Fifth of Liberty

Share

A lot of young people now remember the Fifth of November, but very few of them really understand what it truly means. Coopted by the Occupy Wall Street movement, the image of Guy Fawkes has become associated with something somewhat skew from its original intent, as a new version of "rage against the machine" without bothering to identify what the "machine" means. Young people may foment and rant about big business, but it is big government that always does the most to reduce human options, human potential, human liberty, and human happiness. Guy Fawkes, and the Gunpowder Treason, were not about what people think. This was about LIBERTY. It was about an idea that men ought to be agents rather than objects, that government was bloated and oppressive, that it was inefficient and corrupt, and that when a man stands up against tyranny he might actually change the world. As you go to vote next week remember that although Fawkes failed, 276 years later, in Philadelphia, another group of men started a movement that succeeded and gave us the liberty that we do enjoy, a freer country than the world had know for centuries, if we can keep it.

Guy Fawkes belonged to a group that felt that the central government of Britain had too much power. Ironically enough, the ensconced government managed to convince a plurality of young people that it intends to increase freedom. How, exactly? The liberal left hates religion, guns, conservative freedom of speech, the Constitution, election law, law in general, police, etc., all of which are actually part of our law and legal system. How does that increase freedom to flaunt the law? What they really mean is they want to control HOW you are free. Well, if rights come from man, and Barack Obama believes that they do, then it is government's power to give or take them at will. This is actually the opinion of feudal lords, or in other words the same opinions about government and its relationship to the people held by the powers Fawkes intended to disrupt. His efforts were aimed at taking government's eye off oppression of the people and focusing on itself. Far too many of our leaders, including Donald Trump if he is elected, think that "whatsoever a man doeth is no crime" if it's legal. Well, that's because they do not believe in natural law. Sure they believe in what they call "science", and they claim they believe in karma, but who decides what constitutes reason and good karma without a standard, which is something in which our leaders do not really believe. It's a convenient religion to worship government, but that's just as bad as if not worse than trusting in men of the cloth because every man is flawed in some way, and so what they do cannot possibly ever be perfect.

Guy Fawkes' actions were designed to reduce the efficacy of government overreach. A large explosion in a building housing the bureaucracy would provide a significant setback four centuries ago to the administrative state's ability to harass, delay, and defraud the populace. Rather than looking outward, they would have to put things back together before any foray out to harass the citizenry could be effectively mounted. The king of England was the final word. With the creation of the Anglican Church under Henry, the king wasn't just the political and military leader, he WAS god. Rights, gifts, and everything were up to him, and that was an ideal as offensive and vile as any the people of that island ever knew, because as flawed as they were they at least meant to worship God. "There is God and there is government. God is greater than government, and government doesn't like that" (Inga Barks). Whenever any government becomes disruptive of our rights under natural law, it is our right and responsibility to resist. Fawkes did so violently. Others do so peacably, but he did something, and as Teddy Roosevelt would say, credit goes to the man in the arena, and that's why we remember Fawkes.

Guy Fawkes Day occurs near election day every year in America and ought to remind us why the gunpowder treason got started in the first place and its relationship to American Liberty. In truth, the events his failed actions set in motion eventually precipitated the American Revolutionary War because the government of King James and the government of King George both enslaved the people to their government. The tyranny of British Monarchy demanded loyalty and offered nothing in return. It was long on talk and short on action, and so both of these dynasties eventually fell for the same reason. Although destroying Parliament would not defeat Britain, Fawkes and his fellows knew that symbols are given power by people and that if enough people got behind it, it would change the world. It didn't work in 1604, but in 1776, the symbols in America DID work to galvanize a continent to throw off the oppression of an island.

This election day, we have a choice between a candidate who will do whatever it takes to centralize power in government and a buffoon. Hillary Clinton has shown for 30 years that she will do whatever it takes to empower government and by association empower her since she's part of executing government mandates, no matter what it costs you. Her final stretch ads claim that she will rebuilt America- an America she essentially destroyed. Despite what Clinton claims, she is not interested in expanding your options; she is interested in dictating which ones you have, even if they are ones you desire. I grow tired of her ads on youtube claiming that she campaigns to help children when she ignores the potential of a fetus to become a full-fledged citizen; liberals do not care about your potential, because they believe it's unfair for people to not be equal in every way (except of course for them, they may be whatever they like). Liberals do not believe in freedom the way we mean it; they mean to be free from restraints, except those restraints they happen to feel ought be imposed upon you at this moment, and they encourage behaviors that enslave the mind and body (drugs, sex, etc.). Where on earth are liberals actually happy? They claim they just need a little more time, a little more power, and a little more money, and THEN they will be able to deliver on their promises, but this is a lie. If they deliver, and you become happy, you will not need them, and they cannot abide that. According to them, you will always have too much freedom and too much money until you have none at all of either, and even then they may, as they did in Europe, squeeze it out of you or incarcerate you for inability to pay tax.