Thou Shalt Obey … Or Else

Thinking Outside the Box

With Dr. Charles Ormsby


Dr. Charles Ormsby – May, 2012

“I was in a meeting once, and I gave an analogy to my staff about my philosophy of enforcement … how the Romans used to conquer little villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go into a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw, and they would crucify them. And then you know that little town was really easy to manage for the next few years. So that’s our general philosophy.”Al Armendariz, EPA Administrator.

The video of Armendariz’ candid braggadocio, hopefully, has been seen by nearly all those who will vote this November. It is as close to an open admission of the practice of government tyranny, in fact the appreciation of government tyranny, as one will ever witness.

Look at the language he chooses. He describes his goal using the word “conquer.” Does this imply mutual agreement or dictatorial rule? I guess the Roman reference cements his intent.

He uses the word “little” three times to describe those he is seeking to subjugate. He relishes the overwhelming power he wields because he is backed by the police power of a massive federal government. Crushing the defenseless, while cowardly, is sport for bullies.

He references “the first five guys they saw” to underscore the terrifying randomness of his planned cruelty. It wasn’t finding the first five guilty guys … just the first five guys. That is a way of saying, “We are capable of doing whatever we want to whomever we want. You could be next. Obey us or else.”

The potential horror of “whatever they might do to you” is emphasized by the punishment meted out to the unfortunate five: crucifixion.

But our wannabe overseer didn’t stop there. He followed the opening quote with, “you hit them as hard as you can, and you make examples out of them, and there is a deterrent effect there.”

Yes there is. He didn’t really need to point this out; it was the ultimate purpose of the random crucifixions in this little town. Once government is powerful enough to wield such power and any constraints like our Constitution are weakened sufficiently, its reign of terror works very effectively. That is why he says, “So that’s our general philosophy.”

Note that Armendariz twice refers to the strategy of inflicting random terror on innocent civilians as a philosophy … not as a policy. Policies tend to be more localized in space and time while philosophies are typically used to describe widespread and permanent aspects of one’s beliefs and practices. He seems to relish not only the practice but also the thought that this should be a foundational aspect of governance.

Apologists for both the administration and the fascist movement it represents will tell you that Armendariz’ statements do not reflect their practices or their philosophy. Both their record and their statements for the last hundred (or more) years clearly prove that their denials are lies.

A key component of all statist programs is compulsion. They are sold with maternal sentiments and smiles, but compliance is enforced with steel. The same maternal justifications that are used to put these programs in place continue to serve as the public face of the policies, but just try to opt out and you will soon feel the steel at your back.

The philosophy of compulsion becomes a way of life for career politicians and government administrators/bureaucrats.
Exercising power over those they rule seems routine and, over time, becomes an aphrodisiac. This has been true throughout recorded history. The most brutal examples occur when the limitations on governments’ exercise of power are removed completely (e.g., the Roman Empire in its later years, the Mongol Empire under Genghis Khan and his descendants, Nazi Germany, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and Communist Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea). But the slide into tyranny has every shade of grey and we are slipping into ever darker hues. There is nothing to stop this tragic slide unless those who are being subjugated have the will to revolt.

Unfortunately, the serfs fall prey to the same conditioning effects as those who are imposing the tyranny. They become accustomed to the government setting the rules that govern every aspect of their lives and they accept their obligation to obey. Obedience becomes a civic virtue.

Why do the statists do it? What is in it for them? Power and money.

Tyrannical governments are criminal enterprises. Their offenses range from such petty excesses as the GSA’s recent wanton disregard for your tax money during their Las Vegas bash, to crimes against humanity such as premeditated genocide. History tells us that the vast majority of individuals, when put in a position where they can plunder and get away with it, join in and enjoy the party. If slavery or genocide is required, so be it.

Before his execution by beheading at the hand of the Stuart monarchy in 1683, Algernon Sidney wrote in his treatise, Discourses Concerning Government, that “All human constitutions are subject to corruption, and must perish, unless they are timely renewed, and reduced to their first principles.”

Three hundred years may separate us from the time Sidney wrote those words, but they precisely capture the current state of America. Our Constitution has been largely destroyed by our legislative and executive branches and our courts have blessed its destruction. The plain English meaning of the Constitution and its philosophy of limited government – one that is given only enumerated powers and thus is designed to protect our liberties – is on its deathbed.

Five justices occasionally offer the philosophy of our Founders and the Constitution that embodies that philosophy a few life-sustaining breaths, while four do all they can to turn the lights out. We’re down to a single individual standing between what remains of individual liberty and its alternative, tyranny.

The prospects for freedom in America are dim, probably dimmer than those who care about individual liberty suspect.
The knight we are sending out to do battle with the Tyrant In Chief is Mitt Romney.

If he wins, our freedom depends on his recognition that our Constitution needs to be renewed and that it must, again, be reduced to its first principles. I’m unconvinced he understands or appreciates this, but he is now our only hope.

If Romney loses, individual freedom is likely to be lost, if not permanently, at least for several generations. A victorious Obama will surely appoint several replacement judges to the Supreme Court and they will be statist ideologues, as young as he can find, to bridge the transition to total statist control of society. He will then have four years without re-election worries (assuming the 22nd Amendment is honored) to burn as many bridges as possible while instituting tar-baby entitlements that can never be repealed.

Our shackles will be fitted and forged. All we get to do is say, “Yes, Massah.”

Do we relish the thought of always asking our government for permission and dutifully obeying its commands? Do we recall what it means to be free? Will we fight to regain our freedoms and then pass them on to the following generations?
Stay tuned. The clock is ticking.