When is rugged individualism at stake? Is it jeopardized each
time a new federal law is enacted and we stand by and watch our rights
disappear? Or, is it when we just become Complacent and no
longer care about standing on our own two feet?
28, 2003—Ground Zero Plus 654
No Spanking, No Junk Calls, No Junk
Food, No Junk Prejudice--Or Else...Cries The Government
Editor, New York City Combat Correspondent News
GROUND ZER0, New York, N.Y.--June 28, 2003--
The real issues of Freedom boil down to the issue of "central control"
over people's lives or "individual" management of them.
No Terrorism is greater than that of Complacency, when
one turns over the rule and order of his or her life to the care and
feeding of a third party, especially to a government body.
"rugged individualism" is in jeopardy
Rugged Individualism, the
foundation of American liberty, is summed up in Supreme Court Clarence
Thomas' quote from Fredrick Douglass in his flaming dissent against
the recent affirmative action vote regarding giving black students,
Native Americans and Hispanics applying for law school added
competitive weight because of their position as minorities.
In his opening volley against legislating diversity,
Justice Thomas reached back 14 decades to a speech by Douglass.
Not only does the following quote apply to the issue of diversity
among the citizens of America, but it also has a knock-out-punch
meaning to the constant meddling of the U.S. government in the daily
lives of American citizens. Here is the quote:
Frederick Douglass in Justice Thomas'
Dissenting Opinion Against Affirmative Action
``(I)n regard to the colored people, there is always more that
is benevolent, I perceive, than just, manifested towards us.
What I ask for the negro is not benevolence, not pity, not
sympathy, but simply justice. The American people have always
been anxious to know what they shall do with us... . I have had
but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your
doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do
nothing with us! If the apples will not remain on the tree of
their own strength, if they are worm-eaten at the core, if they
are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall! ...And if
the negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I
ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs! Let him
alone! ...(Y)our interference is doing him positive injury.''
What the Black Man Wants: An Address Delivered in Boston,
Massachusetts, on 26 January 1865, reprinted in 4 The Frederick
Douglass Papers 59, 68 (J. Blassingame & J. McKivigan eds. 1991)
(emphasis in original).
The Supreme Court
is, in a subtle way, becoming the Great Terrorist to civil liberties.
Each decision it makes that empowers the government over the people
strips the people of one more rock away from the foundations of their
"rugged individualism" castles.
Court is becoming the Great Terrorist to civil liberties
The foundation of any Liberty is
usually not bulldozed down. Its weakening comes about by
people letting visitors to it take a pebble here, a stone there,
ignoring the fact that eventually, chunk by chunk, the visitors are
like termites--one may not be a worry, but when one's brothers,
sisters, cousins, uncles, aunts and children's children beat their way
over the same path, the undermining becomes disastrous.
Beasts of Terror are not always giant, ugly
birds in the sky that crash into World Trade Center towers and kill
thousands of people in the name of Allah.
Is the Supreme
Court a wolf in sheep's clothing?
Often, Beasts of Terror take diaphanous
forms, similar to the fable of the wolf in the sheep's clothing.
These "Beasts" wear smiles and slap your back and tell you they are on
your side. But, they carry a small knife in their palm, and each
time they slap your back, they slit you and you bleed a little.
Not much. Just a little.
You don't notice the blood until its too
late, and your back is totally lacerated and you wake up and say:
"What happened! What the Hell happened?"
Insidious Beasts are those that offer you
protection from yourself.
Making prejudice and bigotry a "national
crime" suggests that the United States government can control
prejudice and bigotry. In essence, if one reads
Frederick Douglass' comments closely, Douglass is simply saying that
the black man and woman must become "rugged individualists" in a land
composed of "rugged individualists." To be granted
special entitlements for one's disadvantages only fuels the fires of
entitlement. It tells the children of those entitled that
entitlements are legacies, inheritances that must be used to gain
parity with others.
In other words, to build one's character
and acceptance to any group or society based on forces other than
one's own bearing, one's own character, is a falsification of all
principles of "individualism.
Court's upholding of affirmative action snares a big rock from the
castle of "rugged individualism"
While hailed by many, upholding affirmative
action in the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in favor of the University
of Michigan's Law School admission policies, snares a big rock from
the castle of "rugged individualism." It not only weakens the
knees of minorities struggling to build their own castles, but the
blow threatens the fabric of American democracy. It is one more
way in which the government tells its citizenry how to run their
It is one more act of tyranny and
oppression not just against current "rugged individualism" rights, but
impinges upon those of future generations, the Children's Children's
Children. For a society to be "color blind," it must begin with
the vision of a child who sees no difference between himself and the
other children. It can't be legislated downward to be "real."
Otherwise, it is a mere smoke screen, a
"feel-good-about-what-I-just-did-to-create-Justice-for-all" act that
has no firmament.
But that's not all.
on "rugged individualism" was launched by the government.......
The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) and
trade commission got together and launched a new attack on "rugged
individualism." The government has offered citizens a
shelter to hide from "junk calls," those noxious calls by
telemarketers offering a variety of offerings over the phone. By
registering at www.donotcall.org,
the government offers "big brother" protection against receiving
unsolicited calls. Violators face a fine of up to $11,000
for each call made to those who have dashed under the skirts of the
The wolf in
sheep's clothing continues to stalk us
On the surface, this may appear as a
benefit. But, is it the wolf in sheep's clothing stalking
us one more time?
Unfortunately, the President of the
United States touted the new program on television as another example
of government helping people out. It's not that we as a
nation have our hands full with vital issues of world peace or an
economy on shaky grounds, or a threat to all our civil liberties
through the Patriot Act's chipping at the granite stone of the Bill of
Rights. But the sheer fact the most important leader
on the globe would issue from his lips the benefits of protecting
people from "junk phone calls" suggests that our ability to stand on
our own two feet has weakened so much that we must run to the
government and ask them to answer our phone for us.
Their answer is a Billy Club. Yes, they will protect our
weak selves from the Bullies of Telemarketing. Yes, they will be
our Mother and Father of Vigilance guarding us from the Beast of
Telemarketing Terrorism. And yes, we can all go to sleep at
night more comfortably knowing our "Homeland Telemarketing Security
System" is at work.
How will these
government decisions enrich the lives of the Children's Children's
One might ask, "How will the
decision by the U.S. government to halt junk mail or junk calls enrich the lives of
our Children's Children's Children?" Will the fact we
can't say "no" to someone on the phone be considered a strength or
weakness. Will the fact that state law, not federal law, rule
the issue be more in tune with "rugged individualism" than "federal"
management over all our rights?
Has anyone ever benefited from
a telemarketing call?
Are all telemarketing calls
Of course, if one really wanted
to get off the list, one could not make one's phone number public and
removed it from the phone directory. But that would be too much
an act of "rugged individualism" rather than the frightening trend
toward more "governmental control" and "management" over our daily
lives, which now includes the ringing of our phones.
Americans have grown Complacent
about how to run their lives. Take this next issue.
It's the "No Spanking Law."
If you're scratching your head,
hang on. It's on its way. The No Spanking law is in
effect in a nine countries already, and is heading toward America,
just as the federal law to allow gay marriages is hovering up in
Canada and enthusiastic supporters are shouting for its acceptance.
need government to discipline (or not) their children?
No one will argue that
corporal punishment at the extreme against a child is harmful, and
the line between discipline and abuse can be fuzzy. But when one
begins to legislate laws telling a parent how he or she may raise a
child, and what he or she can or cannot do to that child within the
context of socially, and morally accepted guidelines, now becomes
another example of stripping one's rights away.
In America, for over 200 years,
our nation grew without the citizens rushing to the government to seek
permission to parent their children. Local, community and
state laws were in effect that somehow allowed America to become the
wealthiest, healthiest, most powerful nation in the world--envied by
all because of its citizens "rugged individualism."
Suddenly, all that legacy is
flying out the window. Suddenly, we are now being
challenged as a society that our ability to raise our children comes
from some Terroristic Roots. A No Spanking Law is a law
against Child Terrorism. It presumes, at a national level, we
cannot trust our communities, or our states to reflect the choice of
the citizens to manage their lives. It means we have done
something horribly wrong in the past, or, that we are so spineless we
fear we will do something so horrible in the future that we need the
government to tell us how to raise our children.
This is true Terrorism.
It means all who allow such a
law to come into being by default accepts the character flaw of
parenting. It means we who allow it have committed an act of
Complacency. We have given over the parental keystone to
our rugged individualism castle to government. We deserve to
have our castles fall.
Oh, don't let me forget the Fat Tax.
The government is seriously pondering imposing taxes on junk food, and
warning signs at fast food establishments such as McDonald's that
serve to remind mothers and fathers they are feeding their children
Once again, the government is telling
the citizens the opposite of what Frederick Douglass sought for his
black brethren--"let me stand on my own two feet."
Terrorism is about making the
slope of individuality slippery. It's about enacting laws
in the name of good that ultimately do bad.
The government is considering imposing taxes on places that serve
What worse Terrorism is there
for our children and their Children's Children's Children than to
allow their "rugged individualism" rights to be ripped from their
innocent hands without a fight, without the blink of an eye.
This week tens of thousands,
perhaps millions, leapt with joy over the affirmative action ruling,
and the gay rights ruling by the Supreme Court. Others rushed to
their computers to log on to
www.donotcall.org, cheering on government. Still others
lobbied hard for the No Spanking law and Fat Tax, expecting the public
to shout: "Thank you, Lord. Yes, Free! Free at
last! Thanks to government! Thanks to someone's efforts
other than myself! Thank you, Lord. Freedom!"
Sad, isn't it?
We glorify decisions at the
moment and rue them in the future.
Today, we might think little
things like Fat Taxes, No Spanking Laws, No Junk Calls Shelters,
Affirmative Action, Gay Marriages, all work to the benefit of our
nation and its future because they appear on the surface to be "gifts"
righting past injustices or present threats.
But, when we realize that any
federal law enacted is another reduction in our rights, not an
addition to them, we stop and are forced to think.
A federal law is the sum of the
averages. It does not serve all, it is the average of all.
It appeases no one in particular but tries to be all things to all
people, and in that process is weak in structure. When one
tries to be everything he or she become nothing.
We rush to
support government's management of health care
Look at government's
management of health care.
To expect our rights to
not be watered down by each decision is pure folly. But instead
of opposing federal laws, we rush to support them because they appear
to be in our favor. We don't look behind the law,
past the sheep's clothing, into the eyes of the Beast of Terror who
wears the offering.
If we did, we would see a Beast
eating up our individual rights. We would see our children being
born with less and spine, and fewer tools to stand on their feet.
We would see our children being crippled at birth by our Complacency,
by our selfishness to believe something that appears good is good.
Candy looks good, but eating it
has a price.
A telephone is a handy
instrument unless it rings with a Telemarketer.
Rather than tell the neighbor
not to spank his child, I'm going to call the police.
Be nice to the black man, it's
Legislation is scary.
Tae the Pledge
of Vigilance to help you preserve your "rugged individualism" and
also to strive for less legislation that robs you of your
rights and duties
It isn't something to leap up
and down about.
How do we preserve "rugged
We ask one big question:
"Will this law or act subtract from or add to the individual rights of
the Children's Children's Children?"
If one can't ask that
question, one is already a slave of the Beast of the Terror.
To un-slave yourself, take the
Pledge of Vigilance.
It's the freedom Frederick
Douglass talked about.
27--Liberia West Africa--An "American Colony"
In The Grips of Terrorism
- 2004, VigilanceVoice.com, All rights reserved -