[Reader-list] The President Is Insane

[Yazad Jal]

Very interesting rationale of why Bush & other US Presidents are so
pro-surveillance.
-yazad


>
> The President Is Insane
> by William Stone, III <http://www.wrstone.com>
>
> At one time or another, you've stared at someone and wondered, "What in
> the heck are they THINKING?"  More and more often, this happens when I see
> government functionaries:  Presidents, Congressmen, Senators, their staffs
> and sycophants.  "What are they thinking?" is not a frivolous question:
> in a very real way, no human being can ever truly see the perspective of
> another, simply because it is impossible to actually step into another
> person's shoes.  We can IMAGINE what the other person's life is like, but
we
> can never truly KNOW.
>
> This is, of course, exactly why libertarianism and the Zero Aggression
> Principle works as spectacularly as it does.  The ZAP as a personal
> philosophy recognizes that we cannot truly know what the other guy is
> thinking:  all that matters is that he doesn't harm others in the process
of
> pursuing his goals.  Libertarianism as a political philosophy works
because
> it is derived from the ZAP and applies it on a political level.
>
> Nevertheless, the Statist mind refuses to accept the rather obvious fact
that
> one person can never really get inside the mind of another.  They believe
> that the complex problems, motivations, and goals of every individual are
> easy to understand, therefore it is the province of government to assist
the
> individual in any way possible.
>
> Statists simply cannot understand that individual lives are far too
complex
> for anyone but the person living it to understand.  For this reason, it is
> impossible for someone else's life to be as important as your own.
>
> This is an important distinction between the Statist and the libertarian.
> Failure to understand this concept is indicative of a serious
disconnection
> from reality.
>
> Indeed, this marks Statists as INSANE.
>
> To justify this idea, let's look at the leading Statist in the United
States,
> King George III.
>
> (By way of explanation:
>
> (King George I was America's first autocrat.  In 1787, a Constitutional
> Convention was called to make some specific revisions to the Articles of
> Confederation.  Via backdoor maneuvering, the Articles were abolished
> entirely and the Constitution adopted, creating the strong Federal
government
> that is now the bane of every American's existence.  Chief among the
powers
> of the new Federal government was taxation, which King George I tried out
> only six years later and which resulted in the Whiskey Rebellion.
>
> (We've been suffering the consequences of George's successful quelling of
> that uprising ever since.
>
> (Similarly, King George II ruled America from 1988-1992.  His son George
III
> currently sits on the throne.)
>
> The individual in the office is largely irrelevant.  The chief executive
has
> been insane since the ink was wet on the Constitution, though it's clear
> that in the last century they've become increasingly paranoid and
psychotic.
> Nor is insanity specific to the United States:  every President, Prime
> Minister, and King since the dawn of time has shared the delusion.
>
> On the subject of the President, consider this:  for the power afforded
him
> by the office, George III is willing to become a prisoner for the duration
of
> his term of office -- and for most of the rest of his LIFE.
>
> This is no exaggeration.  Do you think that the President can hop in the
Ford
> and run  down to the local Seven-Eleven to pick up a six-pack at 2:00 in
the
> morning if the mood strikes?  Never mind that there are servants to
perform
> this kind of task -- the fact is that the President CANNOT do it.  Case in
> point:
>
> During George II's reign, I worked as an international courier. As was
> often the case, one evening found me at  Pierson International Airport in
> Toronto, Ontario, Canada.  It was about midnight, and I was lounging
around
> the deserted cargo docks of the airport, awaiting my deliveries to clear
> customs.  Bush had been in Toronto that day and was leaving at about the
> same time I was lounging around the outer customs door.
>
> There was a helicopter circling overhead, which I knew was part of the
> Presidential security.
>
> Ordinarily, a major airport like Pierson International has a constant
> background hum of jet engines, either idling, taking off, or landing.
> Suddenly, every jet on the ground cut its engines and the airport went
> eerily silent. I glanced up and around, wondering what had happened. I
> reflexively looked off toward the horizon and up into the distance,
> scanning for the line of aircraft lights that would be planes on final
> approach. There were none -- traffic was orbiting well away from Pierson.
> Neither were any aircraft taking off.
>
> I took several steps out into the parking lot. The helicopter circling
over
> me instantly halted and trained a floodlight on me. I had the good sense
to
> freeze and keep my hand by my sides.
>
> The noise of a single aircraft engine powering up, taxiing, and then
finally
> taking off became audible.  I watched Air Force One leave the ground.
Within
> seconds of takeoff, the floodlight winked out, the helicopter sped away,
> and every aircraft on the ground powered up its engines. I glanced into
> the distance and could see aircraft lining up for landing again.
>
> All of this was deemed necessary by the President's guards simply so that
he
> could fly from Toronto to Washington.  Hundreds of thousands of dollars
lost
> due to the procedure, and force was initiated against literally thousands
of
> individuals.
>
> Clearly, the President is a prisoner of his office.
>
> Further, in order for the Secret Service to adequately guard the
President,
> they must know his whereabouts and activities twenty-four hours a day,
> seven days a week, for four to eight YEARS.
>
> Do you want to know why Bill Clinton was so keen to keep the Secret
Service
> from testifying before the Grand Jury? Because they knew exactly what he
> was up to.  They had to, in order to protect him.
>
> Think of it: the President is watched and monitored -- for security
reasons
> -- 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.  No wonder King
George
> III has absolutely no qualms about subjecting the rest of us to the kind
of
> constant surveillance that he endures: he's so inured to it himself that
he
> doesn't understand that it's totally immoral.
>
> It goes far beyond that, however: if you're the President, your guards
know
> when you and your wife went to bed, how long you had sex, and -- in all
> likelihood -- if you were both satisfied.  This is not an exaggeration.
In
> my relatively small household of myself, my wife, and two daughters, it's
> difficult to keep the generalities of my sex life from the children.  They
> don't even WANT to know what we're up to, yet they have inadvertently
> interrupted our activities on occasion.  By comparison, the White House is
> FILLED with Secret Service agents whose sole job is to know where the
> President is and what he's doing 24x7x365.
>
> These represent restrictions on freedom and intrusions of privacy that any
> normal, sane individual would find impossible to live with.
>
> Anyone who wants the power of the Presidency so badly that they don't care
who
> knows the details of their sex life is either power-mad or a potential
guest
> on the Jerry Springer Show.
>
> Why would anyone put up with such intrusions of privacy?  Certainly sheer,
> raw, naked power is an important factor.  If you derive pleasure from
making
> life-or-death decisions that impact hundreds of millions of individuals
> around the world, then the Presidency might look attractive.  Unrestricted
> access to sex with anyone at any time also drives them, something that
> Clinton so aptly demonstrated.  He was hardly the first: a sizable
percentage
> of elected representatives keep mistresses and/or have sex with their
> subordinates.
>
> However, it's clear that some individuals aren't power-mad or
sex-crazed -- at
> least not when they first arrive in  Washington.  What motivates them?
>
> Insanity.  They believe that human beings function best when they are
given a
> list of rules and regulations to be followed.  They believe that humans
need
> to be ruled, either by individuals in the local town  hall, the state
Capital,
> or Washington.  Their minds are so twisted that they block out a thousand
> years' worth of evidence to the contrary.
>
> Politicians -- with only a tiny handful of exceptions -- overlook the
> evidence of reality in favor of a clever fantasy that they've devised.
>
> They are INSANE.
>
> What other word is there for individuals who block out and ignore reality,
> engaging in activities that are actively harmful to themselves and others?
> The fact that their fantasy is widely-accepted is irrelevant.  Imagine for
a
> moment that a sizable portion of the population believed that the Earth
was
> flat, in abject denial of several hundred years' evidence to the contrary.
> Such individuals are clearly insane, since they reject reality in favor of
> fantasy.
>
> Politicians are no different.  They reject reality in favor of a
> self-indulgent fantasy.  They are insane.
>
> Remember this the next time some Statist gives you a list of how they will
> make your life better by all the laws they'll pass if only they're
elected:
>
> Laws don't make your life better:  they make it WORSE.  Any politician who
> promises to make your life better by making more laws is insane.
>
> -----
>
> William Stone, III is a computer nerd (RHCE, CCNP, CISSP) and philosopher
of
> the Zero Aggression Principle from McCook Lake, South Dakota.  He seeks
the
> Libertarian Party's nomination for the 2004 Senate race in South Dakota.