Indictment: Prologue or The Shackles of the People, by the People, for the People, Shall Perish from the Earth

> I will close my ears, I don’t need to hear,
> what I am and what I’m not.
> They’re not competent to say such things,
> ’cause they don’t know me after all,
> but in the end I’m still ahead,
> I get to do just what I like.
> The thought of this will bring back the smile on my face.
(Vanilla Ninja (2003) Polluter. On Vanilla Ninja. Estonia: TopTen)

Although the time would be fitting, this is not a discourse on draconian copyright laws, copyright in general, free software, underhand politics, oppressive governments, et cetera. This is a discourse on freedom and liberty. Or rather, this is a discourse on Freedom and Liberty.

If we won all the political fights we are having this very moment, we would be no freer than we have been while fighting them. Why? The political situation right now is constrictive, there is no denying that. However, the restrictiveness and harassment is nothing compared to that of the situation with our goals fulfilled but ourselves unsatisfied and lacking. And we would be lacking: Our freedom would merely be a shade of Freedom, and our liberty would be but a shadow of Liberty. Thus, we need to set Freedom and Liberty as our goals. Not freedom from government, but Freedom from the society — independence. And not liberty constrained by the desires of fellow humans seeking to use and abuse us for their own ends, but Liberty — no conscriptions, no curfews, no taxes, no government — nothing but individual’s wanton desires and noble sentiments to command, restrict, and limit the individual.

Obviously, the challenge itself is not new. It is rather ancient, dating back to the beginning of society. Fellow humans have had an effect on individuals, an influence over individuals, throughout the history. Unfortunately, that influence has also been growing throughout the ages, and the pace of its growth has also been increasing. Thus, individuals have come to the verge of ceasing to be and becoming something else, something Gaia-like, only more sinister, stupid, inadequate, incompetent, constrictive, destructive, and useless.

Furthermore, the challenge has been recognized by various philosophers and statesmen since the antiquity: Urukagina saw the established social order of the 24th-century-BCE Mesopotamia as unjust, and seeked to change it (Wikipedia Contributors (2012, January 11) Urukagina. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 22:24, February 18, 2012.); the Athenians saw the solution in giving the Power to the People, until the death of Socrates woke Plato and inspired him to write the Republic, which advocated for yet another repressive regime, and thus the ever-lasting war between repression-by-a-tyrant-or-the-elite and repression-by-the-People had been firmly established to keep raging forever…

And the battle has been raging through the centuries and millennia, from the Roman Monarchy to the Roman Republic, from the Republic to the Empire, from the Empire to the less worthy medieval regimes, from which to the nation states of the 19th century, wherefrom to communism and fascism, and finally to the repressive regimes of today posing as havens for Freedom and Liberty. While, in fact, the modern self-proclaimed free countries are more often than not as bad as China, only a lot less open about that: Modern repressive regimes at least have the courage to admit being repressive. Modern ‘free’ regimes, on the other hand, tend to be ‘free’ for the majority who do not care about privacy, liberty, due process, harassment, democracy, et cetera. Freedom to conform, however, is no freedom at all. At least the freedom to say that two plus two equals five would have to be granted.

Thus, “freedom” means nothing in the West. One might be allowed to use the old on a rare occasion or two, but reinterpreting and reusing in a way that threatens the social order is forbidden. One might be allowed to protest against minor injustices, but campaigning for environment, privacy, and liberty is effectively forbidden, whether the ban is enforced by the authorities using dystopian tactics from Fahrenheit 451 and Little Brother or societal pressure to keep quiet in order to avoid becoming a pariah. Nevertheless, even the need to campaign for or against something is indicative of societal oppression, especially in conjunction with the possibility of many people attending: The need to protest against something implies the existence of a major wrongdoer, and major wrongdoers are hierarchical mini-societies like corporations and governments; the ability to rally many people is testimony to the fact that the struggle for power takes place between classes, not inside the individual for the Power.

Thus, while the current struggles might be worthy of support, they are irrelevant to the struggle for Power. In order to conquer oneself and become an overman (or an overwoman), one must be a human, an individual. Yet, today’s limitations make it impossible for people to be individuals: Increasing global co-operation among the individuals, which would lead us to a freer society able to nourish overpeople, is being stopped by those in power because they are afraid of losing their power and having to manage by themselves.

So, they have distorted the political theories of free market and liberalism to establish their atrocities as the only possible way forward. If it were not for the state, there would be no monopolies that do not arise from the control of the land and natural resources. (Ludwig von Mises (2000) Liberalism. Ludwig von Mises Institute. Chapter 2, section 7. Retrieved 2012-02-19.) And if it were not for the society, there would be no corporate feoffs. If there were no fiefdoms nor monopolies, then we could abolish the state, and if we had no state, we would be able to disband the society.

When we dissolve the corporations threatening our planet and our livelihoods, we cut off the resources from the state. When we have cut off the resources from the states, they have no choice but not to be. Once the states are no more, we do not have an external enemy left, and we have to turn against ourselves.

Then, we will have to ask ourselves whether we can stop being ‘us’ and become a collection of mes. And it will not be a matter of choice; it will be a matter of individual development. We will have to stop being Caesars and become Socrateses. “I came, I saw, I conquered” simply will not cut it: we have to make it I, instead of us under the aegis of ‘I’. We must not use society, nor may we allow it to influence us. We have to separate from the society and alter individuals; we must not attempt to change the society.

Because society tries to alter people to fit itself and more often than not succeeds at that, society is an evil a priori, and one’s utmost goal can only be to exorcise oneself of the evil, unnatural, and undue influence exercised by the society. The society must not be allowed to hold sway over individuals. And thus, it is only fitting to dissolve the society. The shackles must be broken, the society has to perish, and individuals must be given freedom. Freedom from society must become an essential liberty. And giving up essential liberty for temporal safety is unacceptable.

Addendum: Nothing set forth herein shall be construed as a statement against co-operation of mes, formation of small groups, etc; everything set forth herein shall be construed as an indictment against the society, which is suffocating the mes and trying to make everyone average.

Comments are closed.