What, in fact, is the radical idea of today in the flood of mainstream thinking? At a time when there is talk of social peace, the need for collective supervision, interventionist thinking seems to have become mainstream, and the real "radicals" of today are not the socialists and others. On the contrary, they are part of the mainstream - although they often do not want to admit it. So what is the radical idea of today?
There is one very radical idea in contemporary reality. The idea of exaltation extremist. An idea worthy of a fool:
The individual has the right to decide on himself, his property, his fruits work and their efforts.
When you defend this idea, you are suddenly portrayed in the eyes of many people as fascists, extremists, anarchists, people dangerous to the whole world.
It is a radical idea that the results of your efforts are results yours effort and so on you have to have the main word in deciding what will happen to these results - whether you sell them, lose them or anything else.
It's a radical and utterly crazy idea that it should be primarily an individual - and not a kind of central commission, whether in Prague, Brussels, Moscow or elsewhere - who decides his life and his future.
It's completely shocking thought, the idea that you are not anyone else's property. That no one has the right to force you to do anything by force, that no one has the right to take anything from you against your will, that no one has the right to decide on you without your express consent.
This is an extremist view that claims that theft, robbery - held for any purpose - there is still theft and robbery.
It is indelible recognition that there are good peoplewho do not need a bureaucratic enforcement apparatus to help someone.
It is a completely unprecedented idea that if someone wants to get money for something, it is his right to obtain them through voluntary cooperation.
It is certainly a fascist concept that claims that no one has the right to be able to forbid certain kinds of thinking from a position of power. That everyone has a right at least in their space defend opinions that he likes and ignore those he rejects.
It is a totalitarian idea that says you are anyone can think anything about anything.
It is a completely insane abstraction, from which it follows that the basis of decency and tolerance is not violence, but doublefreedom. Freedom to do good.
This is an opinion worthy of banning that says it should be especially youwho decides… about you.
It's about freedom. Then - yes. I confess. I am a supporter of this radical idea. Then yes, I think the world is dangerous. Extremist, reprehensible individual.
And I'm glad for that.
Jan Helfeld: is it always wrong to break the law? | Http: //devian.cz/? Post_type = video & p = 11586 | D2IEgDwHE1k
Ron Paul and voluntarism | http: //devian.cz/? Post_type = video & p = 11491 | I6E2WWTl7Oc
Peter Schiff and the Commission for Supervision and Reform | http: //devian.cz/? Post_type = video & p = 11499 | 1rTBVdValsU
Doug Stanhope: Freedom http: //devian.cz/? Post_type = video & p = 11518 | o8EvorQn4Ms
Walter E Williams: Legality vs. Morality | http: //devian.cz/? Post_type = video & p = 11566 | lEhRQjvm1Is