This is not intended for a discordian audience, since it would be preaching to the choir. It's basically just high-minded posturing, but whatever.

                       -vexati0n

original thread here: http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=13052.0

Liberty is not inherent in any system of government. In fact, the opposite is true. Every type of government exists, by necessity, to limit liberty. Your personal freedom is not something granted to you by your government: if that is what you believe, then you don't actually have it. Freedom is something you take for yourself, it cannot be given to you.

If a man is kicked out of a prison he is said to be free -- but if all he does with that "freedom" is to live in a room and go to work every day like he is "supposed to," then he is really no more free than he was in prison. He has nicer clothes to wear, maybe, and his cell block is larger. More choices at the comissary, more options in the mess hall. But he is nevertheless as fearful of the Authorities as he was in prison; he is subject to punitive action by the administration whether inside or outside the prison walls.

In spite of these obvious truths, it has become popular among the masses to assume that because they are comfortable, they are "free." There is a certain degree of truth to that (as is usually the case with lies), because they are "free" to choose from what is presented to them; they are "free" to associate with the approved groups; they are "free" to protest government policy, so long as they are in "free-speech zones" and they have a permit and they aren't physically located anywhere that might threaten what the government wants to do.

But that isn't really liberty. Liberty is saying what you believe, even if it makes the Authorities uncomfortable. Liberty is going where you want, and not telling anybody where or why. Liberty means that you're free to cover your tracks if you want to, free to talk to and associate with whoever you want. It isn't "Freedom within reasonable boundaries," because people are not reasonable and can be fooled into believing that even totalitarianism is reasonable. Sometimes, totalitarianism IS reasonable, but just because a thing makes sense doesn't mean it is always RIGHT.

The government which claims to be "preserving" our rights and "protecting" our freedom is violating both while we idly sit by and accept entertainment and convenience in return. How long until the resources that keep us mesmerized by television and fast food run out? How far into imperialism and aggression will we allow our government to go to keep our stomachs and eyeballs pacified?

And what will we do when all else really does fail, and we are left with neither convenience nor liberty; our plates filled with stale bread and our living rooms filled with stormtroopers to keep us from complaining about it?