Ye shall be deceived and deceit shall make ye free?

 

by Don Hank

The Chinese Daoguang emperor in 1838 tried to oppose the British in their attempt to force opium on the Chinese people. One could say that, in doing so, the emperor was an anti-democratic despot, but he saw that the opium dens were destroying lives and families and turning productive Chinese into blobs of useless humanity — slaves to addiction.

One could also see the British as liberators, but they were anything but: they wanted to force the drug on the Chinese.

This story presents a dilemma for the libertarian because, while they can see the emperor as a despot who should have been overthrown, they can hardly see the British as bearers of the torch of liberty, since they were using force to drug another nation.

Incredibly, today, we have a similar situation. The libertarians have marshaled their forces and vast amounts of money to deceive unsuspecting people into accepting drugs.

The use of deceit is no less undemocratic and despotic than the use of other kinds of force. In fact libertarians decry the use of deceit by the media and major political parties, and they are right to do so. For example, there was a general perception in America after 9-11 that the Iraqis had attacked us. The press had not actually said that, but they implied it by focusing on WMDs and Saddam’s brutality. Libertarians and other thinking citizens cried foul. War based on deceit has left us with a mess in the Middle East.

Yet libertarians use the same deceitful tactics when pushing their pro-drug agenda.

As soon as Holland loosened up its drug laws, libertarians like Gov. Gary Johnson declared Holland to be a model for us all. Yet the truth was that many Dutch were dismayed at the aftermath of this great experiment. Their school kids started to drug themselves and the experiment got out of hand.

http://laiglesforum.com/the-young-pay-the-price-for-dutch-drug-experiment/23.htm

So much so that libertarian leaders backed away from the Dutch model and looked for another. They settled on Portugal, and the libertarian Cato Institute precipitously seized upon a dubious “study” by the Portuguese government that was published a few years into the experiment, claiming that all had worked out fine as planned and drug use was down. Gullible Cato jumped on this without a trace of critical analysis or further research and the world “learned” that drug legalization solves all our drug problems.

It was a lie, and if Cato had wanted to be honest with us, it would have listened to the Portuguese medical doctors who published a study of their own.

http://laiglesforum.com/decriminalization-of-drugs-in-portugal/2666.htm

When any group pretends to be for liberty, but deceives people in order to accomplish its goals, it is doing what the Left and the neocons have always done. Deceit is no substitute for the truth and none of our political parties are actually for freedom.

You, Fellow Citizen, are on your own.

Be careful out there!

Further on drugs:

http://laiglesforum.com/ye-shall-be-deceived-and-deceit-shall-make-ye-free/2969.htm

Leave a Reply

10 Comments on "Ye shall be deceived and deceit shall make ye free?"

Notify of
avatar
P. Gaddis
Guest

Totally agree, Don! Thanks for helping to expose libertarians and the likes of Ron Paul, who is dangerous at best. I too was caught up in Ron Paul & his stances until I discovered more of what he & libertarians are all about several years ago.

GunRights4US
Guest
Libertarians aren’t pushing a pro-drug agenda. We’re pushing a pro-Liberty agenda. It’s not government’s role to tell me what to do with my body. Whether I choose to bathe my brain in alcohol, opiates, or nicotene; it’s MY body not Washington’s. Only if I put other people at risk by operating a vehicle does it become other people’s business. People are being murdered (by the authorities AND by the drug cartels) because drugs are forced into the underground. How much freaking money are we going to spend when all the evidence shows that enforcement has utterly failed? As a result… Read more »
Bonnie
Guest
It’s not that simple, Don. During the Whisky Prohibition of the 20s, who controlled the alcohol? The Mafia. What was happening at that time and how was the problem resolved? Did everyone cry, “But EVERYONE will become drunks and alcoholics!”?? Yes, they did! Oh, horrors if we legalize booze! If you can imagine the legalization of drugs, people will not have free access to them. They’ll have to have a PRESCRIPTION to obtain them. Which cuts out the “middle man”, the Drug Cartel. You know, the bunch that reigns terror, murder and mayhem on the border. I’m assuming if one… Read more »
Don T
Guest

Why is that Portugal cut their drug abuse in half when they decriminalized drugs?? Proof is where it is, not some half baked Chinese analogy speculation. Just say you are anti Libertarian and save everyone your nonsense. And the WMD?? yea and were we right about it? did we find them yet? Your blog is weak and lacks any real time proof.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/

Hedley
Guest
It’s inalienable, Don. But I’d call it a responsibility not a right! I agree that pro-drugs groups (a lot, I believe, actually inspired by government/banker-driven agenda and covert operatives, who on the other side of their face are conducting a phoney war on recreational drugs) do lie or manipulate he truth. However, that does not change my beliefs that: 1. It is not the government’s remit to determine what I or anyone else is permitted to do with my/his/her body. I don’t agree with GunRights4US on a technicality: it’s God’s body, not mine (but it definitely isn’t the government’s!) and… Read more »
Hedley
Guest
Hi Don, A response to your e-mail containing the post (that doesn’t seem to appear here): Re: “If drug use an inalienable right, why the need to “prove” legalization is beneficial? “would this guy be willing to sign a life long commitment NEVER to use ANY public funded health service? has legalised drink reduced its consumption?” In my post above, the first part (points numbered 1-4) is a statement of my beliefs about the rights and wrongs of regulation/criminalisation of recreational drug taking. The second part is not an attempt to prove the benefits of legalisation – it is a… Read more »
GunRights4US
Guest

\Hello GunRights,
Check over my article and tell me where I said anything about taking away your rights.\

Check over my post and tell me where I even used the word ‘rights’.

Bonnie, you are absolutely correct. God owns my body, I am merely the steward of it. But I was trying to keep my rebuttal succient and to the point.

Sorry for the lateness of my response.

Sapient
Guest
Don / Bonnie Re: Bonnie, you are absolutely correct. God owns my body, I am merely the steward of it. But I was trying to keep my rebuttal succient and to the point. The Founders recognized Natural Rights, and particularly as articulated by John Locke. Jefferson, for example, wrote to the University of Virgiia that: “As to the general principles of liberty and the rights of man in nature and in society, the doctrines of Locke, in his ‘Essay concerning the true original extent and end of civil government’, and of Sidney in his ‘Discourses on government’, may be considered… Read more »
Sapient
Guest
Bonnie Re: If you can imagine the legalization of drugs, people will not have free access to them. They’ll have to have a PRESCRIPTION to obtain them. Might I suggest you go to California where the use of medicinal MJ is legal. It is NOW possible to drive down the road and see people with signs saying “Do you need a prescription..pull in here.” They have a doctor set up that will prescribe MJ for any thing you report. ANYTHING. Now, just so we are clear. Drugs is MORE than marijuana. Consider what it looks like for a person on… Read more »
wpDiscuz