In the same way, and for the same reasons, that all of academia—all professional educators and teachers—are the enemies of any real education, all so-called freedom-fighters—all advocates and activists engaged in promoting liberty and economic freedom—are the enemies of true individual freedom.
Innocent, Unintentional, And Malevolent
Every single one of those engaged in some enterprise intended to promote liberty or freedom is actually promoting the opposite of individual freedom. To the extent their programs and methods are successful, the result will always be less freedom and more oppression.
It is not what they intend. There is nothing wrong with their objective. Individual freedom is an absolute necessity to human life. It is not the values or ideals, that are wrong. What is wrong is that all so-called “freedom movements,” are based on three disastrously wrong principles—the very same principles all political oppression and social engineering is based on:
- That the good is some kind of social condition.
- That the means to any good end is some collective enterprise.
- That individual human beings have a moral claim, (right), to anything they have not earned or produced by their own effort.
These three disastrously wrong principles form the foundation of every political view from Marxism to Libertarianism. The, “good,” for the Marxist is the, “welfare of everyone;” the, “good,” for the Libertarian is, “individual freedom.” At least, that is what libertarians claim to believe.
An examination of all so-called freedom and liberty promoting organizations, enterprises, institutes, or individuals reveals that every one promotes some plan or program for producing a certain kind of society; that their plan or program requires some kind of organized collective effort; and that their idea of freedom is something one has a, “right,” to, just because they were born, without having to achieve it by their own effort. In the end, all social/political movements and ideologies are dreams of collective Utopias, where whatever dream of the ideal society is, justifies the means to achieving it.
They would be appalled to be described as, “Utopians,” these freedom fighters, but that is what they are. Just a few examples show that, intended or not, all their efforts are meant to establish by some collective means, a Utopia where everyone is free, just because they are there.
Some typical libertarian individuals:
“I am a voluntaryist, individualist, libertarian, social and cultural conservative, and believe in traditional moral values, self ownership and private property which I associate with promoting peace, freedom, and the principle of non-aggression.
“The purpose of my writing and cartoons is to inform and entertain, and convince people that freedom is good and government isn’t, and that a genuinely voluntary society is the only system that coincides with freedom. Freedom creates prosperity for the greatest proportion of the population while compulsory government (the “State”) mainly commits criminal aggression and coercion against innocents and causes impoverishment of the masses.”
In this libertarian’s view, the purpose of freedom is it’s social value: it “creates prosperity,” and reduces, “impoverishment.” But individual freedom does neither. The free individual’s wealth and success depend only on that individual’s own productive effort. No social system will provide anyone anything of value.
I chose this individual because he describes his, blog, “The Zero Government Blog,” as, “for people eager to terminate government.” This anarchist view is that government is the sole reason individuals are not free and the elimination of government would automatically make everyone free—though no anarchist would say it quite that way.
Though I am certain Mr. Davies would deny it, his ideas of freedom are not about individual freedom, but some kind of, society which is free (from government). There is no doubt that all government is evil and oppressive, but freedom is not the elimination of government any more than wealth is the elimination of poverty. Freedom, like wealth, must be achieved. Like all collectivists, the purpose of freedom is not so individuals can live their lives as they choose but for the sake of freedom’s assumed social benefits, which he lists:
“•A Huge, Immediate Increase in Prosperity, •A Vast Improvement in Peace, •Harmony and Justice, •Better Health, •Prosperous Retirement, •Much Lower Prices on most items we buy, •No Terrorism, •Bright Kids, •Fulfilling Work – for all, and, •No Drug War.” Yet he denies this is utopian.
This anarchists view of achieving freedom is not only a social (Utopian) view, but a plan based on a collective method. In this case, the education of enough people who will, by their own choice, cease to support or be part of government as fully described in his book: Transition to Liberty.
[NOTE: Unlike most freedom advocates, Mr. Davies does predict when the promised freedom of his method will be established (2027). His prediction is based on the assumption his education program will successfully produce, “8 million graduates by the end of 2022, and 228 or 268 million (the whole literate US population) five years later in 2027.” This is highly unlikely. At present, Americans are, “4% nonliterate, 14% below basic literacy levels, and 34% with only ‘basic’ literacy” (meaning they can barely manage to read and write),” which means most wouldn’t be able to complete Mr. Davies’ freedom course if they wanted to, which most won’t, because very few people are truly interested in individual freedom or even knowing what it is. Most Americans truly interested in freedom have already made themselves free and will be too busy living their free successful lives to be taking some freedom course.]
Some Freedom Organizations:
“An anarchist think-tank and media center. Its mission is to explain and defend the idea of vibrant social cooperation without aggression, oppression, or centralized authority. Another movement to produce the right kind of society—not individual freedom.
“The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property [sic] … a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frederic Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.”
At least it’s honest about it’s confusion, that includes, “personal liberty,” as well as some collectivist concept of, “social individualists,” whatever that might be.
“The Cato Institute is a public policy research organization—a think tank—dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace. Its scholars and analysts conduct independent, nonpartisan research on a wide range of policy issues.” What, “policy?” Policies are what governments use to excuse their oppressive abuses. This site is not about individual freedom, but the right kind of society produced by the right kind of government. It is very much like that of those who call themselves, “Objectivists.”
“The Future of Freedom Foundation was founded in 1989 by FFF president, Jacob Hornberger, with the aim of establishing an educational foundation that would advance an uncompromising case for libertarianism in the context of both foreign and domestic policy.
“The mission of The Future of Freedom Foundation is to advance freedom by providing an uncompromising moral and economic case for individual liberty, free markets, private property, and limited government.”
Another program to produce freedom by means of a, “free society,” by means of a government.
If you think this deceptive title means self-directed autonomous individuals, it does not.
“We are a community that champions the values of self-government. These include voluntary association, personal responsibility and neighborly assistance.”
This is totally a collectivist social utopian site:
“Our VISION is: A world of self-governing people living in a condition of happiness, harmony and prosperity.”
All For The Wrong Reasons
None of these freedom promoting individuals and organizations are actually for individual freedom. They chafe under certain restrictions their government or society seems to put them under and wish to escape those restrictions believing that will make them, “free.” But their, “love of freedom,” is actually a delusion, and if forced to be truly free, they would be terrified.
As H.L. Mencken said:
“The fact is that the average man’s love of liberty is nine-tenths imaginary, exactly like his love of sense, justice and truth. He is not actually happy when free; he is uncomfortable, a bit alarmed, and intolerably lonely. Liberty is not a thing for the great masses of men. It is the exclusive possession of a small and disreputable minority, like knowledge, courage and honor. It takes a special sort of man to understand and enjoy liberty—and he is usually an outlaw in democratic societies.” [Baltimore Evening Sun (12 February 1923).]
In, “Fanning The Flames Of Social Paranoia,” I alluded to the fact that what motivates most so-called freedom fighters is not a love of freedom, but, fear. That particular, “freedom fighter,” has doubled-down on her fear mongering. She writes:
“The flick-of-a-switch “disappearing” of Parler and our then-present president from the ‘Net finally rattled us in a way that previous censorship, deplatforming, demonetizing, Twitter mobs, and disappearances of lesser’ Net operations could not.
“Scary, scary, scary, scary, scary ….“
Life is only scary to those who view the world as primarily evil and doubt their own ability to successfully deal with the it. In “Wonderful World, I quoted Ayn Rand’s description of the collectivists view:
“You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.”
But fear, and perceived threats, and terror are the whole of the motivation of the entirety of what I call the freedom/liberty movement today. It is never about accomplishing anything and always only about evading some terrible evil or danger. Oh, sure, those whose approach is from economics talk about business and entrepreneurship, as things that need protecting, but not as the objective of their programs or movements.
They have no great ambition, no desire to accomplish anything exceptional. They aspire to no personal individual achievements. Their entire objective is simply to live a, “nice life,” without pain, disappointment, danger, or risk—”where never is heard a discouraging word and the skies are not cloudy all day.” Their entire dream is a libertarian utopian paradise.
This one, “freedom-fighter,” describes herself as, “a free-market anarchist” publishes the “Living Freedom Blog and hosts the “Living Freedom Forums,” “a private site for dedicated freedomistas,” which you cannot participate in, “if you don’t join.”
This is the description of why you should join (with my emphasis):
“If you join you can participate in a private forum with a small group of experienced and devoted freedom seekers. Be part of a friendly community with a world of knowledge and a pretty good sense of fun.
Freedom Only Possible To Independent Individuals
The following is from the 2016 article, Gullible:
|One of the most baffling phenomena in the modern world is the gullibility of that small class of people who regard themselves as “freedom-oriented:” the libertarians, the Objectivists, the various flavors of self-styled anarchists, the anti-staters, the egoists, and voluntaryists. With rare exception they are all joiners, supporters of endless movements, programs, parties, and ideologies all supposedly working to bring about, “freedom,” by which they all mean some view of what a, “free society,” would be. |
It does not occur to them to ask if it is morally right for them to attempt to force their view of what society ought to be on those who do not want it. Mostly they spend their efforts and time arguing about floating abstractions like, “rights,” “natural law,” “economics,” “capitalism,” “free markets,” and “justice.”
Most are anti-war, but nevertheless embrace vindictiveness (retribution) as a form of justice, the principle at the heart of most wars. Many of them consider themselves, “activists,” but are little more than sign-carrying, slogan-yelling, rabble-rousers, and trouble makers.
Freedom is not something provided by nature, or society, or the state. Freedom is a necessity for individual success as a human being, but like all other values, nothing supplies it. Like all human values it must be achieved and acquired by one’s own effort. Freedom, like all other virtues, must be earned and deserved by each individual.
Even those who understand that every individual must secure their own freedom begin wrong. They believe the way to freedom is by becoming part of something else, by joining with others in some kind of cooperative or, “team,” effort to achieve freedom. Joining is a contradiction of freedom. Freedom is not a social phenomenon, it is an individual state. Societies aren’t free, only individuals are free—independent individuals.
If you are not independent, you have chosen not to be free. It will not matter what kind of society you live in, if you join something you have already submitted yourself, your own mind and will, to some kind of program that is not your own. Independence, which is freedom from the control of others, is not achieved by joining something. Independence is intentionally disjoining oneself from everything and anything so one is truly free to think and choose for oneself how to live.
Perhaps Ayn Rand said it best in her 1941 letter to Channing Pollock [from [The Letters of Ayn Rand]:
“Individualists have always been reluctant to form any sort of organization. The best, the most independent, the hardest working, the most productive members of society have always lived and worked alone. But the incompetent and the unscrupulous have organized.”
If you want to be free, don’t join anything. The threat is always, “if you don’t join us, you’ll die,” but a life that can only be saved by enslaving one’s self to some group or movement is not worth living.