If James Joyce had been a libertarian

Sen Huwa commented on one of my posts and left a link to this response translated from Babelfish -- here is Sen Huwa's comment and below is the translation -- not a thorough translation, no doubt, but somehow very interesting.

   Libertarisme address me a lot. I make fundamental and moral objection against a government which exercises power unnecessary on individual citizens. Libertarisme help to remind me what means sovereignty as well as the capacity of people to find solutions from freedom for social and social questions.

 Spirituality addresses me also terrible.

Spirituality concerns the term of the laws of cosmos. Some of these laws ave been confessed commonly such as the law of cause and consequence (What goes around comes around), and for example the law of conservation of energy which learns at the profession physics to the middle schoolboy. Acquaintance frequently retrieves cosmic laws we in the fysica. Less well-known we frequently retrieve laws in psychology, philosophy and metaphysics. Think for example of the science of the soul, the mutual solidarity of everything and questions such as: what means its? Spirituality also concerns giving meaning. Why do we have certain experiences? What is the aim of living?

Spiritually oriented people can find much recognition in the Libertarisme. In this Article give I my spiritual vision on the Libertarisme.

The right experience, discover and grow
 Where it is spoken in the Libertarisme concerning sovereignty, I think of the cosmic law of the free will. This law concerns the space that each person gets to choose own life experiences and the right good and bad take decisions. Good or bad decisions are decisions which are respectively in agreement or in fight with the cosmic laws. That is very paradoxical: of the laws therefore the right ratifies not observe the laws. There are however other laws which for zorgdragen the person who chooses for this, asked of this to that there or late will experience the consequences. Spiritually seen, there no sentences but systematic impact exist. The free will enables for from own experience the soul to learn how cosmos functions. This freedom is essential increase reach.

When the inventor of the cosmic laws would prevent people these laws to test, to break and by one's own free will to reconcile, people would learn themselves a little. Then it are unconscious sheep which must remain within the hek but do not know why. This in contrast to sheep which experience has how dangerously and heavily living is outside the hek and for this reason choose, within the hek to remain. From aware free wants.

The law of the free will is a principle where the followers of the state and the church have much effort. For this reason the frightened citizen for more government measures and wonders himself a believer calls why god does not intervene at all misery in the world, whereas spiritually oriented people wonder themselves where those negativiteit have been caused by and how these can be transformed. For this reason the state lays so much prohibited and orders on, whereas libertariër claim freedom himself learn and develop solutions.

Real wisdom and insight are not transmissible and can only be obtained by personal experience. You the someone can indicate way of insight, but he himself the way must go. The libertariër which claim sovereignty, rise for its cosmic right own create life experiences which help him see the light. Overheidsbetutteling are a violation of cosmic free want of people and are possibilities of experiencing and of growing.

conscience level and their restrictions
 The Maya built pyramids with nine layers. These stand for the nine layers of conscience which are passed through evolutionary. Conscience can indicate you as the motivator of one's actions. Conscience quantifies the motivation level, for which, of one's actions. The Maya learn us that the different conscience layers on each other are piled up. You can just work for a higher conscience layer when you have understood the layers below and if basis incorporates in the higher layers.

The nine layers are:
1. Cellular (action = response), motivation: (bio) chemical and physicist wetmatigheden.
2. Mammal (stimulus - re punch), motivation: instinct.
3. Family (stimulus - individual re punch), motivation: personal instinct.
4. Tribe (agreements and differences), motivation: experiences.
5. Culture (reason), motivation: thinking.
6. National (laws), motivation: it stands in the law.
7. Planetary (standards and values): motivation: collective unwritten laws.
8. Galactic (ethics): motivation: the will of within.
9. Universal (creationcreation creation), motivation: I create what I want.

Characterising is that the foundation is laid firstly for insight in what (bio) chemistry and physics are nowadays called. Then insight in its own individualiteit, thinking arises, social structures and appointments and finally freedom to do these insights with all what wants you subject to you all lower laws implicitly respect.

It seems on learning motoring to a smattering. You get firstly what insight in the functioning of the car, then learns you the movement rules and then you can drive where you want naartoe.

Characterising is tevens that but a higher conscience understands a lower conscience, however, the other way around not. You can see to politicians complete well on which conscience level they to think. Many politicians think at the national level: the level of the laws and legislation. How do we solve something? By making a new law! Balkenende a smattering smuggles by speaking concerning and standards and values and suggests with that secretly that its conscience is higher developed than political in general. By remainder this man nevertheless regulates everything at a lower conscience level: with laws.

What now if a citizen has ended up with regard to conscience at the level of ethics? Someone who is life wants arrange how he wants that personally dearest. Not primary from rules and standards but from inner motivation. This way someone is not understood by political because lower cannot understand higher. Such a person has to no explicit rules and laws necessary there apprehend himself because he has already incorporated these in its conscience. Many young people (new time children) have an ethical conscience and feel themselves motivated by the rules and standards of the government. The government says: you must work. The youngster says possibly: I want firstly know what I myself want. Hans the farmer of taskforce youth unemployment cannot and put for the young people to lock up in camps. See here how heilloos lower conscience reacts to higher conscience.

The Libertarisme have (without they that realised) much characterise of a spiritual conscience at planetary and especially galactic (ethical) level. Libertariër want base be actions on inner motivation. Political and the many critics are able to cope with present themselves from national (laws) level nothing and questions itself how a society of this type freethinkers can be controlled without laws and rules. It a chaos will become and a large anarchistic disorder. Just when brings political itself the conscience at ethical level, she understands that no disorder will be since ethics has been founded on an integrated notion of social structures and social order.

Spiritual libertarisme
For many libertariërs spirituality seems another branch of sport with which one does not want identify oneself. That is moan because they administer more spiritual laws than they realise. They have to a higher catch conscience in the core but are possible this sometimes with difficulty places in the sand of at culturally and national conscience level acting governments. They try think ethical principles at the level of and laws of explaining and run up inevitably against incomprehension because term transfer limits to a lower conscience level only possible is. This has do nothing with arrogance. Spiritually seen there at any time respect must be for every individual and his conscience.

In my opinion political LEADERs must always a right or have conscience level higher than the most aware citizens. A government which acts at ethical level, enforces no laws on people who that necessary do not have. I see no objection in the presence of a government subject to these with regard to conscience capable am lead the population in his conscience. At this moment we sit however burdened with a government which represents a lower conscience and nothing else can send and does then from its own restriction what she does not understand. Libertarisme put this lack - unconscious - to the jaw.

Update on Friday, August 14, 2009 at 10:08PM by Mike Farmer

This is Sen Huwa's site -- http://www.vrijspreker.nl/wp/2009/08/libertarisme-spiritueel-bekeken/

Libertarian Preparation Part 7: Pursuing Wealth

Almost all of us pursue wealth. There are some people in society who have a different value system, and wealth means very little to them, but for most of us wealth represents security and acquisition of the means to do and experience things we enjoy -- to pursue happiness.

Free, capitalist countries have shown to be more prosperous than countries under some form of socialism, but great wealth has also shown to create class envy and warfare. It appears that many people haven't mastered the concept that wealth is created through productive activity, that there isn't a limited amount of money sitting somewhere that shrinks when someone becomes wealthy. If I start a business and make a million dollars, that doesn't take money away from anyone, it justs adds to the total amount of wealth, just as if I lose that million it doesn't take money away from others, unless there are people dependent on me making money and not losing it, such as an employee or supplier, but even then it doesn't directly take money from their amount, it just means they won't be creating their wealth off money I had been supplying for a productive activity on which they were dependent (and I was dependent on them, too). If I went out of business, the employee would not get any more paychecks from me, and the suppliers would not have my business.

We should be joyous when people create wealth, because it adds to the total amount of wealth. If I create a million dollars of wealth from a productive business, then I will spending it at stores, buying things, putting it in a savings account so that others can borrow it, investing in another business through stocks so the business can survive or grow, perhaps expanding my business and hiring more people who may be out of work.

Creating wealth is a good thing that helps others. It also means I'm not directly dependent on others to take care of my wants and needs -- I don't have to ask anyone to give me money, because I'm making my own. Ayn Rand once said, and I'm paraphrasing, that one of the best ways to fight poverty is to not be poor. But speaking of poverty, a wealthy society is also a more generous society. As I mentioned in another post, we've barely tapped into our charity potential, and charity is hampered by high taxes and the idea that government will take care of the poverty problem. As many libertarians, and other free, objective thinkers, have claimed, pertaining to inequality of wealth, is that the major cause for wealth inequality has been government intervention/regulation in the economy which favors some economic endeavors over others, thereby rewarding some buisness enterprises and punishing others, interfering with competition and blocking smaller players from rising through hard-work, better ideas and quality.

The idea that great wealth in a society causes consumerism and a materialistic society which slowly erodes culture and spiritual pursuits is also an unproven propostion that is contradicted in reality. America's great wealth, historically, has allowed more people to pursue spirituality and culture -- art, music, religion and spiritual diversity abound in this country. It's difficult to be spiritual and cultured in dire poverty. A mature society can separate business and soul-pursuit, or combine both with no damage to the spirit. Even in business for many people there's a deeper understanding of the spontaneous order that arises -- a type of beauty in the actions at play which aren't planned in a central government committee, but rather the results of millions and millions of free choices. 

We still have a problem with poverty in America, but pursuing and creating wealth is not the cause. A large part of the answer lies in an enlightened national mindset regarding wealth, and a separation of government and economy which allows the economy to grow and create more opportunities for people to create wealth.

Superficial history post and Pollyanna prediction

We might have a national attention deficit disorder and an aversion to history, but history is our record and doesn't address fashion as much as it does movements which can develope over long periods of time, with zigs and zags characterizing the major changes in society recorded from looking back over centuries. In Charles Taylor's book, A Secular Age, he leaves few stones unturned as he gives a view of history related to religious control of society after the Dark Ages, such as Calvin's grand ordering of society (at least within his realm of influence) and the zig-zag movement to humanism/secularism. I will not try to address all of Taylor's points, because I'd have to write a book, and I certainly don't agree with his take on most of it, but it seems to me that in modern times we've been caught in the struggle between an all-encompassing state, free people designing their own lives within the restrictions against natural rights violations, and the remnants of the religious idea that we should obey the commandmants of God to guide the activities of society.

The religious influence in the political realm of society (western society) seems to be losing power, although there are temporary revivals of religious influence. Taking a snapshot of our present situation, one would say the humanist idea of a strong and intelligent state is the driving force behind change. In the historical "minute" it would appear that libertarian influence is almost non-existent, and that we have moved beyond the American Revolution principles of individual rights, limited government and localism -- yet taking zigs and zags into account and looking at the battle since Locke, there appears to be more of a collective confusion being worked out in the hearts and minds of at least those who live in America and some European and Asian countries.

This conflict between human improvement manifesting itself in the service of a great state or embracing  freedom and independence which resists state control or subordinating freedom to the will of a higher power external to the human will has developed a creative tension which at the present is forcing people out of complacency and into action. As time passes, the stakes become larger, and the continuing reality of a strong state in the middle of the conflict rewards government with a central, vital role, and thus the importance of gaining political power.

The founders of America, for the most part, realized the dangerous position of the state at the center of society and attempted to free people from this pernicious influence and control -- I say "pernicious" because the history of control of the few over the many had caused a narrowing of expression and human flourishing to the point of tyranny. At least under the Roman empire, for many areas, the control was broad and general and micro-management wasn't the norm, leaving these areas to enjoy an unambitious freedom. As the world began to move toward the nation-state, order took the form of micro-management in the affairs of citizens and even religious belief was enforced from the powers above. The enslavement of the human will couldn't last long, not universally. America was born out of a movement to limit the power of government and establish individual rights as inviolable. But, the zig-zag of history shows that the American Revolution was beset by the Hamiltons of the world who still believed in central control, so America was infected by the virus of central control from the beginning and the Constitution allowed loopholes for the state to advance, which it has until today, with a zig of freedom and independence here and there -- at times, quite a bit of freedom which created great advances in industry, art and technology. The early years of capital formation were rocky and the government took advantage of this to intervene. The government also intervened to correct the egregious flaws of slavery and women's rights. Slavery and women's rights would likely have materialized without government intervention, but it's difficult to fault the nation for enforcing what was right to protect individuals from oppression  -- rights apply to everyone.

But now we are past the early years of capital formation, nation-building, slavery, women's rights and we live in a liberal society where positive rights are now enforced that weren't even considered "rights" in the beginning, and aren't considered "rights" by many, now. The zag of state control is now in ascendence, and the idea of an enlightened state with the power to establish equality and fairness is broadly accepted as a modern advance over the freedoms and risks of a free market and limited government. The idea opposed to a limited government and free market, in part, is that the wealthy few will oppress the many and that freedom is meaningless if a person is poor and unable to compete against, and is dependent on, giant corporations and wealthy men and women who control the markets.

The egalitarian sentiment has been strong at different times in America, and now the state has momentum to attempt to make this a reality. Redistribution of wealth is felt to be the fair means to establish equality and prevent the wealthy from oppressing the middle class and the poor. By becoming the protectors against wealthy oppressors, the government has assumed many responsibilities which limit freedom and independence. The regulations from government are myriad and stifling. Corporations have gamed the statist system to gain favor and advantage over competition from smaller, less connected competitors. Special interest groups have used the power of the state to gain favor for their causes. The central role of government has created a system whereby a powerbase is established by favoring certain groups over others so that competing political parties battle fiercely for the largest powerbase by using state power to, in essence, buy votes. The power,  prestige and financial rewards of being in the majority party are so great that the main purpose of each party is to win elections and gain control of the three branches of government. In order for a party to build the largest powerbase, the party must promise and deliver the goods. Washington D.C. has become one big feeding trough where special interests lobby for favor and advantage.

History has also shown us that power corrupts, so we arrive at a point where state power has now become so pervasive it touches every area of our lives, and there is no way out short of limiting the power of government. At this moment in time there's resistance to limiting government, but this could change if government goes too far and shows sign of collapsing under its own weight. The remnants of religion in all this has run its course -- it appears the public no longer wishes to mix religion and politics. This was inevitable in an age when knowledge is increasing so rapidly. This isn't to say that spirituality is no longer a factor in people's live or doesn't influence their political decisions -- on the contrary, there may be a great spiritual movement on the horizon as people become more seriously concerned about human flourishing and the limits of the human will. What I envision is a movement toward "excellence". Excellence is a term I like to use to describe the full human being who has gained integration of mind, body and soul and expresses himself, or herself, in an authentic way.

It's becoming more difficult to BS your way through life -- specialization in industry and technology require focus and attention on the goal -- the new media is uncovering the deceit of the old media -- people are learning more on the internet -- social sites are developing standards of participation which demand honesty, trust and transparency. Just the complexity of life can drive a person inward to find meaning and purpose. Human beings are maturing intellectually (although it's hard to believe at times) and society is growing beyond dependence on a nanny state. Once people begin concentrating on the political sphere, the information age will offer competing visions of the future. One vision which I believe will prevail as appropriate to a maturing society is one of freedom and independence, a spiritual society which transcends religiosity -- a peaceful society which enbraces non-interference in the affairs of other countries and gains a renewed respect for basic rights.

I may be off base with my wishful thinking, and in history's time it could be decades away, or even centuries, but this is the vision and path I see for the achievement of excellence. Everyone can be their best, and that's a great achievement. 

Libertarianism and Spirituality

From Merriam-Webster online --  Spirit

1: an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms

People become a little uncomfortable with talk about spirituality, because of the close association with religion, but our better selves understand spirituality in deeper consciousness, usually in solitude upon reflection, or during an intimate moment with a loved one, or upon viewing a work of art -- perhaps it's an experience in nature, or a song, a great speech that sends chill-bumps up the spine, a certain passage from a well-written book where prose and poetry fuse and ordinary language is transcended.

That deeper awareness is far greater than the platitudes of religion or ceremony that passes poorly for soulful experience -- it reaches the mystery of life, the x-factor that animates us -- the vital principle. This part of ourselves is dulled by cynicism, by the daily grind of mendacity, game-playing, political spinning, base language, mundane existence that loses contact with that which is vital -- it happens, life is tough sometimes, mean and crude at times.

So when we consider spirituality there's no wonder we react with a bit of revulsion, because we've been set up before and disappointed by the worst of humanity, by the reality of lies and dishonor and vulgarity and senseless violence and despair. Hell, this is a tough game, man, it's not a dance down a flowery path! But we know, we know, in those moments, we know.

So, with all the appropriate reservations, conditions, howevers and buts, I say liberty is a spiritual quest. I've never become so cynical, so post-modern and deconstructionist, so reductionist, that I don't feel the spirit when imagining the beginning of America, and other movements toward freedom around the world, when freedom was proclaimed as a new way of life. Even with all the human defects, the flaws regarding women and slavery and the statist motives of some such as Hamilton, the underlying spirit to live free still inspires my thought and leads my "spirit" to continue that great, unrealized idea -- the idea of liberty.

It seems like a naive quest at times, like a utopian dream that grownups must shed to accept the cold reality of central control and sophisticated governance -- but I know, I know, in those moments, I know.

And, I won't forget.