FOR THE CHILDREN

Whenever the statists want us to swallow something we’d ordinarily spit out, they invoke the idea that it’s “for the children.” What a despicable lie!

The idea that something is okay as long as it isn’t for oneself is based in the lie of altruism. Stop and think about how many times someone has attempted to justify some crime or stupidity by saying, “But it wasn’t for me! I did it for the children.” I was watching a movie the other night, and one of the characters had committed some really awful crimes and was trying to convince his daughter he wasn’t a scumbag. He said, “But I did it for you! It wasn’t for me!”

There is a phrase, once commonly used in politics, that describes this concept, for it is not new. Politicians would put together a bill that no sane person would ever consider, but then they’d put in a rider for something no sane person could object to. They called it a “widows and orphans” bill, meaning that no one could possibly object to a bill that helped widows and orphans. Never mind that the other parts of it would virtually enslave the orphans and drive the widows to the waterfront cribs.

“For the children” is the new watermark of the widows and orphans bill.

Currently, they are talking about how the stimulus and bailout measures were for the children. Without them, our children would suffer want. Never mind that with them, our children would be under the yoke of debt to the Chicoms for the next 10 generations.

The greatest sham on the market today is global warming. We are told we must virtually destroy all industrialization for the children. We must take away their freedom on a limit never before envisioned by Americans. We must get them accustomed to living in pre-industrial squalor and darkness. We must make them forget the freedom of moving around the world, and hammer them into the feudal mindset in which no one ever traveled more than a day’s walk from his home.

Another tried and true for the children idea is gun control. “We must ban guns for the children.” My personal favorite is, “Gun control won’t reduce crime or violence, but if it saves the life of one child, it’s worth it!” Let’s not, under any circumstances, consider the children who will suffer or die because their parents were disarmed!

In February of ’79, a guy wrecked his car in front of my house. I went out to see if he was hurt. He climbed out and attacked me. I fought him for nearly 30 minutes. My wife had called 911 before I went outside, but we caught the cops at shift change. I beat that sucker bad – he was peeing through a catheter for a week from my kick, and needed 40-odd stitches to sew his face back on. He had a severe concussion from a blow to the head. He wasn’t even slowed down because he was full of Budweiser and angel dust. When I got away from him and got back into the house, I was pretty much done fighting because of three dislocated knuckles and a torn ligament in my hip. He kicked my front door open, splitting a solid oak, inch-and-a-quarter door, and announced his intention to kill me. Behind me were my grandsons, ages about 8 and 10, and my wife. I shot the sucker. At the last instant, I pulled the shot low, so it went in around his navel and ranged to his left and downward, nicking his sciatic nerve and barely missing his kidney. When the law finally arrived, they had to tie him hand and foot to get him in the ambulance. He bit a cop and kicked one of the medics in the mouth. When I called the hospital and asked if he would make it, the nurse said, “Yeah, the asshole will live to get shot again.”

Now in this one, tiny, isolated incident, I’m absolutely certain that, if I hadn’t had that pistol, he’d have stomped me to death and done heaven knows what to my wife and grandsons.

So the critical question is, how many children’s lives will be destroyed by gun control? If gun control saves one child and leads to the deaths or hundreds, where’s the moral high ground? If an economic measure saves, say, the rubber eyelash industry, but destroys free enterprise so that untold generations of children will live in feudal serfdom, how can this possibly be “for the children?" The answer is obvious: it isn’t for the children, at all; it’s for the statists with their unbounded thirst for power and dominion over their fellow man.

Our children don’t need to see themselves as wards – virtual chattels – of the state, living, moving, marrying, procreating, and breathing only as the state allows. They don’t need to grow up seeing their parents as creatures held in intellectual and economic chains by thugs whose only claim to authority is that they are “the government.” They don’t need to grow up believing that effort is punished, that success is crushed, that vision is stripped and raped on the evening news.

Our children need to see themselves as capable of managing their own destiny – of solving pollution problems – of solving crime problems – of solving economic problems. Indeed, the only possible solution for any of these problems is that we and our children be allowed the freedom to create a world that reflects the highest ideals of our souls. They need to believe that they can use their sovereign, rational minds effectively to direct their own lives as free men and women, creating, building, succeeding, failing, and trying again. They need to understand that the true glory of the human race is not to be found in pounding the lot of us into the mud so that we are all equally wretched and destitute. It is to be found in the triumph of the human mind and will over nature, and triumph cannot be glorious unless it is challenged and earned.

American children have the highest standard of living in the world. They are safer,
better-fed and –educated than any other population. This is because they live in a free country that is governed by laws rather than by men. Our children’s parents have been able to work for wages, or to build their own businesses and hire others, and this very simple, basic fact has done more to guarantee the health, security, and happiness – even the very lives – of our children than all the statist tyranny in the history of mankind.

That which destroys a man’s ability to care for his children cannot be for the good of the children. That which places children in the position of looking at the future with eyes preconditioned to slavery and statist control of their very lives cannot be for their good. That which unravels hundreds of years of human progress and places our children and grandchildren in the position of the pre-industrial wretches who died by the millions from disease and hunger cannot be for the good of the children.

What is truly, “for the children?” Freedom! Honor! Self-determination! Capitalism! Individual rights and liberty! Anything else is not for the children, but for the tyrants, and deserves nothing but scorn and contempt, and, if they will not cease their pursuit of our lives, something more forceful.



Sic Semper Tyrannis
Rebsarge.