It is no longer “Soft” Tyranny

There are those among us who insist that currently we are suffering under “soft tyranny.” I take those who speak this way to mean that the tyranny that we are currently experiencing is not of the overt kind that one reads about when one reads of the Soviet Show trials, or when one reads about the German Einsatzgruppen, or when one reads about the Killing fields of Cambodia. Instead, what the phrase “soft tyranny” is supposed to communicate is the incremental tyranny that can be likened to being suffocated by a pillow as opposed to being suffocated by the butt end of a M-16.

I understand the metaphor of “soft tyranny” but I think it is time that we give it up for something harsher to describe what we are currently being subjected to in this country. We are long past the gentle coastal regions of “soft tyranny” that was in place when Woodrow Wilson and FDR were the Tyrants in Chief. Today we are well into the rugged highlands of tyranny and we really must altar our language to reflect that. Fortunately, for us, our history provides us with nomenclature that can be dusted off and used again to describe what we are currently living under and to which we are now subjected.

In our Declaration of Independence our forefathers complained of “absolute Despotism,” and “Absolute tyranny.” So, in the Spirit of 1776 I submit that we lose the “soft tyranny” language and begin to speak again like our Fathers and speak of absolute Despotism and Absolute tyranny. After all, there really is nothing “soft” about this totalitarian regime with which we are contending.

Can the tyranny we are currently living under, really only be referred to as “soft” when there is obviously a concerted attempt to destroy the dollar with all our bailouts and now with the news of “QE2.” Should the tyrannical attempt to hyper-inflate the dollar, be visited only with the sobriquet “soft?” I assure you, Dear reader, should the Feds be successful in hyper-inflating the Dollar you will not call the results, “soft.” No, only the descriptor of “absolute Despotism” will do.

Can the tyranny we are currently living under, really only be referred to as “soft” when one listens to Economic Nobel Prize winning Democrats who have the President’s ear say we will only be serious about budgetary reform when we create death panels and submit to a Value added tax? Such, policy, if achieved, would take us even beyond absolute Despotism to Stalinesque Tyranny.

Can the tyranny we are currently living under, really only be referred to as “soft” when one reads of legislation that is being moved that will restrict our ability to grow our own garden produce and own our own garden seed? What else but “absolute Despotism” can this be called? There is nothing “soft” in the tyranny that would find the State preventing people from tilling their ground and raising their food.

Can the tyranny we are currently living under, really only be referred to as “soft” when the American version of Dr. Josef Mengele is appointed as the man who will head our brand spanking new Health Control centers? Dr. Donald Berwick is a man who doesn’t think that individuals are competent enough to determine what health care they should have and insists that the State must regulate your health care,

“Today, this isolated relationship (between doctor and patient) is no longer tenable or possible… Traditional medical ethics, based on the doctor- patient dyad must be reformulated to fit the new mold of the delivery of health care…Regulation must evolve. Regulating for improved medical care involves designing appropriate rules with authority… Health care is being rationalized through critical pathways and guidelines. The primary function of regulation in health care, especially as it affects the quality of medical care, is to constrain decentralized decision making.”

Now there is a good deal of mumbo jumbo in that quote, but the gist of it is, “The medical decisions process that used to be made by you and your Doctor is passe and as such a government official is going to be part of the decision making matrix in terms of your health care … for your own good of course. These government officials, who are involved for your own good in the decision making process of your health, will have rules that you and your doctor will be forced to abide by (for everyone’s good of course). These rules will make it so that decentralized decision making (code language for you, the patient) will be constrained (code language for “you will be forced to do what we say is good for you.”) This is absolute Despotism my friends and the word “soft” blushes to be used to describe the tyranny that is described above.

Can the tyranny we are currently living under, really only be referred to as “soft” when one is forced to surrender their fourth amendment safety when they go to an Airport in order to visit Gradpa and Grandma for holiday? Is it really only “soft” tyranny when you’re getting gang banged by the state as the “I’d feel up my Sister for a paycheck” TSA, in their muted gestapo uniforms, twist your breasts and power stroke your genitalia? I’m thinking only “absolute Despotism” fits when we are talking about State sanctioned sexual assault.

Can the tyranny we are currently living under, really only be referred to as “soft” when it is clear that what the man who is called the “President” intends to do is to achieve by bureaucratic slight of hand what he couldn’t attain via legislation in terms of cap and tax? Is it only “soft” when the intent of such tyranny is to drive the coal industry out of business? Is it only “soft” when the intent of such tyranny will drive food prices through the ceiling and impoverish Americans? Is it only “soft” when the intent of such legislation will result in brownouts across America? There is nothing “soft” about such designs. This is nothing but what our founders styled “absolute Despotism … absolute tyranny.”

We could go on and on but already we have demonstrated that “soft” tyranny is just to soft of a title for what we are living under. All of this is an attempt at the undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. This is absolute tyranny and those who will not resist absolute tyranny deserve to eventually fall into Stalinesque tyranny.

Surely, no one would argue that all these expressions of absolute tyranny are anything but the result of prearranged efforts. When we see a lot of framed timbers of usurpation, of different proportions, which we know have been laid at different times and by different tyrants, and when we see these framed timbers of usurpation joined together, and see they exactly make the frame of the house of absolute Despotism, — every previous usurpation fitting exactly with the usurpation that preceded it and not a necessary usurpation missing and not a extra usurpation to be had — then we know we are well past the exit called soft tyranny and are entering into the city called absolute tyranny and absolute Despotism.

My friends, war is being made upon the citizenry of this country. Now, it can be a war where the causalities are only on the side of the citizenry or it can be a war that finds the Despots making war visited with a resistance that they find disconcerting.

A Law Quote A Day Keeps The R2Kt Virus Away

“For it cannot be shown that any part of that power which magistrates had under the Old Testament is repealed under the new, neither can any convincing reason be brought, why should it be of narrower extent now or then. Are not blasphemies, heresies and errors dishonorable to God, and destructive unto souls as well now as of old?”

George Hutcheson — 17th Century Reformed Theologian
The Gospel of John — pp. 158

A Law Quote A Day Keeps The R2Kt Virus Away

Christ frees us from the law, but not the Judicial Punishment

” For 1.) If there be no bodily punishment to be inflicted on false teachers and blasphemers, then must Christ by his blood repeal all those laws in the Old Testament; but the Scripture shows us all our parts of Christian liberty in these places of Scripture, Ti.2:14; Rom. 14:4; I Thess. 1:10; Gal. 3:13; Gal. 1:4; Col. 1:13; I Joh. 4:18; Acts 15:10-11; Heb. 4:14, 16; Heb. 10:19,21,22; Col. 2:15-16; 2 Cor. 3:13, 17, 19; Jam. 4:12; Rom. 14:4; Act. 4:9; Act.5:29; 1 Cor. 7:23; Matt. 23:8,9,10; Matt. 15:9; and elsewhere; in all which places nothing is hinted of the false teachers patent under the seal of the blood of the eternal Covenant, that he is freed from the Magistrates sword, though he destroy millions of souls.”

Samuel Rutherford
A Free Disputation Against Pretended Liberty of Conscience etc. — pp. 233-234

Note how careful that Rutherford is in defining liberty of conscience. Rutherford does not allow the catch phrase “liberty of conscience,” to be used as a “get out of jail free card” for every licentious behavior imaginable. Liberty of conscience does exist as the passages above indicate but it can not be invoked in order to overturn the clear teaching of God’s law word serving as a standard for social order and the Magistrate. Liberty of Conscience can not be invoked in order to overturn either the 2nd use of the law of to ignore the third use of the law. I go to ends to point this out because often when you deliberate with the R2Kt lads they are screaming “liberty of conscience,” as a garlic mantra to ward of the Dracula of God’s hated vampire law.

A Law Quote A Day Keeps The R2Kt Virus Away

“… Our Adversaries are obliged to give us precept, promise or godly practice, why a moral sin forbidden and severely punished in the Old Testament, should yet remain a Moral sin in the New Testament, and yet not be punishable by men or churches.”

Samuel Rutherford
A Free Disputation Against Pretended Liberty of Conscience — pp. 332

Commonality and Antithesis

What accounts for cultural commonality between pagans and Christians in a given culture existing alongside the fundamental antithesis that the Bible teaches is between Christians and pagans?

Some posit the answer of Natural law. Natural law, so it is claimed, can be accessed by pagans and so allows pagans to operate with a proper sense of ought-ness to civil realm realities. However, such an answer misses the reality that Natural law, while being something that genuinely exists, can not be read aright except that Special revelation be, at some level, assumed. The pagan may get some things right and some might even credit that getting of some things right to Natural law, but the thing to remember is that those who want to credit that the pagan gets civil things right can’t account for how it is that a pagan who is beginning with autonomous self as their ultimate beginning point can get things right via Natural law.

The answer for the issue of commonality existing alongside the idea of the biblical antithesis is that both that the pagans have not yet worked out the implications of their Christ hating worldview — retaining yet stolen capital from the Christians worldview in their worldview — AND the Christian likewise has not yet worked out the implications of their Christ honoring worldview, retaining yet impurity in their thinking that allows accommodation and commonality with their pagan neighbor on matters that they ought not to be accommodating upon and where no commonality should exist. As time goes by and as people (Christians and pagans alike) work out the implications of their respective worldviews the result will be that the commonality decreases as the antithesis increases.

The fact that commonality exists is accounted for, not by Natural law, but rather by both Christians and pagans living together in the twilight of their inconsistencies.