The Loss of Freedom - Driving in the Rearview Mirror

None of us would drive down the road in reverse.  In spite of it being
possible, reverse is only intended to take you where you've been, not where
you want to go.  Sadly, today many of us have been convinced by special
interest radicals and socialists playing on our own narrow self-interests
that going in reverse is somehow "progress" taking us where we want to go.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

A few examples of this phenomenon using Constitutional matters should
suffice to make this point.

Senators were (until 1913) elected by the State Legislatures.  They were
intended (by the Constitution) to represent THEIR STATE, hence a US Senate
composed of two Senators from EACH STATE, regardless of size or population
(unlike the US House of Representatives).  Since 1913 US Senators have been
elected by the popular vote in their state and they have evolved accordingly
away from representing their state to representing their Party and those
national and international agendas that give them reelection support and
other emoluments.  It is clear to me that any US Senator that supported an
Endangered Species Act or did not fight Federal Wilderness Declarations in
their state would never have been reelected by their state legislature.
Instead, imposing such harms on their state goes unmentioned thanks to vast
amounts of money and publicity and support from national and international
groups whose agendas are diametrically opposed to freedom, the welfare of
state residents, and the Constitution as originally drafted.

The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law. prohibiting the free
exercise (sic of religion).; or abridging the freedom of speech".  So the
Courts and the President tell Military Chaplains they cannot preach against
abortion or same sex escapades without endangering their career.  Likewise
they warn Churches not to influence members prior to elections about
candidates' records on moral issues without endangering their "tax-exempt
"status while the President simultaneously campaigns from the pulpits of
racial minority congregations.  The calls for laws forbidding certain words
and the political correctness (supported by courts) prohibiting certain
views or expressions of views (global warming, environmental and animal
proposals, etc.) in public schools or in public forums increasingly make a
mockery of "freedom of religion" and "freedom of speech".

The Second Amendment is under constant assault.  Every incident gives cause
for calls for "registration" and further restrictions.  Cities like
Washington and Chicago ignore and violate the 2nd Amendments' "shall not be
infringed" with impunity.  "Gun-Free Zones" and prohibitions against guns
near government buildings and schools etc. (what happens when you are
involved in a car accident in a "no-gun zone"?) proliferate as national
parties vie for votes from "the middle" and for international expressions of
approval. The gun rights' restrictions in my lifetime and the accompanying
increase in violence on law-abiding citizens and growth of oppressive laws
of other natures has been breathtaking.

The Fifth Amendment provides "nor shall private property be taken for public
use, without just compensation."  Tell that to all the private property
owners who have been forbidden to develop their property "without
compensation" because the Federal government declares it to be "Critical
Habitat" under the Endangered Species Act.  How is "Habitat" a public "USE"?
On what basis (other than questionable UN Agreements masquerading as
"Treaties" as define in the Constitution) can this property be taken by the
Federal government "without compensation"?  How can the Congress pass a law
that forbids me from disposing of my horse (i.e. "my property") to a
butcher?  On what basis does the Federal government forbid the
transportation of fighting roosters (cocks that are "owned" as "private
property")?  On what basis does the Federal government seize authority over
polar bears from the state of Alaska, or force wolves and grizzly bears on
rural communities where they destroy property "without compensation", or
claim jurisdiction over all privately owned animals down to mice and rats
used in laboratories?  Anyone that is not concerned about this trend either
lives in a totally artificial (i.e. urban) environment or is naive enough to
believe that somehow this will all stop before reaching their dog or their
hunting club or rural community or their animal husbandry operation.

The Ninth Amendment states, "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain
rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the
people."  Today it is considered feasible and possible (by politicians,
bureaucrats, and radicals) to legislate that "the people" have no right to
own animals, wear fur, eat animals, hunt, fish, trap, log, live in rural
areas, protect themselves or their property from wild animals, mine, develop
energy resources, access and utilize resources on "public land", etc.

The Tenth Amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the United States
(i.e. the 'Federal government') by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to
the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Today the Federal bureaucracies obtain more and more Federal funding to
"disburse" to state bureaucracies, Highway Departments and Fish and Wildlife
agencies being two examples.  Federal "strings" on everything from
Native/Invasive plant requirements to state operations meant to complement
current and future Federal plans have made the state agencies little more
than Federal contractors masquerading as state employees.  Examples of "the
people" having any rights beyond what government chooses to "grant" are
growing too numerous to enumerate.

So where is this taking us?  Back in time is the short answer.  Like members
of primitive tribes or peasants in medieval kingdoms, we can have or do no
more nor less than "the Chief" or "the King" or "the Lords" allow.  They can
forbid (as they have always done) the possession of weapons.  Private
property is no more nor less than they say it is at the moment.  They and
their chosen supporters write the decrees that forbid eating certain things
or teaching certain things or doing certain things or possessing certain
things.  They will decide what religion and how far it may go will be
allowed.  They decide what ethnic or religious or racial or sex group will
get what government largesse or be repressed.  Like religious police in
Saudi Arabia , animal "officers" enforce the "standards" of those in power
while steadily increasing their authority and power.

The similarities between the US Senators and Lords of old are eerie.  The
way they primp and pontificate and look down on others should give us all
pause as they line up every four years as some sort of anointed group from
which we should choose the next King, excuse me, President. The recently
injured Governor of New Jersey (a former US Senator) speeding 90 miles an
hour down the New Jersey Turnpike (while the rest of us get tickets for far
less because it is "dangerous"?, "unsafe"?, or simply because there is a
"law" against it?) is but another current example. How like Kings' hunting
lands (even Hermann Goering had such lands) are the Wildernesses and Animals
imposed on the rest of us.  As crocodiles kill Africans, the UN dithers
about "allowing" harvests.  As whales maintain depressed commercial marine
fisheries, the International "Whaling" Commission blocks any harvest or
management.  As planted and protected (by the US Federal government) wolves
and grizzlies kill humans and destroy private property with impunity over
increasingly expanded ranges; citizens are prosecuted for defending life and
property that goes uncompensated when lost.

Yes, back in time.  Back to when primitive plant and animal communities were
worshipped and influenced where and how humans lived like our poor, ignorant
ancestors of long ago.  Back to primitive societies where there are no
guaranteed rights and where only the powerful and influential have a say.
Back to the world where the majority of us are sheep to be treated like
animals by those in charge while simultaneously making smarmy laws about
animal "rights".  This "future" isn't like communism in China or socialism
in many European societies, though we may be intended to pass through such
phases: this "future" is the primitive oppression we think is so impossible
in our world of computers and "ecosystems" and satellites.  It is the rule
of the strong over the weak.

It may appear that we are going forward, but like the fellow driving into
the rearview mirror we are going back where we came from at an increasing
speed.

Jim Beers
24 April 2007

- If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

- This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://jimbeers.blogster.com   (Jim Beers Common Sense)

- Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak.  Contact:
jimbeers7@verizon.net

- Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist,
Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow.
He was stationed in North Dakota , Minnesota , Nebraska , New York City , and
Washington DC .  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western
Pacific and on Adak , Alaska in the Aleutian Islands .  He has worked for the
Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security
Supervisor in Washington , DC .  He testified three times before Congress;
twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60
Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to
expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Centreville ,
Virginia with his wife of many decades.