The Parable of the CEO

There once was a CEO, named John, who founded and owned a large, successful real estate corporation, and owned a red H2 Hummer (an ATV, all-terrain vehicle), several Navy blue suits, and many silky, shiny, white shirts and ties. Now John had a very good friend, named Isaac, who typically drove a white porsche and wore a blue suit; the car was a promotional bonus gift from John, who just recently transferred Isaac to a nice position in the accounting department in his successful company.

Several employees in the accounting department immediately decided that they did not like Isaac, because of his suit and car, which was a gift from John as part of the transfer bonus, so after a short time they all threw him hard up against the wall. He fought them all back, and of course several of the employees either left the company or were fired.

Isaac rose to fill the vacancies left by these ex-employees, which made them hate him all the more. These ex-employees were, of course, envious of and angry at John, and they hired hitmen to attack both John and Isaac. One hitman, named Al, entered the company and passed by security without being detected. He approached John from behind and shot him three times, once in each leg and once in the head, though John's hard hat substantially minimized the damage, before John's security engaged and repelled the threat. Al left a message for John: "Fire Isaac, resign your position, and give us your company, lest you continue to be smitten. Also, you must subject yourselves to us, including your wealth, your customs, your family, and your freedom."

John recovered quickly enough to make war with Al; though the wounds in his legs took years to heal. Obviously John was furious and looking to execute swift justice upon his enemies. One ex-employee, named Ira, boasted of her financial support for Al and for another ex-employee, named, Pal, who was supporting a hitman, named Ham, to attack with Isaac frequently. Both Al and Ham, and many of the ex-employees publicly announced their intent to destroy or captivate both John and Isaac.

Assuming that there is no one else to whom John may turn for assistance, what should he do at this point? Judge for yourself first, apply it to the most familiar experience coinciding with this parable, and then evaluate the conclusion of this parable.

In this case, John pursued Al with a rifle and seriously wounded him, fired and killed an employee, named Alf, when he protected Al, and captured Ira, when she tried to defend the dying Al, and finished Al.

The power of the US federal government

I'm sure that you are aware that the US federal government's rise to power during this last century is rooted any much more than taxation. The other half of the fiscal equation is benefits, subsidies, grants, entitlements, etc. It is only the taxation which hurts most directly, and is therefore most noticed. In addition to revenue collection (taxation) and spending (benefits), the government has successfully claimed the powers of nationalization, regulation, and education.

Nationalization is the "legal" theft of real estate by the government; theft because despite the compensation (money) offered, the transfer of wealth (property, in this case) is coerced.

Regulation involves the issuance of certifications, permits, and standards for environmental waste.

Education consists of the governments control over all public academian establishments, being a virtual monopoly in the elementary and high school levels.

A few other major elements of federal power (beyond taxation, which wasn't mentioned here yet) include the IRS, extensive tax code, and invasion of privacy, and the differential, unfair, and manipulative treatment of citizens by classes and groups. Taxation includes all import and export taxes, tariffs, investment taxes, death taxes, gift taxes, leasing fees, permit fees, income taxes, corporate taxes, property confiscations, quid pro quo "donations," and the power to levy bonds (debt).

Every power listed thus far may be justified by hundreds of "good intentions," but in the end only one general observation holds true for all of them: These powers have all been grossly abused because they all violate the fundamental principle of blind equality, which is freedom. Blind equality says that it is immoral for government to hold different standards to different people; without consideration, or even collection, of any unique, personal attribute, government must create an impartial law and enforce it impartially. Impartiality is the anti-thesis of factional politics and the basis of fairness. The FairTax, a revenue-based approach to establishing and implementing impartiality, and thus freedom for the people, in government, holds great potential, despite its intrusions upon the privacy of the American family in its implementation of the prebate provision, an flat credit adjusting for the expected taxes paid at the poverty line.

Flag burning

The incineration of a flag (or any other symbol) is a clear advocation the destruction of the organization designated by it. Therefore, all who burn flags are mortal enemies to the respective countries and must be taken as a declaration of war. No declaration of war may be wisely dismissed, and no friendly relations may be maintained with those who make such declarations, except they repent by re-establishing friendly relations built upon time-tested trust. Any organization which supports an organization which makes such declarations must be assumed to be joining them in such declarations. Any group or organization which does not openly oppose flag burning activities must be considered either supportive of them, or controlled by them.

The Reformist and the Revolutionary

Reform and revolution is generally wise so long as those new ideas are tested extensively for all potential problems with a deep consideration of the past and of one's own partialities and agendas.

Most institutions and traditions are shaped by a long history of mistakes, and therefore rest on strong and oftentimes subtle foundations. Yet we all know that every existing institution and tradition was created by imperfect humans, and therefore are imperfect themselves. Stability requires consideration of every strong foundation and of the best methods for constructing and building upon them. Typically, change is motivated by avoiding one problem, and usually unintentionally creating several others, yet any consideration of all of the foundational truths will naturally reveal all institutional foundations, which will enable the avoidance all potential problems.

So what is the most foundational truth? That all things have natures defined by their compositions and organizations and that the nature of life is to increase its own survivability through individual decisions, i.e. to increase freedom and power. The best defense of freedom is blind equality, i.e. the lack of "traditional politics," and the defense against those who violate this blind equality, i.e. thieves, vandals, etc. So the best revolution is the one which most closely embraces nature, and especially human nature.

No pure democracy has ever been on this earth

When is the last time that government has ever waited to hear from the majority of an entire population? Woman were ignored for the longest time, and slaves too. So most of the earth's history has already been disqualified from pure democracy. These days the majority of the vote is taken to be the majority of the population, but two issues arise from that: 1) Majority vote is not majority population, 2) A small, well-organized, and motivated faction can exercise great political influence by voice and by vote, and 3) Apathy does not constitute endorsement of any view, even of the majority of the voters. In reality, modern democracy cannot be described as the rule of the people, but instead as the rule of the voters, or the rule of the factions.

When has any government been content and patient to wait for the majority of the people before closing its elections and extrapolating the will of the people? And why do intellectual elites deem their issues to be of such great importance as to berate the people for ignorance and apathy when their pet issues are neglected and thus rejected for lack of resonance with the people? And finally, how do representatives pretend to represent when most of the work represents their own interests and agendas, lacking support from the majority of their entire constituency? Who do representatives represent and how do they withold from the people the power to override their vote, which vote is considered to represent the will of the people? Such weaknesses are inherent in the nature of the current practices of government and politics, and they challenge the very foundation of power for a great many politicians and special interest groups, hence the justification for substantial opposition from those who pretend to be democracy's strongest advocates, but in reality are the strongest advocates of the modern, corrupted forms of democracy.

In a real democracy, the representatives represent the people, only acting with and according to their explicit and expressed will. Likewise, the government only governs by the established will of the majority of either the people or their representatives. The government should never have the power to discriminate, except in the execution of justice or enforcement of impartial, indiscriminate laws, or in the contracting of private agencies by bid for government work according the relevant requirements of each respectively.

The Powers of Government and Freedom of the People

How can a government which claims to derive its power from the people can so often deviate from the interests of the people, while at the same time regularly catering to the interests of the special, small factions?

Such is the nature of government, to set men on unequal grounds so that some are masters over others. How is this made possible? When the voices of any are allowed greater weight than the voices of others, and when men are allowed to legislate discriminating laws, then the faction is empowered to enslave the other factions; until they physically resist by revolution or by organized "crime."

The nature of an equal government must then weight every person's voice equally, and be barred from discrimination of any kind.