Break the New World Order of Men!
I’M not that familiar with the ideas of Aristotle, Plato, John Locke, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Karl Marx, including those of modern thinkers like Jacques Derrida, Michael Foucault, Noam Chomsky, among others.
As for Aristotle, what I know is that he announced that states are created not only that men may live, but also that they may live well. I don’t have any idea what Plato wrote; I was just told that between Aristotle and Plato, the former is more preferable and reasonable. Aristotle was the first intellectual on earth. John lock? I just learned that he expounded on the rights of man— his fundamental, inalienable and innate rights to life, property and liberty.
Rousseau? I read that he’s a good-looking European gigolo who traded sex for money in order to finance the publication of his magnum opus “Social Contract.”
As for Marx, he’s the guy who co-wrote a manifesto about the hidden power of the proletariat and who spread the idea of communism. Derrida, Foucault, and Chomsky all preached the power of word, of language.
Wait! There’s one left—it’s Ayn Rand. This feisty woman courageously stood against the philosophers of yesteryears and wrote what she thought was right. The Russian-born American philosopher, although she preferred to be called “novelist,” preached America over half a century ago the virtue of selfishness, the goodness in individualism, and the evil in collectivism.
Why am I saying these things? This is to say that yes, I read some of them, but I did not accept most of their ideas. To me, philosophies, theories and ideas are not exact science. They’re just a cacophony of words, of lines and sentences. Some are a codification of lies and ironies while others ought to live and to be embraced by the thinking and living, never mind the unthinking and half-dead.
I believe that some of them— those philosophers of olden times— yes, some of them wrote about their time, while there were others who concocted ideas out of their vision, out of their own anticipation or prediction of the future.
Their ideas tell the story of their time. Plato and Aristotle learned from the story of their epoch. Their philosophies are the mixture of history and opinion. The first is the stimulus while the second is the flesh that forms part of the body of their respective philosophies.
The abuses of the elite were the reason why Marx conceptualized communism in order to awaken the sleeping giants of his time— the proletarians.
Our time is full of “isms”, and because there are lots of ideologies and philosophies today, people are confused which is which, what to follow or reject. Aside from the major ideologies like communism, socialism, fascism, totalitarianism, authoritarianism, etc, there are also sub-groups like the conservative, the liberals, the democrats, the republicans, and the labor party, among others.
In America, there are only two political parties— the Democratic Party and the Republican party- that clash during election period, although not so many Americans can give the differences between the two. They just vote for the candidate who speaks well.
In the Philippines, after the ratification of the new Constitution, the multi-party system paved the way for the exponentiation of various parties like Liberal party, Kampi Party, Lakas-NUCD party, Lamp Party, United Opposition, Genuine Opposition party and many others. As a result, the Filipino people usually have difficulty memorizing the names of the parties and their respective candidates come election time. This is the reason why the Commission on Election introduced a new election term— nuisance candidates— to narrow down the number of political aspirants who would like to “serve” or to “steal” (or both) from the public.
This is the confusion I was talking about in my previous blogs. The people are confused, I said, because of the many ideas, ideologies, and philosophies— good or bad, rogue or honest, practical or impractical, good or evil— percolating in the agora of ideas today. How can you expect to see a thinking people with this kind of system? How can you expect them to draw a rational argument if they cannot even define, distinguish or contrast the many “isms” that are being fed on them in school? Although there are some “lucky bitches” and “sonsafabitch” who are called intellectuals. But to me, they are called as such because they contribute much to public confusion. They are given the “intellectual” tag because the government and those in power say so.
Lo and behold! We’re now living in a new Babylon, under a system of confusion.
Perhaps, this is the new Babylon predicted in the bible. God moves and thinks in mysterious ways.
But ideologically, those in power are erecting a new Babel that would challenge the power of God— and the God I’m talking about here is the Individual. Yes, I’m an atheist. I don’t believe in the idea of God as told in the bible, and to best illustrate this theory/concept of mine, let me refer the word God here to the Individual, or the word “I”.
An individual is borne with rights and civil liberties— and I call these human essentials as man’s basic means of existence. I define existence as man’s reason for being. To live, man must exist first. Existence, therefore, is the prerequisite for the aforementioned rights.
To simplify, man’s basic means of existence are equal to human rights— the right to live, to property, to liberty, to his pursuit of happiness. Without these man cannot exist well, because if a tyrant rooted out one of these rights, say— his right to liberty— then man would live like a prisoner, caged, followed, surveyed, and detected, and deprived of freedom to think and to socialize with other human beings- he is deprived of free will.
Without these essentials for existence, man will not grow academically, as he is only fed with state-controlled information— he will not improve economically since he is deprived of choice like what course to take or what career to pursue— also, he will live in a system where laissez faire is considered evil while planned economy is considered the best mode of production.
But existence is different from survival. The second depends upon the first. Man can no longer survive if he’s dead.
Hence, man’s basic means of survival are what some theorists or bunch of knee-jerk “intellectuals” call “basic needs” like shelter, clothing, food, security and so on.
I say these are the basic tools for survival because man needs them not just for comfort but also to survive in the jungle-like world. Did you know how man created all these tools for survival? All of these came into being— which we are the beneficiaries— because of man’s intellect— because man used his sound judgment, his ability to think and never his ability to feel.
To feel is the indication that man exists, while to think is the indicia that he is man. Take note that I use the word “man” here as the one with complete mental faculties, the thinking being, the creature who is above all living things, and the one who should and ought to live on earth. This is so because in our world, there are half-humans or humanoids— those who surrendered reason to feeling or faith, individualism to collectivism.
In the beginning, it was man and not society who discovered fire. Man invented— not community— wheel. Through his intellect, judgment and effort, tribes, communities and societies lived comfortably.
Man built the first bridge because of his willingness to survive— he migrated from one place to another to search for food and to look for a better and more suitable place to live in.
Man— the Individual— is the creator. He created men’s tools for survival and men’s facility in order to live a comfortable life. I define men as the Collective.
After the Individual introduced his creation, the Collective then used the concept of society in order to place man under the rule of men. Then a tribe was created. Time after time, tribal wars occurred. Tribes grew into community or society. Communities, on the other hand, evolved into states or nations (territories).
All those creations of Man were used by the Collective to perpetuate slavery and to facilitate invasions. Man’s first tool for hunting was turned by men into weapons for wars and slavery. Man’s first bangka or wooden boat for fishing— men improved it into fleets.
Throughout history, the Individual— the Creator— introduced new things that would benefit men.
Galileo Galilei invented a magnifying device now called telescope to observe the heavens. Through his invention, he discovered that the world is round and argued Sun-centered solar system as a fact. But men (members of the Catholic Church) ganged up on Galilei and employed the force of the Collective to forever silence him. By the advent of the age of industrialization, the sanctimonious, murderous, power-thirsty Roman Catholic Church realized it committed a mortal sin punishable by God.
Another example is Nikola Tesla who discovered wireless technology. But because of the utter ignorance of men who doubted the power of human mind, Tesla was ostracized and then tagged as a mad scientist. Decades after Tesla’s death, men realized his wireless technology discovery was possible.
One good example of a brilliant creator is Albert Einstein, who discovered the theory of relativity now used by men in every field of human life. Einstein’s theory largely benefited the United States of America in its empire project. Soon it was used to bomb two major cities in Japan— Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Computer and the Internet were discovered by Man and not by men. This is the reason why the wealthiest man on earth is one of the pioneering capitalists who ventured on this new technology. The logic is— if the Internet was created by the Collective, then there will be no Internet billionaires like Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, among others.
Individualism, not Collectivism, is, therefore, the banner held by Man (Creator). Collectivism is the lie that binds men— those who benefit and exploit the creation of the Individual.
Give me a proof! you might ask. America is the proof. Before it became the U.S. of A, it was the most moral nation in the world. Before the Bushes came to power, it was the nation of America’s founding fathers who preached the gospel of individualism and put the Individual above men. The U.S. Constitution is the first on earth that recognized the inviolability of the Individual.
America rose in a time when all countries all over the world embraced the gospel of Collectivism— when Russia and Italy both slid into communism, when Germany was fooled by Nazism, and when the rest of the world (Japan, China, Spain, Great Britain, etc) was ruled by the Collectivists (monarchy, socialism, communism, fascism, totalitarianism, dictatorship, etc.)
Then the great consequence came. What would the Individual do if his rights were abolished, abridged, or diminished by the Collective? He would shout “Run as fast as you can and never come back!”
German-born Einstein screamed: “Flee from Germany and go to America”
Austrian-born Tesla also migrated to the U.S. to get rid of the Collectivists back in his homeland.
Ayn Rand went to America in 1920s and forever denounced Russia as her mother country.
Most of America’s great citizens were immigrants who waged the greatest strike of all time, as they all fled their respective motherlands poisoned by Collectivism.
It wasn’t destiny, but their love of life and reason that brought them to America. It wasn’t choice, but their high regard for freedom that made them search for the most moral nation in the world where they could practice their profession and enrich their talent without state interference. It wasn’t other people’s will, but their love of their work and craft that made them choose America as their motherland.
The Great Strike of the Individual took place because Man could not exist in a social system run by the collectivists who advocate for what is called the “common good”. He cannot live in a corrupt society where self-sacrifice is considered virtue and man’s self-interest is regarded as evil. He cannot survive under a system that removes his rights and civil liberties, a system that arrogates all rights and power to a collective or group of men.
It was predicted over half a century ago that America would embrace collectivism, and this is what is happening these days. The
Collectivist has framed a grand design that would trap the people in a communal system. For the sake of “common good”, they say, surrender your gold to the government— and this happened during the term of U.S. Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt when the Americans were ordered at gunpoint to give up their remaining wealth to the Federal government.
For “common good”, Germany’s Adolf Hitler said, “surrender all your rights to the state.” This was also the case in China under Mao Tse-Tung, and the Chinese people had been told to obey the law of the communist state under pain of death. This “common good” leitmotif was also applied in communist states like USSR and Italy.
Now it’s different. Having no enemy, the Collectivist has to create one. This is because war is indispensable under a collective system. The existence of war creates a notion that the territory under threat must always take the self-defense mode. War does not only confuse the people, it also keeps the communal society intact.
The global war against terrorism gives America the right to act on both defensive and offensive mode. It arrogated so much power to the Chief Executive branch, so much power that it can order the surveillance of not only suspected terrorists but also individuals it desired to follow, particularly the critics. It also sanctioned the kidnapping of suspected terrorist (and even ordinary individuals) through what is called extraordinary rendition.
The world is shrinking, digitally and ideologically. Some European countries had merged to achieve the common good. More and more countries were now beholden to collectivism.
If the people remained confused and the collectivists continued with their quest for a communal system, the world would slide into communal dictatorship.
When that day comes, the word “I” will be replaced by a single word–“We.” A new Babylon will rise under one-world, one-law, one-language system— and it will be the death of Man.