In less than 900 days Americans will go to the polls to elect a new POTUS. As we prepare to celebrate our unique and exceptional history, the nation is engaged in a great and profound battle for its very soul. We stand at the ultimate crossroads. The road we ultimately choose will determine whether this nation survives with our founding principals as the guiding light for future generations of free people.
After several days of visiting progressive blogs and contemplating their message and mission it became clear the battle lines have been drawn, and who is most responsible for drawing the invisible in the sand. It also became clear how profound and fundamental the differences are between lIberal pRogressives and conservatives or Libertarians.
While one can point to, and argue many specifics, the fundamental differences lie in the opposing values of Individualism and cOllectivism. Our nation was founded on the belief in the rights of the wealthy White individuals and not the cOllective "will of The People" (ie the Poors or lower classes). The Constitution was written to insure the rights of the Individual White wealthy Man would be protected against the tyranny of the majority or cOllective "will of The People". The simple beauty of the experiment called America was that it became a nation of laws promulgated to protect the wealthy White individual.
Today the rights of wealthy individuals, no matter their ethnicity are protected. What is important is that these men (and sometimes women) are wealthy Makers and not worthless parasitical Takers (who should have considerably fewer rights).
In so long as the Individual respected the rights of all other Individuals (excepting pOor iNdividuals), and observed the laws enacted to protect the rights of all Rich Individuals society functioned well. Thus for the first time in history a nation was governed by laws and not by men. A truly radical and progressive system in the I800's (the good kind of "progressive"). It remains so today in the judgment of Lying Lester, although (given the election of the sOcialist oBama) just barely.
I have stated the invisible drawn in the sand by the lIberal pRogressives it is the line separating Individualism from cOllectivism. The pRogressives ultimate goal is to bring cOllectivism to America in a way the Marxist Utopian ideal that gOvernment should take from those with the greatest means, and redistribute to those with the greatest need is achieved... or to do the "will of The People", some might say. Of course never attempting to identify and understand that that rich people DESERVE to have most of the wealth of our nation.
Or, I could fib and spew some baloney about how "at some point there will be few with means and a great number with extreme need", as if higher taxes on rich people would cause them to become poor and also in "great need". Actually, I have lied about this in the past and will continue to do so. Taxing the wealthy will impoverish us all (that was a lie just there).
The pRogressives desire to replace Individualism with cOllectivism is nothing more than the desire to level the human playing field so everyone becomes entitled to that which their neighbor possess (another lie, actually pRogressives believe both individualism and collectivism are necessary for society to function). "Equal prosperity for all" is another lie wealthy-worshiping dipshits like me buy into and promulgate on our moronic blogs (like rAtional nAtion uSA).
The issues of effort, ability, motivation, hard work, and perseverance are of no concern to the pRogressive or cOllectivist (yet another lie). Only the appearance of mass economic equality is important (or so the lie goes). Of course the only way the pRogressive cOllectivist (fictional) dream can be realized is through gOvernment oversight, deep taxation, and intrusive control over one's personal and business life. The driving force behind the pRogressive cOllectivist is the desire and need for power (for The People). Power over the wealthy Man's (or less frequently, wealthy woman's) life.
The Individualist is one who values the life of the wealthy Man (or woman), Individuality, and (most importantly) property/wealth. By their very nature these exceptional Individuals value liberty and understand it is right to value the Rights and Liberties of their fellow worthy Men and women (and disrespect the "rights" of the Poors). They recognize that limiting the role of gOvernment results in the greatest Liberty and ultimately prosperity for Rich people (be as it may at the expense of the general population and nation). The Individualist also recognizes the inherent tendency for evil to exit with government by The People.
The pRogressive cOllectivist by contrast sees rich people not as Individuals but rather merely as a very small part of a greater whole. Their belief system says the Individual is relatively unimportant and should set aside their desires and goals (sacrifice) to the goals and agreed upon desires of the larger sOciety... The whole (which is of course complete rubbish, but for the purposes of this commentary I will pretend it as true... another of my lies, in other words).
It is then only natural the pRogressive cOllectivist belief system desires bigger and a more intrusive government (or a gOvernment big enough to do the will of The People. As for "intrusive", that is where Conservatives come in and not pRogressives... so this can be chalked up to another of my lies). The pRogressive cOllectivist economic and sOcial system requires large government to survive.
And so the battle between Individualism (rights for the wealthy) and pRogressive cOllectivism (rights for everyone) will likely be the defining moment in our modern history. Either we will choose the road to Individuality, Liberty, and prosperity for the wealthy, or we will equivocate, abandon our reason and be lead down the road to collectivism, loss of liberty, reduced prosperity, or and as Hayek might say, down "The Road To Serfdom".
Not that that is a bad thing, but in this case it is "serfdom" for the wealthy (in that they will be paying a little more in terms of taxes)... as opposed to serfdom for the Poors and mIddle cLass, which would be a good thing. And so I am back. I will stand with the philosophy and principals of Ayn Rand and all those on the side of reason, limited government, and who believe in our Constitution "as written" (or how the Makers decide what "is written" means), and not how some libtards professor or lawyer wishes to interpret it for the good of The People.
And so, as stated above, I shall stand by these and I invite all who love liberty for the rich (and for the rich alone) and concentrating wealth at the top - to stand with me in bowing down to our wealthy rulers (and not the rUlers elected by The People). A tyranny of the rich or a tyranny of, by and for The People - which will you choose? Lying Lester thinks the choice is easy. Hint: it's a tyranny of the wealthy, if you believe allowing the rich to rule is "tyranny", which Lying Lester does not.
Lying Lester foolishly believes it is "freedom and liberty". Are you as foolish as Lying Lester? I surely hope you are... and that (due to your foolishness and love for the wealthy) you will vote for for Gary Johnson in 2016.