Skip to content

March 23, 2012


We, the Steadfast Guardians of Liberty

by Kyle Becker

ImageEverywhere around us it appears the ties that bind us together as Americans are unraveling. The value of freedom that formed us as a people and provided us with unity of purpose, and consequentially allowed for civil and sensible national discourse, has been utterly severed. We now discuss to what extent we must enslave our fellow man to our most capricious of desires; and we plot to what degree we will ruin the nation through unchecked debt born of disregard for consequence.

What is lacking in our Constitutional republic is any sound notion of rights; due to the self-serving immediacy of our capacious desires and through our utter confounding of democracy and freedom we have sacrificed our children on the altar of expediency. By majority rule we have selected our oppressors, who heave our wealth into the ever-gaping chasm of want and idleness; and meanwhile, our politicians with earnest displays of self-aggrandizing pomposity claim credit for siphoning off our sweat and tears and blood in which to baptize their party faithful.

With mock sobriety and solemn buffoonery, our alleged field generals in government are marching us towards the abyss. All the while they serenade us to The Battle Hymn of the Republic, a song to which half of them trek us scattershot around the globe and to which the other half have forgotten the words. Whereas the former contingent implores us to fly to arms against vicious, ubiquitous enemies intent on depriving us of our rights, a cause for which we are to sacrifice our sacred freedoms, the latter faithlessly clamor for us to unify with the entire world, including with petty despotisms that would use such an overgenerous pretense to effectively destroy us.

Honor and integrity being as foreign to the paper-pushing tyrants who inhabit the halls of government as the contrived values of the world’s tyrannies are to the majority of Americans, we should probe the ultimate source for our burgeoning oppression. One thing is for certain — we did not survive the darkest periods of human history as a free country to be yoked under by the likes of the two-bit charlatans and slipshod masterminds who currently feign to knuckle us under.

What is essential in our liberation is therefore the promulgation of a proper understanding of rights. This will provide us with the moral clarity with which to decipher the conniving sophistries of our would-be rulers. Rights are ineluctably individual and not contingent upon the accidents of nature, such as skin color, place of birth, or sexual disposition. Such qualifications make a mockery of the legal concept of rights and devolve them merely into state-granted privileges. False conceptions of rights, often flown under the banners of high-sounding euphemisms like “civil rights,” do not put conditions upon government, where the onus properly belongs; but rather put conditions upon our individual rights, which are already due us under the auspices of freedom.

More controversially for those already receptive to such argumentation, and hopefully not an irreparable division between those of us who are already individual rights advocates, in route to reaching a properly arrived at consensus, is the source for our rights. While the Founders and those who properly revere them argue that our inalienable rights emanate from God or a Creator, this is not necessarily the case. Counter-intuitively for many, and argued with full awareness of the religious revulsion that such a statement might provoke, rights can be objectively derived from the true aspects of reality, human nature, and life itself.

Continued at Conservative Daily News.

6 Comments Post a comment
  1. Mar 24 2012

    To me it is not a false dichotomy to say that rights are either given us by the God of nature, or they are temporarily granted by the rulers of civilization. If the latter, then they can be taken away just as easily as they were granted. But if individual rights have nothing to do with any earthly power, then they are inalienable. However, I have also argued before that one does not have to believe in God in order to take someone like John Locke seriously. I may or may not have been right.

  2. May 4 2012

    Appealing to rights on the grounds of God, government, or man’s inherent nature will ultimately fail. The source below deserves a hearing from rational minds. I understand some emotions will be stirred, as is natural, for they are causes to certain effects — the effects being subconscious value judgments. Emotions, however, are not necessarily correct perceptions of reality and should be check at the door before any scientific inquiry is researched.

    “What are rights? Where do they come from? One’s answers to these questions determine whether one is capable of defending a free society. If one does not know the nature and source of rights, one cannot know whether rights are real or imagined. And if rights are not real, there is no foundation for freedom; governments and societies may do as they please.

    “The traditional answers to the above questions fall into three categories: (1) Rights are moral laws specifying what a person should be free to do, and they come from God. (2) Rights are political laws specifying what a person is free to do, and they are created by governments. (3) Rights are moral laws specifying what a person should be free to do, and they are inherent in man’s nature. But each of these theories is demonstrably false, and a person or society attempting to defend freedom on such grounds will ultimately fail—as Americans are failing today.” — Craig Biddle (

    • May 4 2012

      In my opinion, you are neglecting that it is the essence of man to be a rational being. You cannot judge rights according to the variability of rationality, but on the potentiality of a being for being rational.

      • May 4 2012

        Agreed, rights belong to every man, because every man has the same requirements for life whether he recognizes it or not — whether he wishes it or not. His mind is his basic means of survival. I don’t think I was neglecting this fact; sorry if I came across that way.

  3. May 4 2012

    I got that backwards, emotions are effects of certain causes… my bad.


Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. spirit of clarity or divisiveness « JRFibonacci's blog: partnering with reality

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Note: HTML is allowed. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to comments

  • RSS Drudge

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS BigGovernment

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS Reason magazine

  • RSS Counter Jihad Knights

  • RSS Mises Institute

  • RSS BigJournalism

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS Foundation for Economic Education

  • RSS Tenth Amendment Center

  • RSS CATO @ Liberty

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS Newsbusters

  • RSS The UK Libertarian

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS Unified Patriots

  • RSS Common American Journal

  • %d bloggers like this: