I frequently draw the motivation for my posts from encounters I have had with other people. This is one such post. In this case, I had a series of discussions with an individual who eventually told me — with certainty — that I am part of our social problem because I am rigid in my thinking. This person told me that I am stuck in the thinking that people either had to agree with me or they were wrong — period. Strangely enough, reality was the other way around: it was this person who held that form of thinking. But the truly sad part — at least to me — was that they do not see it.
I think a little back ground is in order here. This person reached out to me. They started our correspondence. From the very start, and in every conversation we had, this person worded things in a way that made it clear that they would only consider what I had to say if I agreed with them. For example: this person told me they needed to know my answer to a certain question before they could take me seriously. When I answered their question, they said they agreed with me, so they could now take me seriously. This was the way things went between us — until the first time I disagreed with them! The moment I disagreed with this person, they start telling me that I was stuck in the way I think. That I was close-minded and only saw the world in terms of black and white. They said they were trying to have an ‘honest’ discussion with me, but that they couldn’t because of my rigid and wrong thinking. Then they told me there is something wrong with me (implying a mental disorder or instability of some type). So, needless to say, we are no longer having any form of discussion.
Now, here’s the thing between this person and myself. First, I had qualified everything I said to them. I specifically told them that I was speaking in terms of ‘Left and Right,’ ‘Democrat and Republican’ for the sake of common convention. I also told them that I no longer think in such terms. I explained that I see the divide as Lawful vs Lawless, Tyranny vs Liberty, God vs Rebellion. I also repeatedly told this person they were free to reject anything I said. I made it very clear that I was not demanding they accept my arguments. But none of that seems to have registered. In fact, it was as if this person never heard any of my words. They just told me that I was thinking wrong by trying to force my views on them and by trying to put them in an ‘Either/Or’ box and then they broke off our chats.
So, what are we to make of such people? Especially when, if we are honest and take an objective look at things, we tend to see such people are the ones with a rigid, ‘Either/Or’ pattern of thinking? And worse yet, these are the same people who seem to feel they are entitled to force others to agree with them. They will either shout you down, insult you or seek to use the force of government to impose their will on you. Yet, for some reason, they also believe they hold the moral high ground. In their minds, anyone who disagrees is ‘The Problem,’ and their moral superiority justifies them in trying to ‘Solve the Problem. This is the thinking of tyrants, but they cannot see that. They are impervious to reason — even to the plain meaning of a simple definition. So, again, what do we do with such people? How do we treat them? Or do we respond to them?
Well, this page is devoted to Natural Law, so I will turn to Natural Law for my solution. Unfortunately, the only solution seems to be to leave them alone in their delusion — until such time as they become a threat to my Rights or the Rights of others. At that point — under Natural Law — they must be restrained. You see, they are free to think and believe however they wish. But, at the moment they seek to use force against the will of another person, they enter in to a state of war with that person.
Natural Law dictates that we defend ourselves from attacks by external forces that seek to control our will or harm our body and property. But we live under a Social Contract (i.e. rule of law) that has been put in place to help us defend ourselves. We restrict some of our Natural Rights with the understanding that the Law will execute them for us. So, in the case where a person or group of people seek to force their will on others, the Law has a duty to stop them. At the very least, this is how our system of government is supposed to work. However, we have allowed too many of these delusional people to seize control of our system. They have turned it into a weapon that they are now using to further their will; to force their will on all those who resist them.
My dear reader, this is the very definition of tyranny!
Now, when we reach the point where these tyrants have seized so much of the law that the law can and will no longer protect us, then the government ceases to be legitimate and we are all thrown back into a state of war with everyone else in society — as well as with the government. Therefore, the question before us today is this:
Where is that point?
THE ROAD TO CONCORD 