What’s in a name? Why did I name this soundboard Bacon, Books, and Bullets? Everything! It epitomizes my political, social, and economic philosophies.
These three items are particularly relevant to a trend I have witnessed in the past twenty-five years: the compelled collective. There is a concerted effort to ban all of them, in some way. All of these items represent materials that demand social controls as defined by “progressive” elites – otherwise known as the Left.
They embody all that is wrong with you and I.
They are the reason you must be controlled. They are dangerous because they represent different facets of individualism: the recognition and acceptance of consequences (Bacon), the knowledge necessary to make informed, if possibly heretical decisions (Books), and the ability to defend your right to be an individual (Bullets). Let me explain…
Bacon: Leftists want to protect you from… you.
You being the individual. They do not trust your ability to make your own decisions. Thus, if you are eating something unhealthy, such as BACON, you are not just a threat to yourself, but with national healthcare, you are a threat to the economic viability of a system that demands you to act responsibly. After all, bacon leads to higher cholesterol… higher cholesterol leads to heart problems… heart problems lead to higher medical bills…. etc.
By controlling your healthcare, the Left now controls how you must eat… of course, this is “for your own good.”
If you smoke cigarettes, you are a threat to you and that system. If you eat cheeseburgers, Big Government must stop either you or the purveyors of such irresponsible tastiness. This is creeping into every day facets of our lives. From Jack Daniels to Ring Dings, an ever encroaching government is coming for your version of BACON because they “care,” and they do not trust you.
Ironically, this encroachment on nutrition and choice is coming from a Leftist ideology that advocates pro-choice as a “women’s rights issue.” Regardless of which side of the political spectrum you fall, pro-choice or life, you must admit that the following seems pretty silly: it is a right to abort a fetus or a child, but it is not a right to eat what you want.
There is no religion, with which I am aware, that overtly bans the consumption of sugary carbonated beverages in ridiculously large containers. That cannot be said about abortion. Yet, the same group that advocates choice over one’s womb, advocates control over one’s belly.
I trust you… so should you. By creeping into your consumption patterns, Leftists are making inroads into your personal sense of responsibility. If Bacon makes me fat, so what?! I love the taste of Bacon!
Soon, however, your individual option to choose Bacon will be eliminated. Mark my words… the Left will introduce all vegetarian diets in the next twenty-five years as a means to combat obesity and heart disease because it is economically required. A black market for Bacon will emerge…
BOOKS: I love books. I love reading a host of different, primarily nonfiction books. From Plutarch to Paulson, from Foote to Chernow, I cannot get enough. But in this case, books are merely emblematic of all forms of informative or thought provoking media.
Movies that once received accolades have now been deemed socially derisive. Television shows are being edited for content because they do not reflect the “correct” social norms. History is being rewritten to tell a new narrative… facts be damned! Certain books are being defined as socially coercive. Why? Because they lead to dangerous thoughts that erode the compelled collective.
Information as you once knew it has come under attack because it needs to be controlled in order for the Left to achieve its objectives.
When intellectual thought is handcuffed by the political whims of a given class, it is troublesome. When it is banned because the content does not fit the values of one group, that is dangerous. Not only does it stymie personal growth and development, it leads to something else: intellectual inbreeding. This is the antithesis of progressive behavior.
When a group thinks the same what is the impetus to progress?
Where does it exist? Group think among the masses is terrifying because it is possible. In fact, the collective demands a similarity of conscience. All you need to do in order to achieve your objective is to control that which is read and learned.
Do you think that is impossible?
We are only eighty years removed from that having happened in Germany. We are only twenty five years since the collapse of a state predicated on a utopian vision enforced through a single system maintained by government controlled state approved information. We are only ten years removed from cheering for two “good ole’ boys” in a car with the Confederate Battle Flag emblazoned on its roof.
A revision of history to control that which you think is in full effect.
Independent thought is the enemy of the collective because the collective cannot thrive in an environment in which an informed participant chooses not to submit.
Individualism must be destroyed and that begins with how everyone thinks.
In order for Leftist ideals to work, it must be all or none. The individual that embraces capitalism and opens a black market as a counter to a socialist trading system immediately threatens the vitality of the socialist market based system. He begins to introduce the one truth of market dynamics: where there is demand, supply will soon follow. This goes for so many other facets of “progressive” concepts as well.
Books that introduce concepts that lead to personal manifestations of conscience erode the compelled collective. That is a dangerous concept to a Leftist. The lack of compulsion and the onus of personal responsibility to choose a collective runs directly into the face of the progressive movement because it allows for someone – anyone – to stand up and say, “No.”
BULLETS: the Founding Fathers could not possibly conceive of a drug addict breaking into your home and stealing your flat screen television. The ideological reason to ensure a population enjoyed the right to bear arms was grounded in something far scarier: the Government could break into your home and steal your flat screen television. The ability to fight back against government over-reach was a very real threat to the newly independent United States of the 18th Century.
Whereas I highly doubt that the US Government truly wishes to deprive you of your property or your rights in a violent manner, the threat always exists. That is because power is corrosive to the soul. The PATRIOT ACT, while well intended, has grown the power of the police state within a country that introduced the revolutionary concept of the Fourth Amendment. At what point does another 9/11 become the catalyst toward its alteration or abridgment?
While many would say this is a crazy position, I ask them to consider the following: why is it crazy? Absolute power corrupts absolutely. When did that maxim become obsolete?
The regulatory environment of the 21st Century United States is governed not by Congressional consideration and voting, it is governed by Executive authority. The President’s varied cabinets choose the mechanisms by which they determine the law should be enforced. Presidential discretion is left wide open for interpretation.
If the Government has no inclination toward a hostile take-over of an individual’s rights why therefore does it fear an armed populace? The Mexican Standoff of consequences should be an accepted balance because the Government will never pull the trigger… right? Maybe not.
A Mexican Standoff is called an Armed Robbery when only one party has a gun. Is there a desire to take away your civil rights? I would argue that such a possibility exists.
Many Leftists will argue that guns lead to violence, thus gun removal is required. I can give several reasons why this is untrue, but I will say they have something right. A population of individuals that are forced into a collective will ultimately fight back. That is the definition of violence.
Thus, now we have a war with that quintessential American tool of independence and resistance. Little boys that shape their peanut butter and jelly sandwiches into the shape of guns are expelled from school in Massachusetts. Parents in New Jersey had Child & Family Services called upon them for allowing their pre-teen son hold a gun and publish a photo on Facebook. The demonization of guns has clearly begun.
In this new environment, Davy Crockett never would have killed a bear by the age of three.
Some moderates like to attack the Libertarian notion that an armed population is a great counter to Government intrusion upon civil liberties. They will argue that, even if it were the case that the Government would like to take your rights away, what would your semi-automatic .308 rifle do for you against tanks and air strikes? To that I give the following simple answer: Afghanistan.
Bullets represent the last stand of the individual. It is the ability to fight back against the compelled collective. A dog without teeth is just an easily dispatched animal. A dog with teeth is a weapon. Pull the teeth while you can – preferably while it is sleeping.
The American public writ large is sleeping and the Government is pulling its teeth.
Do not underestimate those who wish to disarm individuals from fighting against compelled collectivism. They mean you harm. This is the last step necessary to steal your individual rights.
If you cannot fight back, what can you do? Die or accept.
Bacon, Books, and Bullets… symbols of independence, impediments to compulsion. I deeply believe in the power of the individual. I strongly believe in the power of the galvanized, voluntary collective. Plato and Machiavelli feared Republics. Republics can achieve so much when the contributors independently derive to a self-serving conclusion and engage in collective action.
But that is a matter of choice versus compulsion. Independent choice is a powerful weapon. The individual is a powerful force for good. In fact, it is the most powerful force for good. So much more has been achieved when individuals choose to enter social compacts freely… to reinvent those compacts… reform them… Every society that has been stagnant, violent, and predatory has been a society in which a party or parties were forced to submit and individualism was suppressed.
In other words, every society that has been repressive has been a manifestation of Leftist compelled collectivism. Fascism is a Leftist ideal (socialist economics)… Communism… oligarchies (economic control centered by a power elite at the top)… Political systems predicated on a maximum value of independent choice may be messy, but they are ultimately better societies.
Freedom is the soil, the sun, and the water necessary for the individual to blossom.
This website is dedicated to the political preservation of Freedom and Individualism.