Help ! Do I Need A PhD In Liberty Studies ?
By Tim Regan
When one steps into the Sacred Realm of the Liberty Movement or the Patriot Movement , all of a sudden he is faced with the question ; “ Okay , I know something is wrong but exactly what is the problem and what do I need to know in order to help get things back on a proper footing ( and what is the “ proper footing ” anyway )”? There seems to be so many subjects to know about , is it best to research Economics ? Finance ? The Constitution ? How about How Capitalism works ? How Communism works ? Ethics ? Political philosophy ? Also , there is often the feeling that we need to become an “ expert ” on these topics in order to rationally and sanely argue what we just instinctively and intuitively know to be true . Given that most of us were indoctrinated in government concentration camps from K through 12 and possibly went on to party re-education at a local University ( emphasis on “ Uni ”, as in NOT diversity ), how can we expect to think for ourselves and negotiate what is important and what is true and what is not true ? Basically , what makes sense and what doesn ' t ? What caused the financial collapse of 2008 ? Was it deregulation ? Was it too much regulation ? Was it capitalism ? Was it crony capitalism ? What is capitalism ? What is capital ? Do they mean money ? What ' s all the talk about gold ? I ' ve never even seen a gold coin , how could gold be important ? Why do the quarters and other coins keep changing their look ? Is the government up to something ? Oops -- sorry , I got a little lost . But , do you see what I mean when I say it ' s easy to get lost in the confusion that faces us when we are beginning to awaken to the possibility of a better way ? In the past I have tried to be a well informed grownup by watching the news intently and trying to digest just exactly what was going on in the world . Well , guess what ? I have since learned that to be an informed adult does not include swallowing everything a distinguished looking gentleman in a tie is telling me I should know , and how I should think about it . I don ' t care if it ' s ABC , NBC , FOX , CNN , or MSNBC , these people are not fostering an atmosphere of honest intellectual inquiry . Why should they ? That ' s not their job . They have a bill of goods to sell and they are going to do whatever it takes to make the sale . Sex may sell but repeating talking points over and over
Pono Press , June 2013 , Page 10
again sells even more . Just as troublesome as saying A is true because FOX said so , is to say A must be true because MSNBC said B was true . I must admit , avoiding this knee-jerk reaction is not easy when discussing my freedoms or the future of my country . Okay , so we can ' t trust our education , we can ' t trust our media celebrities , and chances are we can ' t even trust our friends and family because they ' ve probably been corrupted by both . How do we know where to stand on so many complex issues ? The answer is actually very easy . The answer is principles . I don ' t mean have principles so you can be morally upstanding and you will be rewarded with accolades , reverence , and position and later be granted a place in heaven . Although this may or may not be a result of your maintaining principles . What I mean is : know what your principles are , and understand those principles thoroughly . Then when faced with an issue , whether an economic issue i . e ., Should the Fed be engaged in quantitative easing ?, or a fiscal issue , i . e ., Should the government be paying out unemployment insurance for 99 weeks ?, or a constitutional issue , i , e ., Is Obamacare constitutional ?, never argue the issue . Instead , identify the principle being challenged , and explore how this incidental topic matches up to your principle . When your principle is taken as a premise , or starting point of reasoning , you can build on this premise to reach a logical conclusion . Then all you have to do is compare this conclusion with the issue at hand . If the issue is out of accord with this endpoint , well , then obviously it is not aligned with your principle . Logic would then dictate you reject that stance taken on that particular issue . I know that was a mouthful but maybe this example will help illustrate ... For example : Issue-The creepy mayor of Buttinskiburg declares that no more cupcakes shall be made within the city limits . If the cupcake makers want to stay in business they will have to change the name of their product to deathcakes and apply to the city for a deathcake license . They will also have to pay a fee and of course the deathcake tax for each unit sold . Argument- There are so many ways to debate this new “ cupcake ” law . How can I possibly knock down
( Continued on page 11 )