Posted without commentary. There is great truth here… Follow the link:
BRENT HAMACHEK – […] For those of us who still believe in and embrace the ideas of our founding, for those who believe that the individual and their liberty are of paramount importance and prime value, for those of us who believe that free market capitalism is the most moral and just system for organizing economic activity, we need to have an epiphany. We need to awaken to the reality that we are not a majority. We are not a vocal minority with the same rights as the majority. We are now dissidents. We do not have the same voice as our ever-strengthening oppressors, and we do not have the same rights that they enjoy.
For those who might argue that there more of us, or at least as many of us, who believe in individual liberty and free market capitalism than there are opponents to same, I would suggest that you should not confuse a simple head count with total political atomic mass. The positions within society that our opponents hold and the institutions and machinery they control gives them leverage beyond simple membership numbers.
As to our being cast in the role of dissidents, we have no choice. How we conduct ourselves in that role will be the difference between having a chance over the long term to ultimately prevail or having to spend a century or more under the totalitarian’s thumb. We need to understand the role we are in, the most effective course of action we can take, and above all, we must understand and accept our limitations. A failure to understand and accept the latter will only deepen and prolong our subjugation. (read more)
Thank you for sharing this. This was the noise reduction unneeded.
The article is quite nice, much thinking and reasoning and philosophizing.
And it’s a lovely treatise of what works – what works for the author, that is.
Yes, we are all individuals, with individual rights.
But no one lives in a vacuum. Not once did the author mention family.
Nor did the author address the Presence of Our Lord, other than equating Jesus with Socrates as men who changed people.
Major, major fail.
Jesus was One Man. Yet that One Man managed to change the world, all by Himself, with Help from the Holy Spirit.
Dennis Prager says we all want to be taken care of.
Perhaps.
But people also crave the pleasure of a completed job well done.
We’ve the great examples set by our Founders, something our Founders never had.
You small group of “dissidents,” the leaders, just need to lead. We worker bees will follow.
Just please don’t sit around philosophizing, picking nits off one another.
We’ve work to do, and we’re burnin’ daylight.
This.
This has always been (until now) the unseen weakness of the Mises school of economics. For all its talk of prices being signals of value, it inexplicably (or maybe not so inexplicably depending on your view of the LSE) fails to account for the value of the national rule of law framework in which an economy operates freely. That framework was produced at a cost by the sacrifice and work of the citizens of that nation. It therefore has value, and access to that framework can not successfully be without cost, either as a contributing citizen, or as a foreigner who pays tariffs.
Tariffs, as our Founders understood, are the price foreigners must pay to participate in the economic system we built as a nation. And when citizens move their business interests offshore to avoid the cost of citizenship, and then try to sell the produce of their business back into our economy — under the color of citizenship but really being no different than a foreigner — they too must pay the tariff, the cost of doing business. The Austrian/Mises/LSE theory of economics explicitly exalts the unfettered freedom of trade at the expense of the national framework within which that trade is ultimately protected. It explicitly devalues the social framework, the national framework, that is indispensable for it’s theory to function. It’s a very British Empire, a very London School of Economics (LSE) way of thinking, and it has led to the crisis of political power in which now find ourselves, where the trans-national corporation — the fictional trans-national citizen — has gotten away with reaping the benefits of our national free trade economy without paying the cost of national citizenship, and as a result now has more wealth and political power than the nation itself.
As for the article, all very salient points indeed, but I would add one thing based on the above observation. This new tyranny, of which we now find ourselves dissidents, is not like any previous tyranny. It is not revolutionary in nature. Instead, it operates very scientifically and technocratically by convincing those it tyrannizes to demand their own enslavement, in the guise of comfort. The dissidents mentioned in the article were at least dissidents of a tangible, kinetic revolution. We are dissidents of what the willfully tyrannized perceive as their secure position within the rightful order of things. This needs to be factored in to how we think about “converting” them to our side.
Brilliant, succinct analysis. Right on Target.
You can have either flavor of political liberty—Aquinas’ or Locke’s just so long as you do not make God primary in the equation?!
No! I have a right to free speech because God commands the Gospel be preached to all nations. I have a right to peaceable assembly because believers are commanded to keep fellowship with one another.
Rights are founded in obedience to God, not in abstract appeals to Nature/nature which is RED IN TOOTH AND CLAW.
I am who I am and will not comport myself to the dictums of the ruling Globalist class. I am a free person and will not bend my knee to anyone but God.
Pay attention to the leftists. We have lost the right of free speech. They are wrecking the rule of law as we speak. They are coming for our guns. Keep your powder dry. Resist, resist, resist.
Thanks for finding and posting this sundance. Much appreciated.
I put up a post as A Few Tips for Dissidents with attribution to CTH at
https://freedomaustralia.freeforums.net/thread/896/tips-dissidents
One of the most interesting faucets of his argument is that the institutions control the govt. With this as a premise it is easy to understand the end game which is simply for the institutions to stay in power, to maintain if you will, the status quo.
This is why Trump was removed.