Politics of Accommodation III - (the Anti-Christ)

L&G-

So I thought that after venting my frustration recently that things had changed. I had adjusted or found a certain amount of repose - enough to calm me down and relax. And things have been fine recently, until today. I went to get my haircut and this Middle Eastern woman took my order and cut my hair. She asked me how I'd like it cut and I told her high and tight. No fuss, she just started cutting my hair. About halfway through the haircut, this woman sneezes and I was just keeping to myself, as usual. No one conferred a blessing on her and I didn't know her or feel very comfortable so I didn't say anything either. She had just been giving some orders to another stylist about some type of drudgery which was to be conducted in terms of a rotation (ostensibly, this stylist was next due), so I figured she was pretty comfortable with her surroundings. Then after she said, "I have allergic reaction," I looked up and saw her wearing a facemask (like the one painters or people in a pandemic wear) then I burst out laughing from shock. Nobody laughed with me and when that settled in my resentments awakened.

Jesus said, "Turn the other cheek." And many of you are probably thinking to yourselves, "What is Nathan talking about?" he is paranoid or crazy! Well let me tell you our enemies rely upon us not picking up on subtleties, or at least not acting upon them. This, I think, would be a good segue for discussing the rule of law in terms of liberty and a responsible body politic. We are free because we are expected to be responsible for our freedom, otherwise liberty becomes license and, as Benjamin Rush stated, 'the temple of tyranny has two doors; we bolted one of them by proper restraints, but we left the other open by neglecting to guard against the effects of our own ignorance and licentiousness'. What he means is that monarchy or despotism (government by one through a system of rules or via individual will and caprice, respectively) leads to tyranny. Consequently, by establishing a Republic of, for and by the people, we have avoided [tyranny] on one account. However, the other 'door' to tyranny is rampant licentiousness, or irresponsibility with our rights.

I'd like to proffer that it is not 'us', being white Christians, who are the direct cause of licentiousness and irresponsibility in modern America, rather pagan influence-at-large. We have to put that in check if we want to keep our freedom. Justice is the end of government. Indeed, it is the end of civil-society. If people were angels, we wouldn't need government. If the government were run by angels, we would need the division of powers, checks and balances, etc. We are humans prone to sin and there is a certain amount of accountability we need to take for that. Let's consider a couple of simple questions for context - namely: "Why is the '3rd World' uncivilized? And what makes it so?" The latter I've covered already - it is a lack of moral restraint, ergo depravity which leads to destitution. To the former question, some people aver that inputs (e.g., resources or land or climate) are the cause of development or lack thereof. Humbug. The uncivilized world is so because of the people who live there.

A lack of responsibility with freedom will always lead to anarchy. And in order for justice to be obtained (in a civil society or otherwise), people cannot get away with crimes; they must be punished and deterred, or else government is in the business of creating victims. So, if people are irresponsible with freedom (e.g., if they lack self-restraint and are inclined toward anti-social, anarchical behavior), they will lose it. The government, in order to impose justice in the face of licentiousness, will be forced to tighten down the restraints upon society. If they did not strengthen their mechanism to punish/deter crimes by making rule more draconian, people would be able to finagle the administration [of justice] by impeaching the credibility of courts [of public opinion and of law] via hearsay evidence - e.g., O.J. Simpson citing 'racism' to get away with murder. And, in turn, the artful and designing would live in relative liberty at the expense of those who hold themselves accountable to the rule of law (as in the case of civil society). This, in turn, would create a double-standard in which one class is of debauchees while another is bearing the grudge of responsibility for upholding order. And that is a concept we refer to in economics called 'free riding'.

Free riding creates victims (i.e., those who bear the burden to supporting others who don't 'pull their own weight', as it were). That being said, no government can victimize its people forever without facing an insurrection of some sort. I think I've previously mentioned that bureaucrats want power and they will do whatever is in their power to keep it, including ratcheting down pressure on civil society to maintain order. It is well known that people of warmer climes have more dissolute character than people from cooler climes. In effect, the 'inclusion' of more dissolute characters into a body politic that is otherwise responsible creates a 'ratcheting down' effect on liberty. 'Diversity' subsidizes freedom for the less morally restrained and it costs those who are more inclined toward self-restraint. "Unfair discrimination" is one thing, but let's have a little discernment, shall we? People are different. We don't all act the same, walk the same, talk the same; we don't all have the same behaviors or standards for morality. We don't all believe the same things or hold ourselves to the same levels of accountability (standards are relative). Let's wake up and realize who and what we're dealing with, here. If we don't accept the truth staring us in the face, our beloved Republic will be gone.