the classical social democratic top-down solutions offered to address society’s problems.
But the modern Democratic Party is not interested in small doses of anything. They appear to have adopted quite a bit of communitarian philosophy in attempting to “remake America” by declaring all sorts of “positive rights” that citizens are due as members of the community.
The tension between the Constitution’s clear, unambiguous celebration and protection of individual rights and the practical need for some form of communitarian ideology to which government aspires has become painful in the early 21st century. Schemes to promote “fairness” and “equality” are most susceptible to this impulse, but lately, as with national health care, we see the ugly facade of “positive rights” rearing up to overshadow the Constitution’s conservation of the individual’s primacy in American society.
Tea partiers are raising questions about the intent of the Constitution. Was it really supposed to guarantee someone’s access to health insurance? Not guaranteed health care, which may be a different kettle of fish entirely, but using government to mandate that the individual be forced to purchase a specific product for the betterment of the community? How does one square that requirement with the Constitution’s protection of individual rights? Why should the rights of the community — if indeed this is the case — trump an individual’s right to choose otherwise?
The clash of interests represented by the modern welfare state and the tea party may not be new, but it has entered a new level of intensity. It may rightly be asked why that opposition to this expansion of the welfare state has become so organized and passionate now. It’s not as if Republicans haven’t contributed to the growth of government, so where were the tea parties when George Bush was passing his massive Medicare drug benefit or had his Department of Education stick their noses in our school systems by creating No Child Left Behind?
National health insurance reform and the runaway deficit have clearly become a tipping point for the tea party movement. It is also clear that while excessive spending and the health care takeover have been the catalysts for protest, the underlying motivation for the movement is the belief that the Constitution has been stretched, mutilated, mangled, and shamelessly used to justify granting the federal government power it was never intended to have — power it has acquired to the detriment of individual rights.
There can be no absolutist position on personal liberty, just as there is no communitarian justification for fashioning a society where equality of outcomes is guaranteed by the state. For in the end, the tension between the rights of the individual and the needs of the community is a healthy manifestation of an evolving society. What makes the tea party movement so significant is that for the first time in a very long time, the supporters of individual liberty not only have organized effectively to make their voices heard, but actually have a strong case to make regarding the primacy of the individual over the state as it relates to the current agenda of the Democratic majority.
The president and his party are venturing a bridge too far in this ancient war between the forces of constitutionally limited government and the communitarians who seek to use government to further their altruistic impulses. And the tea party movement, by shining the light of constitutional intent and first principles on the communitarians’ designs, have rekindled an interest in the meaning and purpose of our founding document with ordinary Americans.
They may not succeed in actually shrinking the size of government. But the tea party movement has put the communitarians on notice that from here on out, they better have stronger arguments to make for their concepts of redistributionism and “social justice” than they showed in ramming through national health care.
Whether through organised secret efforts such as those used by the FBI and CIA, or through the cruder manipulations of (still intel linked) marketeers, the usual downfall of true popular uprisings in the modern civilised world is to be coopted by some strain of the enemy, through the failure of the movement to understand that left and right are two glove puppets used by the same puppeteer. I hope and pray sincerely that the Tea Party Movement sees through the attempts of right and left, red and blue, to re-enslave them. Only through true independence will the multitude of ills the Tea Party has arisen to attack be truly defeated.
So what if the whole of Congress is a sea of independents? A two party system is a control system, not a political system. A distraction. The curtain behind which the power elite hides.
People in the Soviet Union (and other communist states) had “social justice” whether they wanted it or not… look how much fun that was.
Mr. Moran, you are making a crucial mistake. You say:
There can be no absolutist position on personal liberty . . .
But the issue of “personal liberty” is a thoroughly “absolutist” issue, about which there is no possible “moderate” or compromise position — and here is why: Man is either born free — or he is not.
He either has the right to his own life — which means that his life belongs to him, not to the state, not to “society” and not to anyone else — or he does not.
He either has the right to liberty — which means the right to freedom of action, the right to engage in all the productive and self-supporting actions necessary to sustain and enjoy his life, a freedom of action limited only by the fact that he may not infringe this same right in others — or he does not.
He either has the right to property — which means, the right to exclusive use and disposal of any property that he creates or earns working for another man — or he does not.
He either has the right to live for his own sake — which means, the right to the pursuit of his own happiness, by means of his own honest effort, having no power to force others to sacrifice for his sake, and no others having the power to force him to sacrifice for theirs — or he does not.
The Founders of this country held to the former of these two possible positions — that all men are created equal and posses an absolute, unalienable set of rights that no one may violate under any conditions. The leftists/”progressive” anti-capitalists movement that is the heart of the modern Democratic party holds firmly to the second part — and intends to implement it all the way to its root.
Denying that man is born free, these “progressives” assert instead that all men are born into bondage — into bondage to whatever “needs” the “needy” can convince government should be satisfied by confiscating at gun-point the earnings of the “less needy” –bondage to “needs” which are held to trump any rights, including property rights — bondage man can only escape, or ameliorate, by becoming an object of charity himself, that is, by figuring out a way to horn in on the racket and collect some of those payments himself.
And all these enemies of freedom need is for you to grant the legitimacy of their position by agreeing that there “is no absolutist position on personal liberty…”. All they want is your concession that yes, under some conditions, the state may limit your freedom for its own purposes.
The proper, absolutist position on personal liberty is this: no man may ever initiate, that is, start the use of physical force (or threat thereof) against another man. The proper function of government — the agency which holds a monopoly on the use of physical force in a given geographic area — is to insure that force is only used in retaliation against those who have initiated its use, i.e. against criminals who violate the rights of others by initiating force against them.
But when you propose to compromise on this — even just a little — you are sentencing yourself and the rest of us to slow death by a thousand cuts. Once you concede the principle that the “needs” of some may justify the initiation of force against others, you are doomed. For there is no end to the “needs” that can be dreamed up by “the needy” and their champions.
Republicans have always been willing to “compromise” on this issue. And look where it has gotten us. And as a result of decades of such “compromises”, a child born today faces:
– a lifetime of paying for public schools to educate the children of “the needy”
– a lifetime of paying for the school lunches of those “children of the needy“
– a lifetime of paying for food stamps to feed “the needy”
– a lifetime of paying for public housing to shelter “the needy”
– a lifetime of paying for public transportation for moving “the needy”
– a lifetime of paying for the doctor bills of “the needy”, including paying for “the needy” to bear still more children that must be educated, fed and housed
– a lifetime of paying for the drugs and medicines of “the needy”
– a lifetime of paying for the retirement of “the needy”.
The child even faces:
– a lifetime of paying for the “needs” of such “needy” parties as millionaire farmers who “need” farm aid
– a lifetime of paying for the bail-out “needs” of wealthy businessmen who foolishly bring their businesses to the brink of financial collapse
– a lifetime of paying for the subsidies going to “needy” ethanol producers
– a lifetime of paying for the subsidies going to “needy” “green energy” producers to build windmills, solar panels and “alternative technology vehicles”
– a lifetime of paying for foreign aid to “needy” people starving all over the globe, including in places where they scream their hatred for Americans on a daily basis
– a lifetime of paying for cops to arrest people who “need” to be protected from their destructive desires to use drugs or engage in prostitution
– a lifetime of paying for the special “needs“ of those who foolishly choose to live below sea level in the path of hurricanes
– a lifetime of paying for the “needy“ to take out loans they cannot repay.
Do you not see where your concessions to this worship of “need” leads? It leads to our destruction — to economic ruin and chaos.
Yes, we are told the lie that some of these taxes are going to pay for our own future healthcare and retirement — but the fact is that today’s Medicare and Social Security taxes are not buying some future insurance policy for each of us, they are simply paying the medical and retirement expenses of today‘s elderly.
And yes, it is true that the great majority of those presently receiving both Medicare and Social Security paid taxes into the system and were thus themselves victimized by “the needy” that existed during their working lives.
And yes, it is also true that government’s massive interventions in the economy, coupled with its relentless inflating of our currency, has driven up the cost of living and driven many more Americans into the category of “the needy”.
But none of this justifies a further expansion of the welfare state — rather, it simply proves that the size and scope of the welfare state cannot be confined or limited in any way — and that it is destined to bankrupt us. There is simply no practical limit to the “needs“ that can be dreamed up by “the needy“ and by politicians seeking to expand their power under the guise of “helping the needy”.
The welfare state is, in fact, a monstrously unjust institution. Nothing on earth justifies the disgusting notion that every child is born a slave to whatever “needs” the people around him may claim. Bequeathing a monstrosity like the welfare state to future generations of innocent children is a moral obscenity.
It must be stopped — and rolled back. And that can only happen when Americans learn to assert their right to their own lives — and their right to live for their own sakes — regardless of whatever “needs” the parasites around them may wave in their faces.
Michael Smith,
Your comments are a perfect summary! Thorough and concise. To the point and well thought out.
Thank You!
Michael:
Well said. Do you know anyone who understands the past and present and can explain the inevitible disaster that looms ahead for the country absent a quick and decisive course correction than Doctor Victor Davis Hanson?
A draft movement for his presidency in 2012 is overdue. Don’t wait for the likes of BILL O’REILLY AT fOX NEWS to decide who the Kabuki Dancers will be. Huckleberry, Thompson, McCain, and many other professional political dividers are at the ready waiting to perform.
It’s time the divide and conquor game played by our ruling political class and phoney news outlets hits the wall of failure in 2012. No more echo’s without a choice ala John McCain.
November 2010 and 2012 are indeed the last best hope for freedom to endure anywhere on the face of the earth.
Doctor Victor Davis Hanson may be one who could make it happen if his eloqent voice could be heard by We The People.
May a strong wind blow from Selma California to Washinton DC starting today.
Excellent work, Mr. Smith. You pass this test.
Bravo! Michael Smith, you rawk!
When Mr. Smith says, “we are told the lie that some of these taxes are going to pay for our own future healthcare ” he gets his only miss of the post. The fact that we are forced to do things “good for us” is the worst heart and sould of this tyranny. Even if all our money went to pay for our future “needs” it would be just as wrong because the true slavery is not financial but a slavery to an other’s decision-making. A free person is free to make mistakes, to go broke, to choose to take a great risk and perhaps die because of that risk. The worst evil of this regime in America is that it takes away not just our money, but our power to decide for ourselves…even to our own detriment.
“Peoples” bill of rights 2010:
The Tea Party, New freedom Party, or whatever you name it party must define a set of principles and constitutional amendments that define it.
Constitutional amendments/principles outline:
1) If you are on the “government dole”; you can not vote until one full election cycle after you are off the dole.
2) Islime is primarily a hostile subversive political movement whose Mosques should be viewed as terrorist recruitment centers and traitorous entities; and should be closed. No burqa or similar female garment should be legal since it should be presumed that women are forced to wear them and say they like it under threat of death: honor killing.
3) No war is legal, and no American can be forced to go or remain in an battle zone, unless the war strategy is “unmercifully crush all areas accommodating the enemy until unconditional surrender”; any political correctness, leniency, or less than crushing assault by the leaders in executing a war should be a criminal offence and any recognized group should be able to go to court to guarantee we are not reading rights to terrorists on the battle field.
4) No prisoner of war, or enemy combatant, has any constitutional rights.
5) The federal government can only be funded by a progressive national sales tax; withholding tax is from now on unconstitutional. The higher the luxury, the higher the tax. Grocery store purchased meat, fruit, vegetables, prescription drugs et al exempt.
6) No former member (or spouse) of the executive or legislative branch may ever represent a foreign government directly or indirectly.
7) Until 2060 or 50 years, no former employees/owners of: banks, weapons manufacturer, Wall Street, drug companies may run for congress or president.
9) Having won the war on racism; affirmative action in any form is illegal.
10) Freedom of speech is to be protected; The right to criticize Islime ( other religions or seculars et al) is absolute and can not be diluted by any political correctness.
11) The right of adult non –felons to own guns is absolute. (violent misdemeanors excluded from gun ownership)
12) The federal government can not enforce by any means unfunded mandates on the states, and any provision of law that attempts to create or cause to exist an unfunded mandate, now or in the future, is not enforceable; The federal government can not blackmail states by threatening to withhold funds to obtain compliance.
13) The USA is to use all natural resources to become energy independent. No oil from the mid-east can be imported after 2018. No “environmental tax” (cap and trade scam) can be added to energy cost; coal is to be used and the EPA can not regulate coal beyond 2005 standards.
14) The states have the final say on which of their states’ natural resources can be developed, no federal designation of any kind can prevent a state from exploiting its natural resources as it sees fit, including offshore.
15) Journalist appearing on TV/cable “news” (public airwaves) must be licensed and certified in the fields they cover. Mis-representing the facts is a lose your license offence which effectively means “the hook”! No licence needed for internet…
16) The Supreme Court must investigate (and make completely public all findings) persons running for president to certify their Constitutional eligibility. Two no votes out of nine is enough to disqualify; any doubt, the answer is no. If they are wrong impeach them.
17) The USA is one nation under God with liberty and justice for all its law abiding citizens. |Marriage is between a man and a woman. There are gay and lesbians that should be treated with respect by citizens and laws; That does not mean you “must” or should or should not: respect their homosexuality.
18) The USA is not a secular socialist society. The USA is a free market God fearing country; To each according to his earnings from each according to the sales tax on his purchases…
19) The Justice system can not “blackmail” people to testify against others.
20) All civil cases are automatic counter suits against the plaintiff. Juries may find against, and assess damages from, the plaintiff and plaintiff attorney in any and all civil cases.
I’d like “Canned Answers” for 50 please Alex.
“What is Spam?”
Just look in the mirror Mr Colon!
You really know how to make friends, don’t you.
It wouldn’t be a problem, if even a few of his canned answers were worth the disk space they take up.
Good summation, some modification may be necessary but this is an excellent start to a political platform. I might add that as a doc with 40 years in the field, I see no sense in the DEA and our restriction to purchase medications for “our” health.
one or two suggestions were good, a couple more were ok, the rest would take us straight into a world where govt controls all. As someone else pointed out, can you imagine if the current adminstration had the power to decide who Fox news could have as their reporters?
You lost me, completely and utterly, at “Islime”.
After Mr. Smith’s wonderful summation, your drivel was particularly depressing.
I wish I could agree with you on this one. But remember that China thought it worth going to war to stop Britain from selling opium to its sons. Maybe they were wrong, but I think there must have been a good reason. Perhaps if we were the society we should be, with ambition and industry the prevailing virtues, it would not matter. But we are not that society, or there would be no reason for such laws.
We know that the Taliban justify selling heroin on the grounds that it leads to the decay of their enemies. They do not sell pornography on these grounds, so the decay in question is not just what they consider moral decay; it must be something that they desire: a weakening of a society, its economy, and its willingness to resist corruption and subversion.
Also note that E. E. Smith’s First Lensman depicts drug-running as an organized attempt to destroy a society from within. (Philosophically, Smith and his story are much closer to H. G. Wells than to Thomas Jefferson or James Madison)
Rick Moran writes,
“There are votes for the Democrats among those people if they were able to frame tea party issues in a way that would appeal to moderate and conservative independents who are attracted to the tea parties due to their fiscal conservatism, but repelled by some of the antics on the fringes of the movement.”
. . . and I am moved to comment briefly as follows.
Speaking just for me (of course), I for one will ^never^ vote for a Democrat. Why? For decades now, Democrats — and I’m not talking just of the run-of-the-mill left-leaning everyman (or -woman) who believes in collectivist answers to just about anything — but genuinely prominent Democrats, party leaders, have ^repeatedly^ told me I’m greedy, racist, and war-mongering; ignorant, easily led, bitter, clinging to Bible and guns, you know the routine.
Democrats, from the guy across the street to Pelosi and Reid, and of course to that Arrogant One in the White House, have continued, on a daily basis, to insult my very ^integrity^ (as well as my intelligence), sometimes blandly, sometimes very rudely.
There is ^no^ way in heaven above or in hell beneath, that I will ever vote for any one of these people. This is ^not^ an issue of being “repelled by some of the antics on the fringes of the movement,” Mr. Moran, but of being repelled, nauseated, and routinely insulted by the main spokespersons and leaders of the party — repeatedly and continuously, for years, yea ^decades^ now.
M J R
I did not notice any real problems at most of the rallies covered by the media, which is good for the T-Party organizers and the vast majority of participants. Although, one supporter told an interviewer that they were opposed to all government programs and want them all abolished now. But when asked if they recieved social security money the respondant said “Yes, but that is not a government program”. That is precisely where the problem with the t-party starts and ends because there are so many misconceptions that it is tough to discover what it is they are really upset about and what their solutions are. However, their continued efforts to clarify their positions and define their cause will, over time, help their cause to be sure. Now, where did I put that new flag I bought yesterday? Good Luck to them !
I wonder if the comment that SS is not a government program comes from the fact that the money was taken from us all our working lives, and is ours.
The same argument can be made for every penny of tax money ever taken from each individual.
Actually, NO. Social Security, unlike say farm subsidies, was presented as an INSURANCE POLICY: you pay the premium, and collect the benefits when you meet the conditions. The fact that the policy issuer turned around and looted the insurance fund doesn’t change the fundamental nature of the contract.
The fact that people believed a lie, does not turn a govt program into a contract.
SS is no different from any other program/tax the govt has generated.
Additionally, the fact that people were foolish enough to believe this lie, is not grounds to force future generations to fund the fulfillment of that lie.
You have it exactly backwards, sir.
The fact that someone — say, Bernie Madoff — sold you what he said was an “insurance contract” does not alter the fact that it was a confiscation device, a.k.a. “Scam”, “Ponzi scheme”, all along.
so where were the tea parties when George Bush was passing his massive Medicare drug benefit or had his Department of Education stick their noses in our school systems by creating No Child Left Behind?
—
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Does the author not remember the protests against both of these bills? No there weren’t rallies by the hundreds, but there were protests. Then again, neither of these bills held a candle to either porkulus or health care deforem in terms of reach or money spent.
I agree that GWB and the Phil Gramm spent like it was going out of style. I remember when some Senator added a pork project for the “Bridge to Nowhere”. The condemnations flew from the media. But when there were 3,000 bridges to nowhere in the Stimulus legislation it was hailed as a savior for the economy by that same medial. Now we look back and say, “What jobs?” The Health Care legislation is loaded with pet projects (pork) and layers of expanded government to take care of us. This Congress is far worse than any through history and we need to get back to reduced government before there are no more private sector jobs left.
> so where were the tea parties when George Bush was passing his massive Medicare drug benefit or had his Department of Education stick their noses in our school systems by creating No Child Left Behind?
They were starting to complain.
Note that there is a difference between $100B deficits (the last Repub Congress) and >$1T deficits as far as the eye can see (Obama’s own projections). (The largest Bush deficit was $600B at the peak of the war spending and they managed to drive it down.)
Or, maybe they were wrong then and have learned since.
A better question would be what about the folks who complained about the Bush deficits but are happy with the much larger Obama deficits.
MarkTheGreat, we were around (some of us), but we hadn’t quite organized ourselves (nor were there as many of us). I was making phone calls, sending e-mails, writing letters. I know I was not alone. I had no organization to go to at the time, but I’ve been active regarding government spending since ’92 (I was 21 at the time). I think enough people got fed up and got together that the Tea Party was born. No denial here that both sides have spent us into oblivion and gone outside the boundaries of the Constitution. It took them about 100 years to get us this far (especially the last 47), so it is going to take a while to get us back. I just pray we can.
Can’t we all just get along ?
NO.
The US has had so much discretionary income, for so long,
that the majority does not remember having to make hard choices in Hard Times.
The US is bankrupt, now, and will have great difficulty paying its creditors
what is owed them, now; It is a wish fulfillment fantasy to think that the US
will be able to pay for the promises to pensioners, let alone the outrageous
promises of end-of-life Health Care it has made to the Boomers.
For those of limited imagination, watch what is happening to Greece, now,
what will happen to other EU countries soon, and what _will_ happen here,
if the fiscal conservatism at the heart of the Tea Party movement is not
adopted as Rule Zero of US economic policy.
Mr. Moran,” ain’t no such aminal” as “forced altruism”. But we know what you mean.
Scripturally, all we do must be done in Love; by choice; not constraint.
Moran is a dear name to me. A coach, Ed Moran, taught us how to block and tackle in high school. And how to be tough when necessary. A noble man.
The writer reveals the source of his underlying confusion when he refers to “the first principle of our founding: the individual’s sacrosanct position in the constitutional hierarchy.” This formulation of the basis of American freedom quite easily slips into simple narcissism, with all the attendant ills that entails.
What the Founders put at the center of our freedom as citizens was the God-given gift of Free Will. That is very different than the “individual’s sacrosanct position in the constitutional hierarchy” — and philosophically, politically and otherwise it points in much more profound directions than the author unfolds in this article.
What do you call it when the state becomes the extension of the will of a party? That, to me is the big issue. The US government has become the means of executing the political agenda of the left, regardless if 50% or more of the country has no interest in that agenda or is completely opposed to it.
That has to stop, in fact we need to burn the bridges that made it possible in the first place.
The only way to do that is to overturn the Obama agenda, then set out on a single minded program of limiting the power and scope of the federal government. We need a balanced budget amendment and a re-write of the commerce clause.
One of our biggest problems is that there are way to many of people on the conservative side of the spectrum who don’t want govt reduced in power and scope. Instead they want to be the ones who use govt to force others to live by their standards.
I didn’t get involved in this movement merely to change masters.
“there is no absolutist position on personal liberty…”. All they want is your concession that yes, under some conditions, the state may limit your freedom for its own purposes…
Oh but there can, and indeed SHOULD BE, some limits on ABSOLUTE personal liberty. I am a homeowner in a quiet, upscale neighborhood, with a wife and small childen. I worked VERY hard all my life, to put more than 40% down (and thereby have a controlable mortgage) on a home in a great area with good schools BEFORE deciding to have children.
My neighbor is a nere-do-well 64 year old man with a propensity for 20 year old inner city prostitutes. He “squats” (without even paying rent) in the former home of his 90 year old Mother, who is now in a nursing home.
While he continues to shack up with, and produces the occasional “love child” with a variety of these women, she/they (and the much Younger Bucks that arrive while sugar-daddy is at work during the day) drink to excess, smoke crack, shoot heroin, and entertains a steady stream of additional male vistitors with out of state license plates (we live in a rural suburb of a nearby city across the state line), which to the casual observers, looks rather like prostitution, the proceeds which no doubt avail them the cash needed to support the lifestyle of “absolute freedom” they so enjoy.
They ocassionally end up on my lawn, naked, smeared in vomit and feces, raging incoherently in apparent psycotic reactions to drugs, which is quite a wonderful experience for MY children to have, I suppose. They often bang on our door at late hours asking for “help” during their many “domestic” incidents that our 4 person police department never seems to have the capacity to respond to.
They often approach us, in a sudden and startlingly unexpected ways, (turn around and they are well within your personal space) asking for money, or for information on finding a taxi that would be willing to make the trip out to “the burbs” to bring them to “the city”.
We have completely unattended children, even toddlers in soiled diapers, regularly wandering the sidewalk in front of my house, in between parked cars, and among my garage and out buildings where sharp implements like saws and shovels, and flamable things like gasoline cans for my mower are stored.
These “absolute freedom” loving people make OUR life an absolute living hell, with the occasional “john” mistaking my wife for one of “the girls” and propositioning her while she tends our (always trodden over) garden. My children are afraid to play outside, where they can regularly hear the yelling, cursing, and breaking glass that usually occurs when Sugar-daddy comes home and gets indignant about the infidelities his young princess.
All of their destructive activities that detrimentally effect our quality of life are Libertairian dreams: free housing, free land use, unrestricted drug and alcohol availability and consumption, unfettered sexual behavior, including legalized prostitution, the list is endless.
What I expect, in general, from an effective representative government, is indeed SOME sort of restrictions on ABSOLUTE personal freedom, such as….
What time of day and night you are allowed to scream obsenities.
Enforcement of illegal drugs sales AND usage, as there is NO GOOD that arises from the glamorization and acceptence of it by Liberal Hipsters. The negative costs to others in allowing/condoning the use currently illeagal drugs is disproportionally high, and completely unacceptable, period. I do NOT want the Government tacitly undermining me with my children, by telling them its LEGAL to buy, sell, and shoot drugs, and your Dad is just a SQUARE.
Emforcement of reasonable “quality of life” crimes like open prostitution, public drunkeness, disorderly persons, trespassing and the like.
ABSOLUTE FREEDOM is a great, noble concept….
Untill you live next door to, and pay YOUR own personal Quality Of Life price, for its free-loading sister
ABSOLUTELY IRRESPONSIBLE
The Root,
Yikes.
I, too, lived in a similar situation. My solution? Call the cops at every possible opportunity. Sure, they get mad at you. Courteously remind them that enforcing public laws is what you count on them for.
No luck with the cops? Attend a city council meeting and lay the whole situation out. Make it clear you will attend every city council meeting and bring the same thing up. (It also helps if you get another neighbor to go along with you. Not easy, I know.)
Letters to the editor of the local dead tree are a necessity.
No love from the city council? County supervisors. House rep.
The common denominator is the squeaky wheel, which, admittedly, is a lot of work. But it works. My nasty neighbor caved, finally, and moved.
The fundamental at work here is precisely what Mr. Moran posits: Individual responsibility is the twin of individual liberty. And it’s up to us — NOT “the state.”
To Mr. Moran: Excellent summation of the principles in conflict. I plan to save this essay for future reference.
Here’s an example of the type of person I cited to baal.
Your concept of “absolute liberty” liberty is a Kantian straw man, advocated by libertines (who want it) and the enemies of liberty, who seek to misrepresent it in order to justify their depredations.
Liberty is not “unlimited” in that sense, such that it needs to be “balanced” by the state.
Liberty is a self-limiting concept; its boundaries are defined not by society or conventions thereof, but by its own internal logic, to wit: if you claim individual rights for yourself, on the grounds of the facts of your human nature (what, in better days, were known as natural rights), you must logically grant the same rights to every other individual.
The sphere of your freedom of action is defined by the same sphere belonging to others.
Or, as the old libertarian truism goes: Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.
Aux armes, citoyens !
Formez vos bataillons !
Marchons ! marchons !
Qu’un sang impur
Abreuve nos sillons !
Tremblez, tyrans et vous perfides,
L’opprobre de tous les partis,
Tremblez ! vos projets parricides
Vont enfin recevoir leurs prix ! (bis)
Tout est soldat pour vous combattre,
S’ils tombent, nos jeunes heros,
La terre en produit de nouveaux,
Contre vous tout prets ? se battre !
Aux armes, citoyens !
Formez vos bataillons !
Marchons ! marchons !
Qu’un sang impur
Abreuve nos sillons !
Liberte, Liberte cherie!
This an answer to usurper B.Husain OBAMA tyrant!
To “The Root ’83″: If you think the stories you cite are examples of “absolute personal liberty,” then you don’t understand the meaning of the term. The pepetrators you mention are violating YOUR liberty in countless ways. Contrary to the position of some libertarians, absolute liberty does not mean the right to freely indulge your whims. Read Ayn Rand for a coherent view of liberty that you won’t get from your typical libertarian (or from the author of this article).
First I have never been to a Tea Party rally. That said I think the Tea Party points are valid.
1. Taxes: I do not think 47 % of the people that file tax return, but get all of their money back are NOT payers. They are getting a free ride on the backs of the people that pay taxes and the government keeps the money.
WE need to pay taxes to support the nation defense, and to pay for the 18 enumerated powers given to the Federal Government. NOT one damn penny more.
I OWE no one health care. This is not a Constitutional guarantee it is redistribution of wealth. The “Common Good” that some people spew means everyone benefits not just the lame, lazy, druggies or bums benefit. If one person pays and another benefits that is redistribution of wealth(theft).
Illegal aliens are NOT undocumented workers they are criminals. So are the people that hide, help or employ these criminals. You could also call these criminals the new slaves.
Charity should come from churches, civic organizations, and individuals.
I demand the freedom to work and keep my money and not support some second or third generation slacker.
If someone wants to pay ore taxes go ahead, the government takes donations. Warren Buffett thinks he should pay more taxes he can, just restructure his income to wages from capital gains. I don’t see anyone stopping him. Don’t want to do this then STFU Mr. Buffett! By the way don’t you have trusts set up for you children that avoid estate taxes?? Shame, Shame!
I want more freedom from the overpowering, over taxing, under performing thieves in Congress.
Don’t like my opinions? I really don’t give a SH***.
I wish all that the 47% who don’t pay taxes merely got all of their money back. Thanks to refundable tax credits, most of them get back way more than they paid in the first place.
Mr. Moran explains the discontent among Tea Partiers with this: “but repelled by some of the antics on the fringes of the movement.”
Excuse me, but there’s nothing “fringe” when the Federales expanded the state with Medicare Part D & No-child-left behind under George W Bush. There’s nothing in the “fringe” of John McCain for immigration amnesty. There’s nothing “fringe” in the Massachusetts implementation of proto-ObamaCare under Mitt Romney.
These guys were not back-benchers, they are either POTUS, GOP nominee-for-POTUS or front-runner for 2012, respectively.
It’s the conservatism stupid. (Or lack thereof.)
Dana
I’ve read everything from A.R. to Zodinski, its all the same. It examines the role of responsible “reasonable” people and their needs/demands against the government.
They never cover the big problem which is:
No singe set of rules can cover all circumstances.
Sometimes there must be JUDGEMENT, and actions “need” to occur to produce a effect, which is “justice”.
These are squishy terms, as most people generally agree on what is “just” but can never agree on a set of rules (comunist, libertairian, republican etc.) that will control the dirtbags without eventually stepping on the toes of the non-dirtbags.
My personal belief is the Golden rule, treat others as you would would like to be treated, but its difficult to ENFORCE when it isnt reciprocated.
The paradox of civilization from time imortal
Tea partiers don’t need a document, declaration or manifesto.
We have the Constitution and it’s time to start reminding everyone and I mean everyone that they have it too.
Perhaps Mr. Moran forgets the Porkbusters concept? How about organizing people to comb through legislation looking for questionable parts of it and collaborating online with others to do that? There was resistance to NCLB and Medicare D: Jerry Pournelle has been pointing out for decades that the amount we spend on education goes up far beyond the rate of inflation, and yet reading comprhension levels remain flat from 1958 when Poor Johnny couldn’t read and Medicare D had individuals pointing out the way this was not a ‘fix’ to the system, but only adjusting its timeline to be out of cash by a few years and run deeply in the red.
Mind you, up to 2006 things were going pretty well in the economy, and the perilous underpinnings to it were not being told properly by any but a rare few who went up to the Hill to tell folks the numbers didn’t add up… and the Republicans who should have been worried about that did nothing. The Democrats following them after ’06 did nothing and ratcheted up the rate of spending until the inflated bubble burst in the housing and banking sectors. Bubbles fostered by legislation going back into the 1970′s starting with loan securitization by GNMA in 1970, which would be the turning point against traditional banking and home loan models.
Yes, Mr. Moran, a number of people did not notice that SSA was headed into the red by 2050… then 2030… then 2020… then 2017… then… oops. Too bad about well known demographic trends known about in the ’80s under Reagan, huh?
Tough about Medicare before Part D and after it… it appears not to have set back the judgment day of the program.
That doesn’t even scratch the parts of government that have had no impact or negative impacts on their missions: Dept. of Ag handing money out to farmers in N. Dakota that live in Florida and paying them not to farm, how about that ever able Education Department unable to shift the reading rate for children one iota since 1980, and that Dept. of Energy that hasn’t figured out a solution to any energy problem while going through a couple of major energy crises since 1970. Don’t mind the Fed. getting the lending practices wrong in the ’20s and ’90s-’00s, doing the exact wrong thing on rates and accptable practices… via regulations!
But then ratchet Republicans have been unable to ratchet back government programs and spending since Coolidge.
And if you think there are ‘communitarian rights’ that create ‘rights’ then we must ask wherefrom these ‘rights’ actually derive. Because we, as individuals, are endowed with all rights and liberties, positive and negative and the purpose of community is our safety from those wishing ill upon it as individuals. For that we allow the use of our negative liberties to restrain individuals for our protection and we create society and government to utilize those rights and liberties we agree not to use ourselves so that they may be used in common and kept under close scrutiny by doing so. No ‘positive’ rights can be created from those negative liberties: their only positive value is in protection of this common thing we make called society. To think otherwise is to then invest this creationn with the ability to create… and soon you get to say that all rights come from the State and none are born in you and you are born a slave, not a free man. Now we must pay from birth for health care… and that is not the definition of freedom but that of indentured servitude to the State.
We are in this predicament soley because politicians will say anything and do anything to get re-elected. Want to end this, put in term limits. One term and your out. The political establishment is about as incestuous as one could dream of. When they get voted out, they get cushy jobs in government or the lobby circus. Hell, we have families that seem to think they have dynastic rights to political office. Think Kennedy and Biden. What did the obama campaign spend? 700 million? Do you think someone would spend that amount of money for a job that pays 250K a year? They have spent 93 trillion dollars (Our Debt) to fix problems they say we have. Thats over 300K for every man,woman and child in america. The end result, not a single problem has been fixed and they keep coming back to us for more. Well, there’s nothing left to give.
Unfortunately, this eloquent and well written review of the Tea Party movement would be lost on the overwhelming majority of Americans even if they were forced to read it. So few are truly literate anymore, conversant in the basic principles of constitutional government, and aware enough to be moved to active resistance. Of those, still fewer are actually pro-constitution and individual liberty. Alas, the time for addressing this and reversing the course of the U.S. has long since passed. I fear that there is no peaceful or even, god forbid, violent means of reversing the course now. We who love liberty and the principles on which this nation was founded are simply outnumbered and out gunned. We are beyond the tipping point by at least a few decades. Of course I will go to the ballot box this fall and support the least reprehensible candidates from the usual grab bag of insincere professional politicians, but I have lost all hope of real change this side of a post-apocalyptic rebirth. We just have variations in the rate of decay, nothing more. I just wish there were somewhere better to go, and I would already be packing. We are now witnessing the final spasms of individual liberty and freedom in the world, which are, from a historical perspective, aberrations in the history of mankind.
Democrats have gone beyond solutions based on utilitarian principles and have adopted a “positive rights” philosophy that is inimical to individual liberty.
There are no such thing as “positive” rights. Those are merely duties being sold to us as rights, in much the same intellectually corrupt fashion that socialism is being sold to us as “liberalism”.
Not quite- there is a positive right to justice. A victim has a right to redress and recompense in court, and the accused offender has a right to be judged by a jury of his peers.
While I have great sympathy for Michael Smith’s comment, I believe he is a tad off base when he condemns this statement of Moran’s. There are many limitations to our absolute freedom and liberty, and we have for the most part willingly accepted these limitations: 1) civil or positive law; 2)community codes of behavior in many of our areas of involvement; 3) religious or moral codes of behavior; 4)Duties and responsibilities to the State in emergencies such as war; and, 5) culture, custom and national traditions.
The key here is “willing acceptance”, which is part and parcel of our basic obligations as citizens in America. However, when a majority of citizens do not willingly accept a law and believe it is unconstitutional, and believe that our elected representatives have acted in bad faith in passing such a law, we have the further obligation to challenge that law with every legal means available to us.
I just do not buy this notion of “altruistic impulses”. What the Tea Partiers are trying to fight is the unchecked expansion of coercive, oppressive government. Those who espouse this unchecked expansion have one thing in mind – power. Let’s stop projecting good intentions upon these people. Their policies only lead to poverty, squalor, chaos and dependency (a.k.a. helplessness). Check out our inner cities for proof. They have been the laboratories of the left for over a century and all are on the brink of failure, socially and economically.
The tea party members are what used to be called the “silent majority” back in the seventies and eighties. The difference now is that they are so quiet anymore.
They are the “engines” of the economy and don’t like being shut down by a semi-idiot, angry, vindictive President.
This will only get more stressful, especially if the left steals the close elections in November, and they will.
http://truthandcommonsense.com/2010/03/29/stealing-the-election-democrats-in-ohio-tune-up-for-november/
“so where were the tea parties when George Bush was passing his massive Medicare drug benefit or had his Department of Education stick their noses in our school systems by creating No Child Left Behind?”
I’ll tell you where they were, they were calling talk radio saying, “The Republicans Deserve to Loose.”
They were getting stepped on by George W. Bush and the Establishment Republicans in Pensylvania when they were supporting Pat Toomey over Arlin Specticle.
They were Screaming at the top of their lungs for W. NOT to sign McCain Feingold.
They were making noise over a quazi liberal woman being named to the Supreme Court.
They were out there if anyone cared to pay attention.
jd
When people smoke marijunah for long time and one among the group want to stop
smoking India hemp,he must have make up his mind to quit a certain person among the friends but he does not have the guts to tell the person i don’t like your relationship any more it may not be the person that the introduced him to smoking ganaja.