Universal Freedom vs ‘Political Rights’

Image: http://www.thefreethoughtproject.com

“If there be such a principle as justice, or natural law, it is the principle, or law, that tells us what rights were given to every human being at his birth; what rights are, therefore, inherent in him as a human being, necessarily remain with him during life; and, however capable of being trampled upon, are incapable of being blotted out, extinguished, annihilated, or separated or eliminated from his nature as a human being, or deprived of their inherent authority or obligation.”
― Lysander Spooner

From the moment I came into existence, I was a free individual. I had no need of the U.S. government bestowing its political ‘freedom’ upon me, I was already free just as I was.

And so as a free individual, I am free to think, believe, speak, act and respond as I wish, as long as my thoughts/beliefs and decisions/actions do not infringe on the universal freedom/rights of others. I am universally free to come and go as I please, where I please, and when I please. This freedom is my birthright, our birthright; universal freedom is the birthright of every human being.

Therefore, universal freedom has nothing to do with the despotic notions and actions of men in power: their manifestos, constitutions and ‘political rights’, and their freedom-denying ordinances/laws. Universal Freedom comes from a higher realm than this, so it can never be granted or rescinded, through violence, by those who rule. Unless, that is, we allow our universal freedom/rights to be nullified, by giving our consent to be ruled over, and then settling for the ‘political rights’ that will be granted us in exchange.

We are only universally free when we wish to be, and then act to preserve and defend our universal freedom/rights from those who would seek to nullify them:

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. Voltaire

{However, if you still believe your freedom and rights have been granted by “god”, through the constitution and “bill of rights”, then I suggest you check out the following: The Constitution Con}

‘Political rights’ are granted by the elite-powers that be, and with these ‘political rights’ comes terms and conditions. In fact, there are a multitude of terms and conditions that apply, when it comes to the ‘political rights’ of individuals in the “land of the free”; terms and conditions that contradict the very definition of freedom:


1) the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.

2) absence of subjection to foreign domination or despotic government.

Combine the two and you get this: “The POWER or RIGHT to act, speak, or think”, and “without hindrance or restraint” from “foreign subjection or despotic governments”.

Does this definition of freedom sound anything at all like the ‘political rights’ we, as Americans, have been GRANTED by our overseers/rulers? Do we truly have “the POWER and RIGHT to act, speak, or think” as we desire, and “without HINDRANCE or RESTRAINT” from the local, state or federal governments?

As far as I am concerned, the answer to both of these questions is a resounding NO! This definition of freedom in no way represents the ‘political rights’ we have been granted, as a token, by those who rule over us: the structural-elite and their ‘elected’ stooges in the government (Statism).

There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice. Charles de Montesquieu

It has been a long time since I first seriously began to contemplate the difference between the universal freedom of the individual and the ‘political rights’ “we the people” have been granted by our ‘elected’ rulers. And over this time, it has become more and more apparent to me that our granted ‘political rights’ in no way resemble, nor represent, the UNIVERSAL FREEDOM every human being possesses.

For instance:


Law: the system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and may enforce by the imposition of penalties

So how does this definition of law, along with “A NATION OF LAWS”, fit with the oft repeated mantra, “America, the land of the free”?

Once again, FREEDOM is “The POWER or RIGHT to ACT, speak, or think”, and “without hindrance or restraint” from “foreign subjection or despotic governments”.

But America is “A Nation of Laws”, and law is “a system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating THE ACTIONS of its members…”

Am I the only one who sees a huge contradiction here? How can one truly be free, if his actions are regulated by a “system of rules” created and mandated by the few in power who rule over the many: “A Nation of Laws”?

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual. Thomas Jefferson

“A Nation of Laws” denotes a system of regulation that is seeking to bring about mass CONFORMITY; a tyrannical legal-system of control, where the few in power create the laws that the many must obey, or else…

And the reason the many are stuck in this system of regulation, leading to mass conformity, is simply because the many have given their CONSENT to be ruled over by the few. The many have given away their universal freedom, in order to have “the security” the few in power have PROMISED them.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Benjamin Franklin

These consenting non-entities have sold their birthright, their universal freedom, to become members of a vast herd that will SUPPOSEDLY be cared for by the few in power. These conformed members of the herd are not free, as they claim, they are, instead, completely enslaved to the tiny minority of overseers/rulers/keepers they have surrendered their freedom/will to. And therefore, these conformed members of the herd will never be more than what they are at this very moment; a vast herd of beasts of burden who will be used, abused, and then tossed aside by their overseers/rulers/keepers, when they have outlived their usefulness:

Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth. John F. Kennedy

And the elite bone thrown to these consenting members of the herd is their ‘political rights’. ‘Political rights’, like the entire political process, exist for one purpose only; to appease the madding herd, so it won’t rise up and stampede!

“A Nation of Laws” is simply tyranny masquerading as liberty, just as ‘political rights’ masquerade as universal freedom!

Image: http://www.hippoquotes.com

Where is it written that a majority will always have political power over a minority? This is another manipulation of the elite-powers, who write and enforce the laws that seek to make void our universal freedom. The elite-powers will always claim that their laws are ultimately “the will of the majority”, when in fact, the law is always according to the will of this ruling minority, and for their benefit only:

Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth. Mahatma Gandhi

It does not take a majority to prevail… but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. Samuel Adams

I have an almost complete disregard of precedent, and a faith in the possibility of something better. It irritates me to be told how things have always been done. I defy the tyranny of precedent. I go for anything new that might improve the past. Clara Barton

“It irritates me to be told how things have always been done. I defy the tyranny of precedent. I go for anything new that might improve the past.” This quote states what has been on my mind and heart since I was a teenager. Every time I have ever questioned the status quo, there has always been at least one card-carrying member of the madding-herd ready to instruct/chastise me: “This is the way it has always been done, so who are you to question it? life isn’t fair! Adjust! Conform! Don’t make waves!” Early on in life, I kept my mouth shut, shook my head in agreement, and walked away, while all the time knowing I didn’t buy any of it. Today, I have a much stronger response to such asinine herd-mentality advice.

One should respect public opinion insofar as is necessary to avoid starvation and keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny. Bertrand Russell

There are three generations of Americans who see themselves as rebellious intellectuals. But in reality, these three generations are the worst kind of conformists and rebels without a single clue; these pathetic individuals are ignorant, and willfully so; they have been “dumbed down” and rewarded for their overwhelming ignorance (they have been conditioned/programmed to be arrogant and ignorant). These are the three generations who believe everything is owed to them, and this is why they lust after the far-left side of the elite’s U.S. Corporation (the neoliberal side) and its corrupt policies and politics. This is why these self-proclaimed geniuses, without any hesitation, supported Bernie Sanders, and then Hillary Clinton, and then Jill Stein, during this most recent four-year-farce. These self-proclaimed geniuses are led around by their turned up noses all day long, every day of the year, and yet, they have not a clue that they are simply being bamboozled, day in and day out.

The vast majority of Americans are not free, nor have they ever been. These Americans have ‘political rights’ (tokens), which have been granted them by the powers that be. And so their ‘political rights’ can be as easily (“legally”) rescinded as they were granted; for instance, these Americans should take a long, close look at how their ‘political rights’ have been altered or rescinded since 9/11, and they continue to be altered and rescinded, with every day that passes.

Once again, elite-granted ‘political rights’ have nothing to do with the universal freedom that is every human being’s inheritance.

Therefore, I believe we the individuals should stop concentrating on ‘political rights’, which can (and will) be rescinded, and start living as the universally free individuals we were always meant to be.

It is our decision to be truly free. And we can begin this journey into universal freedom by disengaging, as much as possible, from this tyrannical system of government/politics/economics!


Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. Voltaire


Here is just one example of how “THE LAW”, in this “nation of laws”, exists solely to “protect and serve” the psychopathic-elite minority that rules:

“…In reality, the intertwining of government and big business meets the definition of fascism. A centralized autocratic government that picks winners and losers, while suppressing un-favored companies or industries, meets the definition of fascism. Fascists let business remain in private hands, but use regulations, laws, tax benefits, and the distribution of goodies to control the economy. Big business serves politicians and government bureaucrats instead of their customers.

Our corporate fascist economic system benefits big businesses who have hundreds of lawyers, lobbyists, tax specialists, and accountants to comply with the tens of thousands of government regulations, indecipherable tax code, and ridiculous laws, while small businesses are driven into the ground. Small businesses have no political influence and no ability to influence the corrupt system. The big connected conglomerates receive the government subsidies, tax breaks, and preferential treatment. Corporate fascism at its finest…”


2 thoughts on “Universal Freedom vs ‘Political Rights’

  1. Excellent post. I always liked the Gandhi quote: “Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.”
    Once you move outside Homeland USA the question of freedom becomes more complicated, viz the small matter of “absence of subjection to foreign domination or despotic government.”

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.