 |
 |
|
|
|
| Montréal, 5 août 2000 / No 65 |
|
|
by
Scott Carpenter
A short while back I wrote an article suggesting that |
|
Shortly after this article was published a friend wrote to me and suggested
that the problem was not a refusal to think but rather But as June came to a smashing halt and my annual summer hibernation from politicking and writing began I soon found myself thinking (of all things), rather seriously, about this seemingly insignificant disagreement. Slowly I began to realize that this disagreement – although at first seemingly semantic – was far from nothing. My reality, your reality While there are those who do refuse to think and are thus easily led by those who do, the main mechanism by which collectivism and group think spreads is through Thinking (about pretty much anything) should always start from the beginning. What is the beginning you may ask? Well... how about this: reality – it exists. Period. Simple, eh? But, regardless of this truth, reality has come to mean something quite different than what it should while We are told from the time we are quite young that each one of us experiences his own In short: we are all subject to the same natural laws – especially the law of causality. How we choose to live within this reality will bear different results for each of us. We all reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of our actions. Reality can neither be shaped nor avoided. It simply is. And therein lies the reason that collectivism has taken such a strong foot hold in what used to be the freest continent on the face of the planet. People have forgotten that their actions and yes, even their thoughts, can have consequences that were not intended. It seems the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Indeed, the demise of Liberty has not been ushered in by gun control, socialized medicine, increasing taxation or the growth of the police state but rather by our own inability to think correctly. How simple yet how incredibly complex a problem. An unstoppable leviathan I was alerted to the tremendously large scope of this dilemma a few weeks ago when I received an alert from one of Canada's leading pro-firearms organizations which debased the federal Liberals for destroying Canada's I am thus reminded of the scene in front of the Alberta legislature shortly before Premier Kline tried to ram through his controversial Yikes. Yet these same folks will stand there and tell you to your face – without cracking a grin – that it is immoral to steal from your neighbor or anyone else. If this is not a glaring contradiction I don't know what is. So how does one combat this growth? The good (and frightening) thing is that all of our actions have consequences. In the end we cannot go on in this manner without suffering a fate worse than death. Perhaps that is why sporadic voices of reason do appear out of nowhere in the mainstream press more now than in the past. Perhaps we, as a nation and as individuals, are feeling the pain of our own silliness. People are hurting financially and physically because of the choices they've made and the thought patterns they've adhered to and now they are looking for a way out. Listen to the voices around you; Canadians complain bitterly, on a daily basis, that taxes are too high, the government is too nosy and too big, and that life is becoming increasingly difficult to live for abundance of red tape and bureaucracy. As professor Pierre Lemieux wrote in his article In the end – whether we like it or not – the only two choices we have are between
|
| << retour au sommaire |
|
