A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **

News in all languages
Last 30 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Castellano_ Català_ Deutsch_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ All_other_languages _The.Supplement
{Info on A-Infos}

(en) CHAIN REACTION #9 - P@triots of Liberty Traitors to Tyranny - By Ronald A. Young

From Texarchist1@wmconnect.com
Date Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:20:27 -0500 (EST)


 ________________________________________________
      A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
            http://www.ainfos.ca/
        http://ainfos.ca/index24.html
 ________________________________________________

    The heated atmosphere of reactionary
jingoism and flag-waving patriotic hysteria,
which has grown out of the 9/11 attacks, has
resulted in a finger-pointing campaign
against dissenters opposed to United States
foreign policy, accusing them of being
traitors. The question that should first be asked
is: What are they traitors to and who are
their accusers?

     There is certainly nothing wrong with being
a traitor to tyranny and oppression. On
the other hand, those who would betray the
cause of liberty are traitors to the whole of
humanity and seek not freedom and justice for
all, but domination and exploitation of the
many by the few. Being a patriotic supporter of a
government doesn't necessarily equate
with being a patriotic supporter of liberty. In
fact, one is often in conflict with the other. It
is the ages-old battle of libertarianism versus
authoritarianism. Which one prevails
depends on how we approach the challenge of
deciding who is and who is not a traitor to
the ideal of liberty.

     Interspersed among the many imposters
vying for the title of "Defender of Liberty"
are a few individuals who are the genuine
article. To help you to better recognize the
traitors to liberty, I will immediately tell you that
none of the Defenders of liberty reside
in the White House. None are members of
president Bush's cabinet or staff. None are
appointees of George W. Bush in any capacity.
And none are members of Congress {with
the exception of perhaps one representative).
We can certainly exclude the overwhelming
majority of government bureaucrats and
politicians inhabiting the various levels of
government. That certainly eliminates a great
many people who likely consider
themselves to be patriots and, thus, defenders of
liberty. Unfortunately, these traitors to
the ideal of liberty are very much patriots of
tyranny hiding behind a curtain of lies and
deceit, causing confusion in the minds of many.

     It is up to each one of us who truly cherish
liberty to ascertain who is a real Defender
of Liberty--the genuine article--and who is an
imposter. If we choose correctly, the grand
prize will be the realization of  "life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness" as set out in the
Declaration of Independence. However, if we
choose wrong and go along with the
imposters, we will realize the true meaning of
the phrase "police state" and what it means
to live in a society based on corporate
totalitarianism. You may have heard of such a
society, for it is commonly referred to as
fascism. Instead of "life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness" we will be relegated to "work,
consume, and obey." Look around and see
for yourself if we are not already in the throes of
such a society, having been led down
the road to enslavement by our devious leaders
who cloak themselves in the terminology
of liberty even as they strip away our freedom.

     In this new era of permanent war and
nationalistic chauvinism, the word "patriot" is
used almost exclusively to describe a person
who gives unquestioning allegiance to the
State, or unquestioningly accepts the actions of
the State--no matter how rogue or
authoritarian or contrary to the ideals of liberty
those actions happen to be. Practically all
Americans have heard during their lifetimes the
phrase "My country right or wrong."
This is what many Americans see as true
patriotism. In their eyes all others are traitors.
Being such a nationalist means never having to
say you're sorry for the misery, death and
destruction heaped upon the rest of the world in
your pursuit of absolute power in the
name of "national security." Just shut-up and
stand at attention when that glorious flag
passes by--the one soaked in the blood of
millions of innocents whose life was drained
out of them so a nation could falsely claim to be
the upholder of liberty while subjecting
the rest of the inhabitants of the planet to
tyranny.

     The word "patriot" is often accompanied by
the word "courage." Those individuals
who defend the State--whether it is right or
wrong (and when it comes to the ideal of
liberty the State is always wrong)--are
automatically presumed to possess courage
while
those who refuse to goose-step in blind
obedience are automatically branded as cowards
and traitors. But it certainly takes more courage
to stand apart and question the actions of
leaders--particularly in a time of crisis (real or
perceived)--than it does to graze with the
unquestioning herd.

     Apparently most Americans aren't familiar
with their own history; otherwise they
wouldn't so easily be taken in by the jingoists.
Instead, they would see that it's possible to
be both a traitor and a patriot.  There is no
contradiction here. If a person is a patriot of
liberty, then she/he must at the same time be a
traitor to tyranny. The American
Revolution was itself an act of treason against
the British Crown, and all who fought for
or supported the Americans were traitors to
England. Yet these traitors called themselves
patriots because they were fighting for the ideal
of liberty, which meant more to them (at
least theoretically) than allegiance to any
government. They even said so in the
Declaration of Independence: "whenever any
Form of Government becomes destructive
of these ends [of securing our inalienable rights,
among which are life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness], it is the Right of the
People to alter or abolish it...." These patriots
didn't fight against one form of tyranny simply
to exchange it for a domestic form. Yet
that is exactly what we have today--liberty being
sacrificed to the dictates of the
government. We as a people have lost our way
and long since departed from the road to
liberty.

     The fundamental lesson that we all must
glean from the American Revolution is this:
liberty is not preserved nor advanced by the
blind sheep who wave a flag and chant "My
country right or wrong." Liberty can be saved
only by those individuals who are
courageous enough to step back from the
obedient masses and directly challenge the
tyrannical actions of the government. When any
government asks the people under its
authority to surrender their liberties for the sake
of preserving the government, that, my
friends, is a government of tyranny.
Government cannot give us liberty. Government
can
only take liberty away from the people--even in
a so-called "representative democracy."
In order to be a patriot to liberty you must be a
traitor to power--especially the despotic
power of government.

      History also teaches us that many of the
America founders were immediately traitors
to the ideal of liberty. Besides being
slave-owners and denying the right to vote to
the
majority of Americans, the founders quickly
passed legislation to criminalize dissent and
any future revolutionary actions on the part of
the people, thus consolidating all power in
the government--not in the people. Upon
arriving in office, the second president of the
United States--John Adams--passed the
infamous Sedition Act making it a federal crime
to criticize the government. So much for the
ideal of liberty. That sounds amazingly
similar to the present heated atmosphere that so
quickly labels a person as a traitor for
standing up against president Bush and
Attorney General Ashcroft's blitzkrieg attack on
our civil liberties.

      The 9/11 terrorist attacks were massive and
horrific, and in no way is this article
intended to excuse or support the loss of
innocent life that occurred. But neither will it
excuse the reactionary and opportunistic actions
taken by Bush, who is exploiting the
deaths of innocents to achieve his tyrannical and
fascist ambitions. This isn't a first for
American leaders, but follows a long tradition of
traitorous acts against the people's
liberty. For instance, after World War II
then-president Harry Truman created the
National Security Council, which ushered in the
era of the National Security State and
further debilitated the ideal of liberty. When
Bush established the Office of Homeland
Security, he examined how president Truman
had created the National Security Council,
which Bush said had "similar domestic
coordination functions," according to recent
public comments by Bush adviser Karl Rove.
The phrase "domestic coordination
functions" is tyrant-babble for systematic
implementation of police-state procedures.

     Benjamin Franklin once said, "They that can
give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety." The words "safety" and "security"
are synonymous. As Ben rightly knew, we do
not defend liberty by sacrificing it (even
partially) at the altar of national security. The
term "national security" is used by the
traitors to liberty who wrap themselves in the
flag and then make lofty pronouncements
from on high about how, in the interest of
national security, we must allow the
government to infringe upon and trample our
sacred freedoms. Is it not obvious to all that
those who so quickly ask us to forsake a little
liberty in the interest of "national security"
are not concerned in the least with the
preservation pf individual liberty, but only with
preserving the government--the National
Security State-at all costs? If not, it certainly
should be. It's time the bleary-eyed masses
awakened to this truth.

     The National Security State is slowly sucking
the marrow out of the body of liberty.
As it now stands, the body of liberty is on life
support and fading fast. And as soon as
liberty is vanquished by the National Security
State, the government will be free to
terrorize the people and make whatever
demands it chooses. Not that it doesn't try to do
so now, but at least we presently have some
semblance of a free society (even if
superficially) to question the authoritarian
actions of our leaders. The national security
interest, however, is already hard at work
creating an atmosphere of terror designed to
effectively silence all public dissent. For all
intents and purposes, the American people
will have traded one form of terrorism for
another--STATE
TERRORISM!

     The truth is that those among us who put the
national security interest above the
liberty interest are the ones who are unpatriotic
traitors. They are traitors to the ideal of
liberty, the ideal that was first and foremost in
the minds of Revolutionary Patriots as
they fought and gave their lives to be loosed
from the shackles of a tyrannical
government. If there is no liberty, there is no
America. And every time we sacrifice a
little bit of liberty to the National Security State,
we are dishonoring all those who
sacrificed their lives for the ideal of liberty. It's
true that many American soldiers have
fought in wars to defend the State. But a greater
number have fought defending the ideal
of liberty, however misguided they may have at
times been in the ways they chose to
defend it.

     Patrick Henry is likely the most renowned
and quoted of all American revolutionary-
era patriots. On March 23, 1775, Henry gave a
speech in Richmond, Virginia to rally men
together for a militia to fight against the British
Army. He was a traitor to England but a
patriot to liberty. Every American school child
has at one time or another recited a phrase
from that speech which became the rallying cry
of all Defenders of liberty and the most
memorable words in American history.

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!

Patrick Henry recognized the tyranny inherent
in a large centralized government and the
standing army that would ultimately arise to
enforce its despotic powers. He was as
vehemently opposed to the federal government
(and the U.S. Constitution that brought it
into existence) as he had been to the British
government in pre- revolutionary days.
Henry declined an appointment to the
Constitutional Convention of 1787. When it
came
time for his home state of Virginia to ratify the
U.S. Constitution, Henry, as a member of
the state convention, stood with the opposition,
recognizing that the Constitution greatly
imperiled the liberty of the people.

     Even an enlightened libertarian such as
Patrick Henry could not have fathomed in his
day how the monolithic federal government
would grow to become the liberty-devouring
National Security State. If he were alive today,
Henry would surely be outraged to see
how the tyrannical tentacles of the federal
government have become so completely and
absolutely wrapped around the people's
freedoms. He certainly would not hesitate to
raise
a voice of utter indignation against such a
government and immediately rally the people
to overthrow such a bunch of despots as we now
have. Such a call for revolution is very
much in line with the principles laid out in the
Declaration of Independence. Patrick
Henry was willing to give his life for the ideal of
liberty, not the ideal of government.
The annals of American history are replete with
documentation of Henry's unwavering
opposition to the tyrannical authoritarianism of
government, which he recognized so
well.

     Patrick Henry did not say give me a
republican form of government or give me
death.
Patrick Henry did not say give me the National
Security State or give me death. No, he
said, "GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME
DEATH!" Henry
recognized then, as many others did and still do,
that without liberty there is nothing but
tyranny--even in an American republic. And the
inherent tyranny of government never
bequeaths liberty or security, only "chains and
slavery." For without liberty for all there
can be no security.

      Even Thomas Jefferson, who penned the
Declaration of Independence (though not an
anti-authoritarian on the level of Patrick Henry),
believed that "a little rebellion now and
then is a good thing" in order to keep the
tyrannical tendencies of government in check--
even in a republic. This is especially true when
the political leaders and governmental
bureaucrats of a "representative democracy"
lose sight of the fact that government derives
its powers from the people and that the people
retain all of their inalienable rights. No
majority or
government can legitimately take those rights
away from any individual; and to even give
consent for the government or anyone to do so
is an act of treason against the ideal of
liberty and against all of humanity.

     Americans are under the mistaken belief that
our liberty flows from the Constitution,
but this is simply wrong. The powers delegated
to the government through the
Constitution are derived from the people and are
equally recallable by the people
regardless of what any piece of paper may say to
the contrary. The people are vested with
the ability to delegate such power through the
collective exercise of the inalienable rights
retained by each individual. However, this
vested ability is by no means a license for the
majority to surrender each individual's
liberty-piece by piece-to governmental control
and the tyranny of the National Security State.
Being inalienable rights of the individual,
each one holds sovereignty over those rights and
they are not revocable even by a
majority vote. When a public opinion poll, such
as a New York Times/CBS News poll in
December 2001, claims that 64 percent of
Americans think it's a good idea for the
president to have the authority to change rights
usually guaranteed by the Constitution,
we libertarians can only conclude that either the
majority of Americans are ignorant
about the inalienability of individual rights or
else they are simply traitors to the ideal of
liberty.

     As the government compels us through its
coercive force to surrender "just a little
more" of our precious liberty, we should heed
what Stephen Gaskin wrote over 20 years
ago in his book Rendered Infamous:

They never give back the emergency powers.
After you get used to them,
they ask for more. We accept that numbly
which would have had us
screaming in the streets ten years ago. And we
are being prepared to
accept even more. (115).

All this whittling away at our liberty, if not
reversed now, has one inevitable conclusion--
tyranny and slavery for all. Who among us is
wiling to stand as a bulwark against the
tyranny of the National Security State in defense
of liberty? This is not something that
you and I can put off for another moment.
President George W. Bush has declared in the
aftermath of 9/11 a "war on terrorism" which in
reality has quickly become a "war of
terrorism," with the National Security State
doing the terrorizing and our civil liberties
being among the first of many casualties. In his
address to a joint session of Congress on
September 20, 2001, Bush decreed to all the
world, "Either you are with us, or you are
with the terrorists." But the "us" Bush referred
to in his speech are not the people and
their liberties, but rather the National Security
State. In other words, Bush has dictated
the ultimatum that we all must abdicate to the
throne of the National Security State or
else be crushed under its heel. What this reveals
is that Bush and his treasonous
supporters--90 percent of Americans, according
to public opinion polls--are nothing short
of opportunists seizing upon a golden
opportunity to turn the recent terrorist attacks
into a
right-wing attack on liberty, playing on the fear
created by these attacks to achieve their
own devious plans of establishing a police state.

     To re-coin Bush's famous phrase: Either you
are with liberty, or you are with the
National Security State. There is no middle
ground. The National Security State has
shown itself to have a voracious appetite for
individual liberty, which will never be
satisfied until it has consumed all our freedoms.
Defenders of Liberty will always be in
conflict with defenders of the National Security
State and will inevitably be labeled by
the tyrannical powers as "enemies of the State."
If that's the case, then let us stand
proudly with the patriots who dedicated their
lives in the service of defending liberty as
enemies of the State. As the saying goes, it's
better to die on your feet than live on your
knees.

      Bush and all the National Security State
apologists are the real threat to liberty--not
just the liberty of Americans but also the liberty
of all humanity. It is they who have
perverted the ideal of liberty upon which
America was founded (exchanging their
freedom for the tyranny of the State), and it is
they who we must submit as being the real
traitors. The greatest irony of Bush's treachery
would be that he should find himself-
along with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, et
al.--facing a people's tribunal for crimes
against humanity. They are the true axis of evil
and are all worthy of the punishment for
high treason which they so righteously advocate
against the Defenders of Liberty.

     As Defenders of Liberty we must stand
together with our global brothers and sisters to
resist and defeat the forces of oppression
emanating from the National Security State that
operate to keep us shackled and subjugated to
the dictates of authoritarianism.

Now is indeed the time to stand up and defend
liberty and freedom. But
the liberty we choose to defend puts human
rights above property rights.
The liberty and freedom we choose to defend
belongs to all the people of
the world, not just an elite few. In contrast, the
liberty and freedom Bush
speaks of is the freedom to exploit and oppress,
and to despoil the earth's
resources and our environment [to kill our
planet] in the name of capitalist
profits. We reject this idea of liberty and
freedom for the few at the
expense of the many. (Young, "No Masters! No
Gods!").

     In 1837, U.S. slavery abolitionist William
Lloyd Garrison said, "Our country is the
world--our countrymen are all mankind." The
inalienable rights of liberty belong to all
the people of the world. It is the height of
arrogance and folly that any society should
expect to be secure while depriving others of
their liberty. And just as the abolitionists of
the nineteenth century were compelled by
conscience to defend liberty against the hands
of state-sanctioned chattel slavery, we today
(the Defenders of Liberty) must rise to the
occasion to once again do battle against the
forces of the National Security State, which
are attempting to enslave us as the property of
despotic tyrants. As Defenders of Liberty,
we will stand firm in the defense of liberty for
all, whether we must do so against a
tyrannical National Security State or a cowardly
and traitorous majority of Americans
who support such a State at the expense of
liberty. Let us stand up and seize what is
rightfully ours. LIBERTY FOR All, FOREVER!

This article is reprinted from CHAIN
REACTION #9. The entire 20-page zine is
available from CR Collective. Email:
Texarchist1@wmconnect.com.




*******
                       ********
       ****** The A-Infos News Service ******
      News about and of interest to anarchists
                       ******
  COMMANDS: lists@ainfos.ca
  REPLIES: a-infos-d@ainfos.ca
  HELP: a-infos-org@ainfos.ca
  WWW: http://www.ainfos.ca/
  INFO: http://www.ainfos.ca/org

-To receive a-infos in one language only mail lists@ainfos.ca the message:
                unsubscribe a-infos
                subscribe a-infos-X
 where X = en, ca, de, fr, etc. (i.e. the language code)


A-Infos Information Center