“Thoughts on the Transgender” – Freya’s Chambers – Sexual Identity

Happy Frigg and Freya’s Day!

Disclaimer:  The topics covered in Freya’s Chambers include serious discussions of sex, sexuality and related issues.  If it isn’t your thing; you can move along, otherwise enjoy and feel free to discuss.  Given the nature of some subjects be prepared for nude images as there may be some.  I avoid genitalia as a general rule but is not always possible.

Discussion:

This is one of those subjects I was going to get to later but it has been put in my face due to recent events.  A coworker came out recently that ‘he’ was transgender and in a few months months ‘he’ was going to become ‘she’.  He talked to me with a lot of trepidation, my empathy could tell he was very nervous and they told me it was because of my background.  As a former minister, they didn’t know where I stood on this issue.  I told him that he really didn’t have anything to fear from me as I pretty much now allow people to be whatever sexual identity they want to be.See the source image

My atheism has made me quite liberal on most social matters as I don’t care what identity/ role or pronoun people use about themselves anymore. My main issue regarding sexuality and behavior is as I said some time ago.  Is it consensual, is it safe, and are the people involved emotionally mature enough to handle it?  Beyond this let freedom reign.

See the source imageIf someone, therefore, feels they are a woman but their body is male, then I can’t conclude they are wrong out of hand any more.  No appeal to authority for my morality means I treat them as human beings who are making choices about their life.  I respect them and support them and their right to make such a decision themselves. My own sexual identity has no bearing on this.  This is about an individual right to make decisions regarding their body and sexual identity.   A right that no person should take from them.

See the source image

My concern for them is that they consider all the risks and factors as honestly as they can and with the greatest amount of information possible to make the best decision for themselves there are risks both mental and physical and this change tends to be a one way trip with some things that cannot be reversed.  This a lifestyle-altering decision and should be treated as such.  Socially the stigma is very negative right now and it can be violent, cause the trans person to consider suicide and other mental escapes even more than others, etc. Going into this decision without full counseling and consideration of all the implications is unwise and I don’t recommend it.

See the source image

It’s also why I don’t think minors should be allowed to make this decision, not to mention letting their body grow to the point where it can take the stress the transformation can put on it, and some changes are simply not possible until the body matures anyway.

The one thing I will not tolerate anymore, is these people being treated badly. I stand very strong for individual rights in this area and my coworker needn’t have been concerned because my attitude now is to defend their right to make this change.  I just have to get used to the change as it happens on a practical level.

My Two Cents,

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Women’s Nipples and the US Supreme Court” – Freya’s Chambers – Equality

Happy Frigg and Freya’s Day!

Disclaimer:  The topics covered in Freya’s Chambers include serious discussions of sex, sexuality and related issues.  If it isn’t your thing; you can move along, otherwise enjoy and feel free to discuss.  Given the nature of some subjects be prepared for nude images as there may be some.  I avoid genitalia as a general rule but is not always possible.

See the source image

Discussion:

While not surprising to me, the US Supreme Court decided to refuse to hear the case brought by two women from New Hampshire.  The Court basically decided not to hear the case.  The story from Reuters is below:

Reuters: US Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Topless Case

Why am I not surprised?  Because the court is conservative and there is no way that they want to go on record as having to do something very obvious to most people from a plain reading of the 14th Amendment.  If you have a rule that tells a woman she cannot do something a man can do freely, then it is sexual discrimination.

See the source image

The best thing for a conservative court with many of its members appointed by conservative presidents to do is to avoid the whole issue.  So that is what they did.  And it shows how the court, while in many ways has always been political, is even more political. The issue for most court members is legacy, not justice and it shows particularly when they don’t take cases of obvious implications for the constitution and the bill of rights. Most notably to me, the court could define 2nd amendment rights for the nation as a whole and in this case, would start to allow women to do what men have been allowed to do for years which is take off their shirt and bare the chest on hot summer days or whenever they wish. 

See the source image

This case involved two women who did a normal activity on a hot summer day and were fined 100$ for it each.  The simple question of whether a man would be fined the same way is an obvious ‘no’.  It is clear sexism that was justified by ‘traditional understandings of nudity”.  One thing is clear though that men and women can do the same activity but one of them is fined and the other is not.  That is sexism no matter how hard you try to make it something else.

See the source image

Probably the most disappointing thing is the fact this case came from one of the most libertarian states in the union – Hew Hampshire.  That’s right “Live Free or Die”.  Except, in this case, freedom doesn’t extend to women as much as men and it has been noted. Sorry, a little hypocrisy there as tradition apparently trumps freedom.

See the source image

What needs to happen is that women have full equal rights in this issue.  The issue of toplessness in public should not be made by government, nor men, but each individual woman involved.  This is really a female choice issue.  It also has an interest in the growing trans community because what constitutes male and female is getting blurry and so the best thing to do is have a uniform standard of ‘if a person for ant reason is allowed to go topless here, then all people are allowed to go topless’.

See the source image

From a sexualization point of view, as the idea of men going topless becomes more normal, sexualization of female breasts, much like legs, backsides and other aspects that have been normalized.  We will become as used to it as we have to those others. Not to say that those attracted to the female form such as my heterosexual male self won’t take note and admire, but I already do that with the rest of the female body as it is. I do find women’s breasts attractive and in some regard ‘magical’.

See the source image

Biology has kept us being attracted to each other’s physical bodies regardless of dress.  Ultimately this has led to our survival as a species.  Every picture I have used in this article is women doing some of the same activities a man can do while topless.  Only if they do it in some states – they get fined or jailed. I could have easily substituted men in all of these pictures and no one would bat an eye as this is acceptable culturally for men.  But somehow it becomes morally wrong if a woman does it. Yeah, right.

See the source image

The women of New Hampshire are now left with the arduous task of changing the laws of their home state.   A process that will take time and should be unnecessary given the plain wording of the 14th amendment: A liberty is being denied to women and given only to men. So much for equal protection under the law and the US Supreme Court is too political and thus to cowardly to correct it.

See the source image

My two cents.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Marriage Rights” – Freya’s Chambers – Equality

Happy Frigg and Freya’s Day!

Discussion:

Disclaimer:  The topics covered in Freya’s Chambers include serious discussions of sex, sexuality and related issues.  If it isn’t your thing; you can move along, otherwise enjoy and feel free to discuss.  Given the nature of some subjects be prepared for nude images as there may be some.  I avoid genitalia as a general rule but is not always possible.  

Now, this is a pretty large umbrella and I first want to begin with the issue of what marriage is.  While religious pundits would argue that it is an institution from God, I would argue that all religions seem to have it or something like it and some of these relationships predate some religions if archeology and scholarship are to be believed.

Marriage itself had always been a cultural l institution and it can be argued whether it is even a good one.  As a libertarian, I question why it even needs to exist.  There is nothing done in a marriage relationship that cannot be done without the marriage.  In the end, it is about legal obligation and people want to put a romantic spin on it using either religion or calling it an expression of love.  As if somehow by getting married you create some more love than already existed. I think there is a lot of nice touchy-feely to the idea of marriage that keeps wedding planners and officiants making money.

Image result for libertarians on marriage

In any case, if we are going to have it I don’t know why the government is involved in the first place.  Yes, it makes it legal but that could also be accomplished by two people going to a lawyer and hashing out a relationship contract. Does the marriage license simply do this in a faster convenient way? If so, I doubt the legalities would be considered equality from a sex point of view, particular in dower states where a woman basically gets half the guys stuff simply by saying ‘I do’ and not such condition exists the other way. The point is those that get married under a license, at least in the United States have conditions of that marriage that they would probably not like if they knew them.

Image result for married is an illegitimate institution

Mostly though marriage survives because of shame and stigma when you are not in certain situations.  The two biggest ones being that not being married is somehow odd and if a woman has a child out of wedlock.  Practically, neither of these stigmas make any sense. As people recognize the bullshit of these stigmas, marriage is indeed taking a hit. I can speak from personal experience that no legal contract, rings or vows will keep you faithful and true nor does an increased level of love result from getting married.

But until marriage is seen for what it is we are going to have it and the state is going to get involved so how should they act when people who normally don’t get married want to do so.  The secular answer is ‘equal protection’ not a restriction of rights.  Justice is supposed to be blind, so she should not be able to judge through the lens of religious bias or social convention.  She should not see that it is a couple of men or a couple of women or two men and one woman or one man and two women or any other relationship that people want to enter into.  The issue is the protection of rights, not to control what marriage is defined as.  That should be left to the people in that relationship; not the state, or even the church.See the source image Of course, if it were up to me, I would abolish marriage licenses and leave the definition of it to the people involved and if they want it to be a legal relationship – go see an attorney and draw up the contract. If you want a religious ceremony go see the officiant but the state in no way should be involved in the first place. In my mind, this is the only way to achieve equality.  As long as the government is involved people can gain control and determine the definition of what marriage is.  This is what causes inequality.

People will always try to control the government so they can control the agenda of marriage.  The best way to avoid this is to give the government no power at all other than to enforce contracts, which it already has through the courts, and provide protection for the people who enter those relationships of their own free will in their own way.

See the source image

My two cents.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Redefining Independence” – A Skald’s Life – Business Virtues

Happy Thor’s Day!

Journal Entry:

The term communist atheist is often implied with atheism but that is the successful propaganda of the McCarthy period of American history as in actually atheists come from all political spectrums.  Ayn Rand, for instance, is far being communist and made it pretty clear she didn’t believe in God either. But she was an individualist and hated socialism and communism because she had survived and escaped Soviet Russia and seen what had happened first hand. Consequently, she supported capitalism.

In looking at my virtue of self-reliance I have say some sort of change needs to take place to reflect my own libertarian individualistic philosophy.  As an individualist myself, how does my definition of independence change my understanding of the view of self-reliance?

Self-Reliance:

“Self-Reliance is the spirit of independence, which is achieved when each person is their own master and no one else’s’ .”

Principle: To achieve and maintain personal independence and advocate for independence in my family, state and nation.

Goal:  Find a new, better paying job by March 2020.

Bucket List: To be a published author of at least five books by March 2029

The change here came like a bolt out of the blue as I was reading Ayn Rand’s quote here.  My version of liberty, freedom, and independence is far more individualistic. My virtue statement needs to reflect that.  Of necessity, I will have to change my principle when I go through the next week; but I think this is far more reflective of my real philosophy which has been altered by the meditation of the last months.

Industriousness:

“Industriousness is the willingness to work hard, always striving for efficiency, as a joyous activity in itself”

Principle: Work with the enjoyment of work itself.

Goal: Finalize last requirements for my degree – Internship by May 2019 – May 2019 (achieved)

Bucket List: Write A Novel and Get it Published by March 2022.

I don’t feel any need to change this one in any way as it is solid in all respects from my perspective. Working hard, being efficient and enjoying both are noble goals.

Hospitality:

“Hospitality is the willingness to share what one has with one’s fellows, especially when they are far from home.”

Principle: To share out of my abundance to help people where I can with their life’s journey.

Goal: By March 31st of 2020, to be the leader/participant in a group of some kind.  (Goal Achieved

Bucket List: To own my own home by March 2024.

I don’t see much to change here either, although one could add a statement about compassion, that seems to be supplied by the idea of sharing in and of itself.

Higher Virtue – Justice:

The philosophy of taking responsibility for one’s own life and yet leaving others to do the same is fairly just.  It doesn’t mean you can’t act to help or be compassionate, but if you do those things with an eye toward dominance, then I would say your motive isn’t just anymore – it’s about control.  Control is an attitude I am trying to only apply to myself.

Work Day Routine:

  1. Morning Routine
  2. Wife: Communication / Cuddle Time
  3. Blogging – Organize, revise, write a new post for the next day, templates
  4. Weightlifting: Gym time – 1 hour after work.
  5. Writing: 1000 words/day.
  6. Reading – 1/7 of a book a day
  7. Personal Business: record financial transactions, savings plan actions, budgeting, appointments, job search, other actions, etc.
  8. Check Communications and Email after 2 pm but before 4 pm.
  9. Nutrition: Daily Carb Count – 2

Good.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Legalizing Prostitution” – Freya’s Chambers – Sex

Happy Frigg and Freya’s Day!

Discussion:

Disclaimer:  The topics covered in Freya’s Chambers include serious discussions of sex, sexuality and related issues.  If it isn’t your thing; you can move along, otherwise enjoy and feel free to discuss.  Given the nature of some subjects be prepared for nude images as there may be some.  I avoid genitalia as a general rule but is not always possible.  

While the subject is prostitution, I want to discuss economics for a minute because what prostitution is in most of my country is illegal (except Rhode Island and Nevada).  The reasons given for this are basically moral and trying to keep morality but like most things with good intentions cause a great deal of harm.  Economically speaking this harm is felt in the fact that black markets have an unknown and unstable economic effect.  Mostly it causes us to misinterpret data and the effects can create shortages and other negative economic impacts.

More gravely for prostitution in particular, much like the drug war, the negative effects of making prostitution criminals are far more detrimental that the supposed crime, if you can call it that.  As a libertarian, my definition of a crime includes actual harm was done and a victim to be considered a crime at all.  Prostitution has neither as it is a) voluntary and b) technically causes no harm.  Most of the negative effects of prostitution are caused because it is illegal not because it exists.  Voluntary consensual transactions should never be criminalized.

See the source image

The standard five reasons for legalizing prostitution are 1) reducing the influence of organized crime, 2) Health Concerns, 3) Protection for the vulnerable and underage, 4) Taxation revenue and 5) Morally there is truly nothing wrong with consensual sex.

See the source image

Reducing the Influence of Organized Crime

If prostitution is legal then if a woman is attacked by a client she calls the cops and the man is arrested.  She has rights and she can utilize the authorities to protect her and if she protects herself in self-defense then she would not be held responsible.  Without this currently pimps pretty much can do to the women what they wish and often it is a form of sexual slavery.  A woman who engages in sex work on her own runs a great risk of attracting the wrong attention and rival pimps are often violent with each other for territory. There is a sense of ownership organized crime has of prostitution as shown by the fact that pimps put their tattoos on their girls.  This would effectively end if decriminalized.

See the source image

Health Concerns:

Health reasons have been listed for legalization probably the longest.  You can require licensing, so you would have better numbers of actual sex workers.  This licensing could carry the requirements of regular monthly health screening to maintain and this would help prevent the spread of STDs along with perhaps mandating condom use and birth control to prevent pregnancy. The point is these workers would be allowed to practice freely and yet be required to get health screenings.

See the source image

Protection for the Vulnerable and Underage

Thirdly the subject of protecting the vulnerable and underaged is key.  The reason sex slavery exists, for the most part, is that prostitution is illegal.   There is no control directly on this black market at all and so anything goes. If prostitution is legalized, then they legal brothels, etc. would most definitely blow the whistle on anything illegal in order to remove competition and because of basic human decency. But also children of the prostitute cannot be used as pawns as the prostitute could call on help for them if needed and they were threatened.

See the source image

More importantly, the sex workers as rule would have legal protection against rape and violence otherwise the recourse is to just take it and then recover as best as possible with the perpetrator getting away with it.

See the source image

Tax Revenue

Tax revenue is always an issue for those of a more non-libertarian persuasion that is why I promote decriminalization for the most part as I would rather have it be that taxation was not part of it. But if you regulate it and charged a fee for the license to administrate making sure sex workers are screened then some revenue would be required. But there is much like legalizing drugs and taxing them an opportunity for state revenue and that cannot be denied.  Nevada reports that brothels generate on average 50 million dollars a year in tax revenue.  Multiply that by fifty states and that is a lot of revenue.

See the source image

Morally the question comes.  You can have sex – no crime and you can make money – no crime.  But somehow doing both together is a crime?  It also has some hypocrisy to it.  For instance, in the pornography industry, a person is technically making money having sex.  The only difference is that it is on camera. The point is there is no victim and no harm is done in the sense someone is forced, threatened or defrauded and if those things are absent I simply don’t see the point of making sex work illegal as it seems to only benefit a small group of people – notably organized crime and law enforcement. Legalizing it would change that.

See the source image

Conclusion:

It is my opinion that the making of sex work illegal has a lot of unintended consequences that are more dangerous and more damaging both socially and economically than if it was simply legal and regulated for those same concerns.  There are many arguments for this and I have listed some of the main ones.  I have never been to a prostitute myself, but I understand why some people would engage in it if they have no other recourse or as clients – options. I simply know that black markets are caused by government laws and often the results are more dangerous and damaging than if the activity was simply licensed and regulated.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Borrowing Perseverance” – A Skald’s Life – Business Virtues

Happy Wooden’s (Odin’s) Day

Journal Entry:

Perseverance is a Self Virtue in my system but I need to borrow it for business for a bit.  Mostly there have been new rounds of rejections for jobs and I need to take a deep breath and go at it again.  My issue is that this is a little discouraging and I am trying not to let it bring on The Grey right now and that means getting up and continuing to go forward.

I am thinking of another angle as well.  I am very much upset about the amount of time I wasted on something that was very false and phony as a career now.  I see Christianity for what it really is – one of the most colossal frauds ever.  It wouldn’t; bothe me so much but I wasted probably my most energetic and productive years doing ministry as a Christian pastor and now have to find a new way forward.  I decided given my atheism to join The Clergy Project, a support group for ministers who have no belief in god anymore.  I am hoping to find the connections I need to move forward a little better.

My Business Virtues are about being independent, hard-working and hospitable with the excess of my prosperity. The job I need has a  few requirements but most notably that it has to allow me to write and to be active in things as well as making me a little more money than I am now.

Self-Reliance:

“Self-Reliance is the spirit of independence, which is achieved not only for the individual but also for the family, clan, tribe, and nation.”

Principle: To achieve and maintain personal independence and advocate for independence in my family, state and nation.

Goal:  Find a new, better paying job by March 2019.

Bucket List: To be a published author of at least five books by March 2029

I believe in liberty and freedom not just for myself but for anyone.  I believe in freethought being the way to liberty.  If I could find something that allows me to advocate for this, that would be awesome.

Industriousness:

“Industriousness is the willingness to work hard, always striving for efficiency, as a joyous activity in itself”

Principle: Work with the enjoyment of work itself.

GoalFinalize last requirements for my degree – Internship by May 2019 – May 2019 (achieved)

Bucket List: Write A Novel and Get it Published by March 2022.

I always enjoy working.  I enjoy coming home afterward too but the work causes me to appreciate the downtime more.  I like to be efficient and some of the things that bother me at work are when I can see things are not efficient and there is no way to fix it.

Hospitality:

“Hospitality is the willingness to share what one has with one’s fellows, especially when they are far from home.”

Principle: To share out of my abundance to help people where I can with their life’s journey.

Goal: By March 31st of 2020, to be the leader/participant in a group of some kind.

Bucket List: To own my own home by March 2024.

I have no aversion to helping others, I just lack the means to do so and the cause that would be something that would help me focus on what I want to do in this regard.

Higher Virtue – Justice:

It’s all about being just in every relationship I have. At least, just on my side of things.  My part fo the relationship needs to be me acting as fairly and justly as possible depending on what happens in each one.  A simple goal but difficult to achieve.

Work Day Routine:

  1. Morning Routine
  2. Wife: Communication / Cuddle Time
  3. Blogging – Organize, revise, write a new post for the next day, 15 min. work on fiction.
  4. Weightlifting: Gym time – 1 hour after work.
  5. Writing: Half-Hour on top of the blogging routine each day. Alternate between Non-Fiction Book and Novel.
  6. Reading – 1 chapter min.
  7. Personal Business: record financial transactions, savings plan actions, budgeting, appointments, job search, other actions, etc.
  8. Check Communications and Email after 2 pm but before 4 pm.
  9. Nutrition: Daily Carb Count – 2

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Own Your Role” – Freya’s Chambers – Sexual Roles

Happy Frigg and Freya’s Day:

Disclaimer:  The topics covered in Freya’s Chambers include serious discussions of sex, sexuality and related issues.  If it isn’t your thing; you can move along, otherwise enjoy and feel free to discuss.  Given the nature of some subjects be prepared for nude images as there may be some.  I avoid genitalia as a general rule but is not always possible.  

Discussion:

Referring to the cartoon above: it should be noted that sticking a man’s wifi antenna into a woman USB port is dangerous in many ways.

Now as a guy with a political science degree, I had to sit in on a lot of classes that involved a discussion of gender roles, patriarchy, women’s issues, equality, etc. I am going to tell you upfront that none of it takes into account hard science like biology and neurology.  The closest I got to that in my studies were two classes – social psychology where the female instructor was honest in demonstrating how men and women are treated differently by society in certain situations and noted that it was not always good for the guy.  This video is pretty interesting and reflects this:

The other class was genetics where the female instructor basically said – the XX and XY chromosome combination makes a world of difference in everything about a person.  Simple genetic truth.  Boys and girls are different and they demonstrate this in everything scientific that science can measure and some differences are evident right from birth.  Another Video, definitely worth a watch as this woman did her homework:

Gender:

When it comes to gender, I am going to say part of it is nature in that we are male and female and part of it is societal expectations. You might say gender is where the hard wiring of our sex meets societal expectations.  It is a mixed bag of our differences as expressed by our sex gets mashed together with society’s expectations. That is why some see it as fluid but others may see it as masculine and feminine having multiple ways to express themselves. I fall on the side of the second option.  I have simply never found a compelling argument that gender was more than male or female and certainly not that it could be fluid.

See the source image

In any case, I have noticed that while feminists bitch about equality, I don’t see them encouraging women to become sewer workers, coal miners or any other dirty job.  They want the social construct version to bitch when it comes to the CEO professional office job, but then cling to their own gender’s nature and avoid the dirty nasty jobs that if men stopped doing would dramatically have a negative impact on life. The feminists when it comes to gender as social constructs seem to have a selective compliant switch and seem to prefer their gender over the alternative.

See the source image

This is why I stopped supporting them after the third wave of feminism began and became pure egalitarian.  Things are not always right for men and how they are treated in this mix of nature and society and I should not be browbeaten to silence because I point it out.

No photo description available.

In the United States the draft, child custody, men’s mental health. longer sentences for the same crime. and the lack of a support structure with any semblance of equality compared to women in the areas of abuse and health are just the tip of the iceberg. There is simply a lot of issues where one sex or the other is being shafted and you don’t do anything but show your sexism when you want to point out yours at the exclusion of the other side.

Gender Roles: 

See the source image

Gender roles and expectations of society are purely social constructs and form in my mind a form of tribalism which I think needs to be regularly challenged.  In my country, this traditional gender role thing started a long time ago and probably saw its height in the 1940s and 1950s. I am glad they have been challenged but interestingly enough some women prefer their traditional role and so do some men.  If this is truly and genuinely their free choice, then they shouldn’t be condemned for it.  The real problem with gender roles is not that they exist, but when they are forced or people are shamed into doing them.

See the source image

Once again I come back to the power of liberty.  Of letting people chose for themselves what role they want to play in society as being the only fair way to do things. Society needs to stop imposing and start granting liberty.  No opportunity should be denied, but don’t be surprised when sexual preferences as far as a role are seen in people’s choices.  Don’t yell if a woman freely chooses to forgo a career to have children and raise them so her husband has to go and work to support them.  If it is their free choice, that’s their business. On the flip side if a man decided to be the one to stay home and raise the kids because his wife has a better job, don’t call him a lazy deadbeat either.  Let people define themselves and this includes their role in society and how their sex/gender expresses itself in that role.

Conclusion:

See the source image

Probably the best thing we can do is let people own their own role as far as sex and gender and follow our own desires as far as our own.  Own your role, not someone else’s. Take it on as an individual, not as a collective group. In the end, we do want similar things and we need each other to have that happen. But we are not going to get what we want by forcing roles on others or denying the natural propensities of our own sex.  Both are avoiding reality.  What really is needed is just letting each of us be free to pursue what we want.  Liberty is always a better answer than control or dogmatic expectations.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Two Toms, John and Me” – Of Wolves and Ravens – Libertarianism

Happy Mani’s Day

Discussion:

Last week the discussion centered around anarchism where I basically stated that I consider it the morally purest and yet most naive idea about government – that is it is best not to have one.  In that post (link), I also stated that the government, if we are going to have one, needs to have certain qualities. This whole idea and the three things I said government needed to have comes direct5ly from my readings of John Locke and the practical application of his principles by two Toms – Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine.  These were in my mind the beginnings of practical classical liberalism which sees its incarnation in the United States of the late 18th century.

It is from these men that much fo my own libertarian philosophy is derived from.  Granting people as much freedom as possible is actually a key to prosperity.  I suppose I do look a little romantically toward the founding of my nation and then look at the current state of things a go – what the serious fuck.  The enlightenment founding fathers were probably the first men to really ask the question of how to have an effective but small government with the maximum amount of liberty and actually put what they wanted more or less in place.

To the Wolves and Ravens:

“Feed the Wolves, but Listen to the Ravens first.”

Needs (Geri):

Through these gentlemen, I come back to my three things needed to do this:

  1.  Recognizing that the citizens are the boss, the government is the servant, not the master.
  2. Having a great concern to defend the rights of individuals, in fact, it should be made as one of the central duties of government.
  3. The citizens should have the means to overthrow said government if it attempts to violate the two above.

As the anarchist reminds us, we don’t need government, but we are probably going to have one, so what we need is safeguarding against tyranny and totalitarianism.

Wants (Freki):

The kind of government then that we want gives us the three above conditions. It starts with the Idea of ‘We the People’ establishing this government and granting it powers and then limiting them. It makes sure the rights of the citizen are spelled out and gives restrictions and limitations on what the government can do in regard to those rights.  Mostly protect them but not interfere.  It also should protect the means to overthrow the government if it becomes tyrannical.  Weapons stay in the hands of civilians.

Reason (Huginn):

Led by Paine and Jefferson and using Locke’s principles all three were maintained in a constitution that granted powers to the government by consent of the governed.  It created a bill fo rights that the government could not strip from the citizen regardless of democratic action.  One of those rights the right to keep and bear arms for the very event and purpose of revolution against tyranny.

Wisdom (Muninn):

What was created was a very wise government that was small.  The problem is as we go along this constitution and the principles behind it are regarded as a tradition rather than law.  This seems to have the same effect as when the Roman republic began to see its traditions erode and tyranny became more possible.

Much the same is happening in the United States right now as the Constitution must be evoked by those who are willing to back it up with force and there seems to be less and less of those people.  I am not one of them but I am also not an idiot.  No government lasts forever.  But the principles of liberty, life, the pursuit of happiness and property ownership, need to remain regardless.

Conclusion:

As I consider my reading list for next year I am thinking Locke, Paine and Jefferson need to be among them.  I need to apply my libertarian principles and my sense of practicality to the modern issues fo how to maintain freedom in the face of two parties that seem hell-bent on restricting or limiting rights which they have no authority from the people to limit.  Making sure people can act in self-reliance is a worthy quest.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Anarchism: Moral but Naively Idealistic” – Of Wolves and Ravens – Political Science

Happy Mani’s Day

Discussion:

I want to go on record a saying the philosop[hy behind anarchism is morally pure because it is the only philosophy of government that gets rid of the two things that make government suck the most – control mechanisms and the removal of individual rights. Without a doubt, I do not argue with anarchists that their philosophy is good, just and perfectly thought out.  It is political idealism as its finest.

That said it is so idealistic that it will never happen.  Much life socialism has an idealistic view of economics but fails to account for the economic realities of the law of scarcity and that human beings are motivated by self-interest so taking that way you get a system that limits human achievement, option, and freedom. You basically also will find yourself taking rights from people, not granting them under a socialist system.

Anarchism does something similar – it doesn’t take into account another part of human nature that has evolved in us.  We are inherently tribal.  Tribalism has allowed human beings to band together against common problems or foes as long as the human race has been around.  it is part of our psychological makeup and it is why everyone will never accept anarchy as a form of government. There will always be the state no matter how it is set up.  As soon as people organize and set up a system of dealing with problems or issues, what they set up is ‘government’.

To the Wolves and Ravens:

“Feed the Wolves, but Listen to the Ravens first.”

Needs (Geri):

That said, I think the anarchists should keep advocating anarchy for one simple reason – it keeps us with the realization that the government doesn’t have to be involved in everything.  There is no need for the government but if we are going to have it it should do something we can all mostly agree it should do.  We need if anything, when the government is inevitably set up it, should be constructed in such a way it serves humanity, not the other way around. This is why most governments fail because they make slaves out of the populations under them and the tension for freedom is created that leads to their eventual downfall.

Wants (Freki):

So what we want is a government that serves us by: 1) recognizing that the citizens are the boss, government is the servant, not the master, 2) Having a great concern to defend the rights of individuals, in fact, it should be made as one of the central duties of government, and 3) the citizens should have the means to overthrow said government if it attempts to violate the two above.

Reason (Huginn):

While I can marvel at the ethical purity of anarchism given the above needs and wants, I have become practically a classical liberal libertarian. Not because I think having government isn’t immoral like the anarchist, but because I think it is inevitable that government will exist because of tribalism.  So if the government is rationally inevitable, it stands to reason that we keep it as small as people will allow and with the least amount of power necessary.  So far as I know the level of government of classical liberalism is the smallest that has been in history accepted by people. So it is practically viable and yet also respects individual rights and if done properly protects rights.

Wisdom (Muninn):

Wisdom finds itself in upholding the moral goodness of a particular philosophy but realizing the practical realities of experience and what human beings will actually do or accept. For me, classical liberal philosophy is the best compromise between the.purity of anarchism and the reality of human tribalism.  Anarchism, however, does bring to the wisdom table the constant reminder of trying to find a way to let people live in freedom and without coercion,  Well, at least as much as human tribalism will allow.

Conclusion:

I like anarchists, even when they argue with me about this, but I have also frustrated them by saying I agree that they are morally the purest philosophy I have found in studying political science.  Then the discussion turns practical and they have to concede another point – when have human beings accepted anarchism as anything other than a short transitional time between governments?  They never have.

Next week I hit libertarianism and I will be dealing with classical liberalism or more appropriately why I am one.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Revising the Ten Commandments – Part 3 – Additions and Final Copy” – The Rabyd Skald

Happy Mani’s Day

Now for the part of this where I ask the question about ‘is there something else that could be added?’ What stands outside the commandments as edited by myself that should also be on par with the other ten.  In this regard, most people don’t realize the original ten commandments does the same thing. In one place after the ten, more are listed and it has a lot to do with additions or other ideas that need to be addressed. I think that there is a call for me to do this as well.  Some other things should be emphasized.

Additions:

#11 – Until a child can make decisions for themselves, they should not have parts of their body removed, be abused or otherwise manipulated to further the agenda of adults. 

Sorry, I think children should be protected and make such decisions about circumcision, sexuality, and other religious and political matters when they are old enough themselves.  Adults should respect it is their body and their choices and until they can make informed decisions they should be protected until they can do so themselves.

#12 – In case it wasn’t already clear, the following activities should not be done as they are morally bankrupt: rape, genocide, and slavery.

I don’t really need to say anything here do I.  Other than I have just contradicted many of the commands of the Law of Moses and the ‘history’ of the Biblical Story of god’s people to say so.  Christopher Hitchens is right.  The reason these are not in the original ten is that God’s people will be asked to commit genocide and will later both enslave and rape the survivors.

#13 – Don’t do to others, what you would not want to be done to you.

Kind of a catch-all and a negative version of the golden rule.  This is because the negative so it actually prevents bad behavior in this case.

Final Copy: The Grey Wayfarer’s 13 Commandments:

#1 – You were born free.  People will try to enslave you through many means; Don’t let them. Respect the freedom of others; Don’t enslave them. 

#2 – Be an artistic human.  Express yourself and enjoy the expression of others.

#3 – Uphold the truth and be truthful with your words.  When you’re wrong – admit it. 

#4 – Take one day a week off and do what you want to do.  Life is too short not to enjoy it.

#5 – If you have children, remember that was your decision, not theirs; so be responsible parents, earn their respect, and teach them to be good human beings.

#6 – Don’t Murder

# 7 – Engage in responsible and consensual sexual activity.

# 8 – Don’t Steal

# 9 – Don’t lie to convict or harm the innocent.

#10 – Think Freely.  Never accept any tyranny, especially that of the mind.

#11 – Until a child can make decisions for themselves, they should not have parts of their body removed, be abused or otherwise manipulated to further the agenda of adults. 

#12 – In case it wasn’t already clear, the following activities should not be done as they are morally bankrupt: rape, genocide, and slavery.

#13 – Don’t do to others, what you would not want to be done to you.

They still need refining, but a definite improvement.  In the end, I think I have demonstrated that it does not require religion to come up with a solid moral code.  Rather, it seems that one simply being human can actually come up with something better than the supposed ten commandments of God through Moses.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!