|
The Difference Between Alex Jones and Alex Knight
July 10, 2009 Other
than that one is an alternative media magnate who is infinitely more well
known than the libertarian Internet essayist and scribbler of horror
tales, that is. Actually,
there isn’t really much difference, until we get to endgame (pun
intended, my apologies to A.J. and his excellent documentary film).
We have very different ideas about how to get from here to there,
but that’s no reason for criticism or discord.
It’s merely an opportunity for some clarity.
There is nothing that those bureaucratic parasites in government
would love more than to see disparity arise between minarchists, patriots,
and constitutionalists, and libertarians, voluntaryists, and anarchists.
Yes, I know “anarchist” has been touted as a bit of a dirty
word over at Infowars, et al, but don’t expect any retributions here.
As stated, it’s counterproductive, and let’s face it – the
term “anarchy” has long since gotten a bad, if bum, rap.
I have always and still hold that both those who advocate small G
and those who want no G must stick together.
As was the motto at the most recent New Hampshire Liberty Forum,
“Many Paths to So
let’s clarify, as promised. To
paraphrase Alex Jones – and perhaps, to encapsulate the vision of
minarchists, patriots, and constitutionalists in general – the goal is
to promote America’s foundational principles to a point where a critical
mass of the population not only recognize the current government’s
wholesale corruption and tyranny, but are then poised to assume the reins
of political power, bring to justice many key members of the old
regime’s ranks for their transgressions against the aforementioned
principles, and then forever after “guard that jewel.”
In other words, perpetually oversee and maintain a government
restricted to original constitutional limitations. Once
again, with all due respect to Alex Jones, his excellent videos and shows,
and those who mean well by becoming fellow “infowarriors,” the reasons
why this cannot work are numerous. As
writer and lecturer (and All
we need do to prove the truth of this contention is to look not at what might
happen, but what in fact did.
Government in If
there had been no government, and only a free-market economy, the “New
World Order” would’ve had no tool to force itself upon the populace.
Without the guns of government, bankers and financiers would’ve
been forced to compete in an open marketplace in which stymie of
competition would become effectively impossible.
Only the leveraged meddling and enabling legislation backed by
violent government force gives such people the ability to erect the kind
of system we are all ensnared in. To
create such a system, on a corporate level, say, becomes exorbitantly
expensive to the point of counterproductivity, and cannot be financially
sustained – especially once one’s customers become aware of what is
happening. Try forming a
coalition, then, with others of like mind, and the internal power struggle
and desire to branch away based on profit motive dissolves it in short
order. No one will stand long
for being everyone else’s financial equal when there is always more
money to be made by competing on one’s own.
Try intimidating that member into submission, and all-out attrition
dissolves the “conspiracy.” Just
look at the history of Mafia crime families. There’s
all the evidence you’ll ever need. Moreover,
suppose Alex Jones’ vision does become reality, i.e., no “New World
Order” but still a constitutionally limited government?
I think we can safely assume that, in spite of the fact that the
likelihood of achieving this is far less than that of simply eliminating
government altogether in favor of a free market, such a government would
in short order begin to revert back to the utterly reprobate cesspool it
is at present. Why?
There would still be elections.
Those in office would also eventually die.
Things would, as they actually did, change.
Differing ideologies and venal lust for power by those attracted to
governing in the first place would bring such a precariously balanced and
wholly temporal house of cards down in a matter of a few years or a
decade. Conversely, once
people saw at first hand the enormous benefits of life in a true free
market with absolutely zilcho government, few would wish to once again
return to the old way of existence. The
very idea of government itself would be forever discredited.
It would be like the idea of a flat earth.
Next to no one would believe in it anymore. In
recapitulation, I’m not saying I don’t like a big part of Alex
Jones’ message. I like what
he’s promoting a hell of a lot more than what we have, and I’m not
here to try to insult, disparage, or discourage his efforts.
Some of them have been truly tremendous.
Indeed, Let’s
have another good hard look at reality, and then achieve it. Alex R. Knight III is the author of numerous horror, science-fiction, and fantasy tales, including Victoria's Place and Other Tales of Terror. He has also written and published poetry; non-fiction articles, reviews, and essays for a variety of venues; and is former Communications Director for the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire. In 1998, he was awarded Activist of the Year for that organization. He now lives and writes in rural southern Vermont where he is currently an undergraduate at Union Institute and University, seeking a B.A. in Writing & Literature, and serves as Second News Analyst to the Center for a Stateless Society. In addition, he is a regularly featured guest on Marc Stevens' The No-State Project, and looks forward to living in a governmentless society of liberty. |