Sunday, July 14, 2013

Democracy: The Enemy of Freedom
















Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi was ousted barely 1 year into his 4 year term. Supporters of the former President claim his opponents "are afraid of democracy."

Is this email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser.



















FPP.cc
















In late June, large scale protests erupted in Egypt, as protesters demanded Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi restructure his cabinet and call early elections. On July 1, CNN reported one supporter said, "the president is staying. We believe in democracy. If people don't like him, they can vote him out in three years."That sentiment was echoed by Abdul Mawgoud Dardery, a representative for the Muslim Brotherhood, saying the opposition “failed in the previous five elections we had in Egypt since the revolution, and they don't want to fail a sixth time. That's why they're going to street politics. Street politics is not an end in itself. It is a means to achieve democracy.”On July 3, Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Gehad El-Haddad, told CNN that Mohamed Morsi and members of his Presidential team had been arrested by presidential guards. The head of Egypt's Freedom and Justice Party and the deputy leader of the Muslim Brotherhood also were arrested.Before the arrests, Dardery claims that Morsi has reached out to opposition leaders many times, but the opposition is “afraid of democracy.” That is an interesting choice of words. Especially when one considers that most Americans believe that “freedom” and “democracy” go hand-in-hand with one another. In the minds of many, “afraid of democracy” is akin to “afraid of freedom,” however the two statements are almost contradictory.

In practical application, democracy is a system in which a plurality of people who show up on voting day attempt to impose their will on everyone else. Allow me to pause for a second to say that I'm not opposed to voting, as I believe one can vote in self-defense; I am however opposed to the system that uses threats of force to make everyone in a geographic area comply with the wishes of a few. If the joint opinion of the plurality changes in the middle of the term, in most cases there is no option for recourse.

Why then should people not have a manner in which they can let it be known that they do not consent to the ideas expressed by the local (or national) government? Why must everyone be obligated to live under the policies chosen by a plurality of people as expressed on a given day?

The idea seems foreign to most people, and they would likely claim “it would never work,” or “it’s never been done before.” Both claims are, in fact, false! Polycentric societies have existed in several places at various times throughout history; in Medina during the time of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad, in Gaelic areas during the middle ages, and to a lesser extent in the United States before the New Deal when most people received social services from fraternal organizations or mutual aid societies.

I long for the day when democracy, much like slavery, is viewed, not only, as a thing of the past but also a system that should have never existed. No government or society should be able to claim a monopoly over any geographic area, and every individual should be able to give his consent to and/or withdraw his consent from any “government” at any time. In fact, I recall being taught that governments exist with the consent of the governed. Can someone then choose to not consent? If not, how is “forced consent” different than a contract signed under duress?

--
In Peace, Freedom, Love & Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry


Darryl W. Perry is an activist, author, poet & statesman. Darryl is a regular contributor to The Bulverde StandardThe Canyon Lake Week and The Comal Beacon and writes a monthly article for The Sovereign. He hosts the weekly news podcasts Freedom Minute and Police Accountability Report and co-hosts the weekly radio show Voluntary Values on the Liberty Radio Network.

Darryl is a co-founder and co-chair of the NH Liberty Party.

Darryl is the Owner/Managing Editor of Free Press Publications.


To schedule an interview with Darryl please send an email to editor@fpp.cc or call 202 709 4377



17 comments:

  1. Links
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/01/world/meast/egypt-protests/index.html

    http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/03/egypt-live-blog/?iref=allsearch

    http://fpp.cc/?p=1389#sthash.WoV6kgUj.dpbs

    http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/14/why-muslim-fundamentalists-should-embrace-voluntaryist-anarchy/

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVRsyc7YJTE

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well as my motto says in my gravitar profile:

    "Government is a racket". And I suppose you can take from that that I am an anarchist. But that term comes with a lot of baggage...as if it means to institute something. But what I mean by it is no government.
    And by "government" I mean a body that has the monopoly of force.

    The early settlers here on Turtle Island were of such a mix and there was so much "frontier" that they could opt out, go off into the wilderness and live in such freedom. Many took to the native ways.

    Now the world is packed to the gills with people - all under some form or other of "government" - it is like rats in a cage. I don't know how to convince people to fucking mind their own business and stay out of others. They are habituated to this system. And as far as I can tell it is all going to implode at some point.

    Whatever, all I can do is philosophize at this point, and not expect anything to come together in any sane way. I can only attempt to hold on to my own sanity. And it is hard to do in this pathological society full of jitterbugs and sleepwalkers.

    "What's it all mean Mr Natural?" __ "It don't mean shit"

    Still the most prescient attitude I have come across...

    \\][//

    ReplyDelete
  4. CLASSIC POINT: Federal Democracy? Big Brother? Policing the State? All of the above?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZKlMYeJE_AM

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/harry-reid-zimmerman-trial-isnt-over_739363.html

    A perfect execution for assault on several amendment here as well as conflict of interests, double jeopardy and a host of creative globalist treachery.

    Eric Holder must be salivating.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I pretty much conclude we are all anarchist by degree.

    Monopolists of truth by force created my philosophy and anarchist nature. If sold in truth, I'd accept any form of government and it's authority if they were willing to prove their case. They have long bypassed that option and the defense is one that should refuse to rest. This acquittal had no legs for the fight but the Chicago crime syndicate will see that it marches on. That's a given. Never rest. They don't.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Clearly double jeopardy...there is now ex post facto...more than anything as far as writing laws to allow, after the government breaks a law...but still if it was illegal at the time, it is ex post facto as much as the standard issue.

    Let's just face it, there is no law in effect here, only diktat, the rule of men.

    \\][//

    ReplyDelete
  7. boomerangcomesbackJuly 14, 2013 at 4:54 PM

    Watching Harry Reid mouthing subtleties, whilst knowing he has "Truth" chained to the wall in his basement, and beats it nightly into a bloody froth, while he wacks off for the afterglow, and thinks about the next gate he must "keep" for his handlers...leaves me nothing to think about this swine shit other than to lump him in with the other ilk he hangs out with and protects. This creature is the antithesis of "humanitarian" and one day the absolutely idiotic voting sheeple who keep such a cockroach in a "policy" position for years, will finally see beyond their blindness.

    I pity the fool. His judgement is already written in stone.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Henoch Prophecies

    ***** *****

    http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/The_Henoch_Prophecies

    Hmmm....???

    \\][//

    ReplyDelete
  9. "The security and surveillance state, after crushing the Occupy movement and eradicating its encampments, has mounted a relentless and largely clandestine campaign to deny public space to any group or movement that might spawn another popular uprising. The legal system has been grotesquely deformed in most cities to, in essence, shut public space to protesters, eradicating our right to free speech and peaceful assembly. The goal of the corporate state is to criminalize democratic, popular dissent before there is another popular eruption. The vast state surveillance system, detailed in Edward Snowden’s revelations to the British newspaper The Guardian, at the same time ensures that no action or protest can occur without the advanced knowledge of our internal security apparatus. This foreknowledge has allowed the internal security systems to proactively block activists from public spaces as well as carry out pre-emptive harassment, interrogation, intimidation, detention and arrests before protests can begin. There is a word for this type of political system—tyranny."~Chris Hedges

    \\][//

    ReplyDelete
  10. An optimist thinks this is the best possible world.
    A pessimist fears this is true.

    \\][//

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dress me in black and call me an anarchist too ;)

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm just kinda wild about Harry. He's like an old Vegas casino pimp. Mo Green.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Just like Kent St. and Chicago. Except , we don't even flinch over it now. HoHum. Lockdowns over Chechen crack dealers.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Wooooo Hooooo! Damned girl you make us friggin crazy when you dissapear. I love this anarchy thing. It's much easier than being a terrorist. Less work.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sorry PD :( Couldn't help it. Been a crazy couple of weeks for me and I was barely online even to check email. Good to be back with you and the gang. Now, please can you take the wanted poster down? lol

    ReplyDelete
  16. “We need a program of psychosurgery for political control of our society. The purpose is physical control of the mind. Everyone who deviates from the given norm can be surgically mutilated. The individual may think that the most important reality is his own existence, but this is only his personal point of view. . . Man does not have the right to develop his own mind. . . . We must electronically control the brain. Someday armies and generals will be controlled by electronic stimulation of the brain.”
    ~Dr. Jose M.R. Delgado, Director of Neuropsychiatry
    Yale University Medical School, Congressional Record, No. 26, Vol. 118, February 24, 1974.

    \\][//

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Like serfs in the dark ages, American citizens can be picked up on the authority of some unknown person in the executive branch and thrown in a dungeon, subject to torture, without any evidence ever being presented to a court or any information to the person’s relatives of his/her whereabouts."
    ~Paul Craig Roberts

    ReplyDelete