Duped, Disarmed Statists Seek Govt Protection from Govt Violence or Better Relations w/Uncontrollable "Public Servants" [Masters] as Race Soldiers Revoke “Freedoms" [Permissions] in Portland
/"The greatest purveyor of violence in the world today [is] my own government.” Martin Luther King quoted in FUNKTIONARY [protesters in Portland are enabling us to see what “authority” is.] “Defund the cops” statists (one who believes in “government”) think if police budgets are reduced the force continuum will somehow be better managed under the control of more responsible government orderlies. That is, the power to forcibly control us and interfere with our freedoms as they see fit will be in good hands. How and why this would occur is not clear. Most statists [democrat & republican] believe that we just haven’t found the right people to have power over us. To get the right folks we need to vote for better leaders and hire or appoint the right persons to be cops, etc. We are on a continual search for the right persons to exert power and control over us and have the right to rule over us. Such power and control is called “authority.” Citizens have the moral and legal duty to obey their government representative’s authority. Only another government authoritarian can determine whether a particular government action was unlawful or lawful. Murray Rothbard explains government is that ‘organization which maintains a monopoly on the use of force and violence; it is the only organization that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion.’ All persons have the natural right to defend themselves and come to the defense of others if they reasonably believe the other person is in imminent danger from an aggressor. The “authority” of government representatives includes such power but also includes the extra-governmental power to initiate unprovoked acts of violence against citizens and to interfere with a citizens freedoms or property when they deem it necessary to do so.
Larken Rose states, ‘The average statist while lamenting all the ways in which “authority” has been used as a tool for evil, even in his own country, will still insist that it is possible for “government” to be a force for good, and still imagine that “authority” can and must provide the path to peace and justice.’ The average statist never questions the legitimacy of authority in the first place. If government power comes from the people then did “the people” give their servants the right to do with them and the products of their labor as they choose and give them the right to control our property whenever they deem it necessary and proper?
We are taught from birth that we have a “free government,” yet when did you consent to government control over you and agree to obey government authority? If our government is voluntary - how and where can you withdraw from it and be left the fuck alone? If a “public servant," such as a police officer, is uncontrollable, unaccountable, can’t be hired or fired by you, has irresponsible power over you and provides a “service” that you have no choice to accept or reject, then he is actually your Master. Undeceiver Lysander Spooner explained,
“A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. Neither are a people any the less slaves because permitted periodically to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power over them is, and always is to be, absolute and irresponsible.*
The right of absolute and irresponsible dominion is the right of property, and the right of property is the right of absolute, irresponsible dominion. The two are identical; the one necessarily implying the other. Neither can exist without the other. If, therefore, Congress have that absolute and irresponsible law-making power, which the Constitution—according to their interpretation of it—gives them, it can only be because they own us as property. If they own us as property, they are our masters, and their will is our law. If they do not own us as property, they are not our masters, and their will, as such, is of no authority over us.
But these men who claim and exercise this absolute and irresponsible dominion over us, dare not be consistent, and claim either to be our masters, or to own us as property. They say they are only our servants, agents, attorneys, and representatives. But this declaration involves an absurdity, a contradiction. No man can be my servant, agent, attorney, or representative, and be, at the same time, uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me for his acts. It is of no importance that I appointed him, and put all power in his hands. If I made him uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me, he is no longer my servant, agent, attorney, or representative. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over my property, I gave him the property. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what power did I put into his hands?” [MORE]
The WHITE Philadelphia SWAT officer captured on video last month pulling down protesters’ masks and pepper spraying them as they knelt on the Vine Street Expressway turned himself in to face criminal charges — the second officer to be arrested for alleged misconduct during days-long protests over police brutality that coursed through the city in May and June. Richard P. Nicoletti, 35, will face charges of simple assault, reckless endangerment, official oppression, and possession of an instrument of crime, District Attorney Larry Krasner said. [MORE] What a relief. Feel safer?
FUNKTIONARY states, “authority” is not a force but a farce,” ‘an implied right to exercise external control over others has no actual meaning in reality.” FUNKTIONARY further states, "The government hoax is probably the oldest, most pervasive and stubborn of hoaxes. It's the belief in non-existent "states" and "nations" and that "government" is both legitimate and necessary.” [MORE]
“The real threat to "authority" is the masses overcoming info-gaps and verigaps through self-knowledge and the proliferation of symbols of opposition, not crime or destruction of property.” Jeremy Locke states,
“You were born to this world with sovereignty over your mind and over your life. Your abilities to think, to feel, to learn and to love are your liberty. In you, these capacities are infinite. You have infinite worth.
Evil seeks to destroy your liberty. It seeks to be in authority over you. It does not want you to have liberty. Evil seeks to destroy you so that it can use you as a puppet.
The implementation of evil is called authority. Authorities are what evil implements as it exercises control over the lives of people. Authority limits your ability to learn, to think, to feel, to love and to grow. This is why authority is evil.“
Larken Rose explains, “The belief in “authority,” which includes all belief in “government,” is irrational and self- contradictory; it is contrary to civilization and morality, and constitutes the most dangerous, destructive superstition that has ever existed. Rather than being a force for order and justice, the belief in “authority” is the arch-enemy of humanity. Of course, nearly everyone is raised to believe the exact opposite: that obedience to “authority” is a virtue (at least in most cases), that respecting and complying with the “laws” of “government” is what makes us civilized, and that disrespect for “authority” leads only to chaos and violence. In fact, people have been so thoroughly trained to associate obedience with “being good” that attacking the concept of “authority” will sound, to most people, like suggesting that there is no such thing as right and wrong, no need to abide by any standards of behavior, no need to have any morals at all. That is not what is being advocated here – quite the opposite.” [MORE]
Allegedly governmental power comes from the people. That is, we delegate our individual power to the government for it to act on our behalf. However, it goes without saying that people cannot delegate powers or rights that they do not possess. So if people have delegated their powers to lawmakers and lawmakers have empowered police officers to act on our behalf, how did police acquire the moral right to commit acts of unprovoked violence on people? Asked differently, if you don’t have the right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence against other people then how can you delegate or authorize police officers or anyone else acting on your behalf to do so? These are not rhetorical questions. Really, How did government representatives and police acquire such super-human powers? Spooner explained,
“it is impossible that a government should have any rights, except such as the individuals composing it had previously had, as individuals. They could not delegate to a government any rights which they did not themselves possess. They could not contribute to the government any rights, except such as they themselves possessed as individuals.”
Similarly, undeceiver Larken Rose observes,
“Despite all of the complex rituals and convoluted rationalizations, all modern belief in “government” rests on the notion that mere mortals can, through certain political procedures, bestow upon some people various rights which none of the people possessed to begin with. The inherent lunacy of such a notion should be obvious. There is no ritual or document through which any group of people can delegate to someone else a right which no one in the group possesses.‘
Authority is a “cartoon” or an “image of law” because “people cannot delegate rights they do not have, which makes it impossible for anyone to actually acquire the right to rule (”authority”). People cannot alter morality, which makes the “laws” of “government” devoid of any inherent “authority.” Ergo, “authority”-the right to rule-cannot logically exist. The concept itself is self-contradictory, like the concept of a “militant pacifist.” A human being cannot have superhuman rights, and therefore no one can have the inherent right to rule.’ [MORE]
WOULD RACE SOLDIERS BE SO LAWLESS IN AN OPEN CARRY STATE? FUNKTIONARY DEFINES SLAVES AS “DISARMED MEN AND WOMEN” and “gun ban” as “the precursor to servitude” and “gun safety” as the right “to shoot back if someone is shooting at you.”
Dr. blynd also explains that “The second amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once." The right to keep and bears arms actually serves as more than an insurance policy, it also serves as a deterrent. For when would-be tyrants know that the citizenry is well-armed, they think twice about imposing tyranny.” [MORE]
Yet authority is the basis of all governments, everywhere. FUNKTIONARY explains “Unfortunately, governments only function by force. Once established, they put laws into effect by threatening persecution, imprisonment, fine, or death against all who don't comply with those laws--including the use of the force continuum.” [MORE] "Government" is simply, unequivocally, and always initiation of force or coercion and nothing else.” [MORE] Locke explains, “The lie of tyranny is that you will maintain the freedom of life by obeying authority. The [false] choices it offers you are a lifetime of obedience or death. Evil is the master of deceit. The objective of evil is not violence, but obedience.“ He states, “The authority principle describes the behavior of people who live under the rule of law. The authority principle shows that people obey anything and anyone that they believe is an authority. Though the who, the why and the what have changed in history, the behavior of people is the same; they obey.
When people are taught that obedience is principle, they obey. When they are taught that the source of worth and knowledge is found in another person, rather than in themselves, they obey. This is the rule of law, and it teaches people that their will is subjective to the will of law and those who control the law.“
WASHINGTON DC, JULY 2020. Photograph is the property of UNDECEIVER VINCENT BROWN.
Where a critical mass of persons understand that authority is the source of the problem and cannot be the solution to the problem, drastic change will occur because the present arrangement citizens have with their masters will no longer be consensual. “ Government will cease to exist when people cease to grant it legitimacy—in other words stop believing in it, stop looking to it for solutions to problems in their lives, and stop supporting it." Fred Woolworth quoted in FUNKTIONARY. Dr. Blynd further explains:
“Throughout history many intelligent thinkers all around the world have tried to contemplate or design some way to have "government" and freedom too. Failing miserably and repeatedly to find one either in practice or in theory, it is time for intelligent human beings to give way to beings of higher consciousness using sagacity and sapience to finally realize that:. 1) "government" itself is a deadly mental contrivance and immanent threat to their freedom; 2) there is no way to prevent "government" from constantly increasing its power and eroding freedom; 3) "government" itself being a reification (deadly cartoon) will vanish when the illusion on which it rests dissipates.
This goes for all brands and flavors of "government" across the ideological spectrum.”
Rose explains,
There is a fundamental difference between having complaints about a particular ruling class, and recognizing and opposing the insanity of “authority” in principle, In short, in all the various societal manifestations of so-called rebelliousness and non conformity, almost none have actually escaped the myth of “authority.” Instead, they have merely attempted to make a new “authority,” a new ruling class, a new “government,” a new centralized machine of coercion through which they could forcibly subjugate and control their neighbors. In short, nearly all so-called “rebels” are phonies, who pretend to be resisting “the man,” but who really just want to be “the man.”
And this should be expected, If one starts with the assumption that there should and must be an “authority,” and that a “government” exerting control over a population is a legitimate situation, why would anyone not want to be the one in charge? Each person, by definition, wants the world to be the way he thinks it should be, and what better way could any person accomplish that than by becoming king? If someone accepts the notion that authoritarian power is valid, why would he not want it to be used to try to create the world as he wants it to be? This is why the only people who truly advocate freedom in principle are anarchists and voluntaryists – people who understand that forcibly dominating others is not legitimate, even when it is called “law,” and even when it is done in the name of “the people” or “the common good,” There is a big difference between striving for a new, wiser, nobler master, and striving for a world of equals, where there are no masters and no slaves. [MORE]
