More from: liberty

Remember now, before it is too late.

File:Patrick Henry Rothermel.jpg

Patrick Henry Before the Virginia House of Burgesses, Peter F. Rothermel (1817–1895). This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1926. This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.

How long are we supposed to put up with these socialist saboteurs? It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the Socialist democrats for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves, and the House?

I ask, gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Have these Democrats any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of massive corruption, voter fraud, masses of illegal aliens, antifa attacks, false flag mass shooting by Democrat operatives, Trump impersonators to sway and control the Congress that it may neglect its Constitutional duty to validate the very votes the Democrats desperately needed to pass with blind eye that they might seize power completely and unilaterally impose their executive orders to disarm us? No, sir, they have none. Their malice is meant for us; it can be meant for no other. They are purposed to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the Democrats have been so long forging.

And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted?
Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done, to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt.

In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free² if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges of Individual Liberty and God given Constitutional Rights for which we have been so long contending, if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a Socialist guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power.

Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Washington D.C.! The war is inevitable and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

“Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death!”, Patrick Henry to the Second Virginia Convention on March 20, 1775 at Richmond, VA.


Four boxes of liberty

Abraham Lincoln O-77 matte collodion print

(From WikiPedia.org)

The four boxes of liberty is an idea that proposes: “There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soapballotjury and ammo. Please use in that order.”

Concepts and phrases evolve and are applied in new ways.[1] The “four boxes” phrase always includes the ballot, jury and cartridge (or ammo) boxes. Additional boxes, when specified, have sometimes been the bandbox, soapbox, moving box, or lunch box.[2][3][4] The phrase in various forms has been used in arguments about tariff abolition, the rights of African Americans, women’s suffrage, environmentalism and gun control.[5][6][7][8]

The soap box represents exercising one’s right to freedom of speech to influence politics to defend liberty. The ballot box represents exercising one’s right to vote to elect a government which defends liberty. The jury box represents using jury nullification to refuse to convict someone being prosecuted for breaking an unjust law that decreases liberty. The cartridge box represents exercising one’s right to keep and bear arms to oppose, in armed conflict, a government that decreases liberty. The four boxes (in that order) represent increasingly forceful (and increasingly controversial) methods of political action.

Read more at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_boxes_of_liberty


Liberty means responsibility

Old photo of the Statue of Liberty in Construction

The Statue of Liberty in Construction

At the deepest levels, the real difference between Conservatives and Socialist Liberals is the concept of Individual Liberty. The people who formed the United States were fed up with Europe and it’s Socialist system: they wanted a place where government served the people, not owned them!

They rejected the concept of royalty and nobles and peons, and wrote “We Hold These truths to be Self Evident” meaning that any honest and rational person would have to agree with the statements to follow:

“that All Men Are CREATED EQUAL, that they are endowed BY THEIR CREATOR with certain UNALIENABLE RIGHTS” God exists, did the creating, and these rights come from God, not human government, and as such human government lacks any power or authority to limit of restrict any of these absolute, God-given, human rights:

“that among these rights are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”.

The concept of INDIVIDUAL Liberty – an absolute right to and responsibility for self determination for each individual human – is fundamental to American Law, and opposite of Socialist law as socialism teaches the people have no rights except those the royalty decides to grant and may retract at any time. In American thinking each individual is absolutely sovereign and limited only by the mandate that they not deny any other human the same right of absolute sovereignty.

This is why Socialists are constantly demanding other people’s rights be denied: it is what the old serfs did to get what they wanted from the royals. This is also why Americans reject this philosophy: when you ask someone else to grant you special rights you are admitting that person is greater than yourself: otherwise you would have no need of their consent: American citizens are not European subjects and as such they are sovereign in and of themselves and need not ask government for any thing.