Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Natural and logical consequences PT 1  (Read 1659 times)


  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 222
Natural and logical consequences PT 1
« on: October 30, 2009, 08:42:33 pm »

My first and only job application in NH  thus far has been in the field of counseling, reflecting on the last 3 years of work experience I have had, which has been in human services, also coupled with a background in teaching.  I am known for bringing to the table an approach that is grounded in natural and logical consequences.   Unfortunately what I consider to be REAL natural and logical consequences and those of the people I have typically worked under, are two completely different things. 

But all education or human service organizations I have worked for were funded almost entirely by government money, even the ones that called themselves private organizations. 
So often I struggled with dictating to a teenager, “You need to learn to have accountability for yourself and not expect others to do it.” 
What I wanted to say as a liberty-oriented person was ,”You need to learn to have accountability for yourself and not expect others to do it, unlike this organization whose very livelihood  is generated by stealing from other people against their will.  Oh and also, many of you shouldn’t even be here anyway, because if all you did was take/sell drugs or not go to school you didn’t actually commit a crime.”

Certainly in a freer market, I think there would be a demand for someone such as myself to do behavior intervention with youth and young adults, but it would be a very different task which to approach than in the context that is society as we know it.

Regardless, the point I am making in this long and drawn out speech Is about the contradiction between government and natural and logical consequences.  Aside from the fact that liberty minded individuals share a desire to reduce or remove government, I see another common thread that ties them together, and that is a society that allows for natural and logical consequences. 
I think it would be fair to say that nearly all free staters, whether they be religious or not, and no matter what their specific personal reason for being involved, would raise children (if they have them) with a set of universals which would include the following:.

* You don’t take things that don’t belong to you
* You learn to appreciate the things you have
* You learn to work for what you have , and knowing you may have to work very hard physically or mentally to get what you have
* Don’t expect someone else to do something that you can do yourself

Last night, a friend of mine who is completing a degree in social work, was ranting about the current socialist trend in society.  I found it all-too-ironic that his college major has the word social in it.  He was espousing on the subject of welfare, how generations of people subsist off welfare, and contribute nothing to society. 
“Welfare was not intended to be this way.  It’s not suppose to be a way for people to feed off of others their whole life.  They should be kicked off of welfare after about 5 years, because that gives them plenty of time to better themselves by going to school or getting a job.” 

I tried fruitlessly to explain to him that welfare was within itself a contradiction, because the money that keeps it going is accumulated in that very way -by feeding off of others against their will. 

To refer to my list of standards above
Government steals, period.
Aside from unique individuals in government, government does not appreciate what it has
Government does not work for what it has
Government expects others to do things for it most of the time

As many liberty espousers have already summed up before, government is inefficient at its best, and a long list of very unpleasant things at its worst. 

When we say that government is neither natural nor logical, it is important to maintain the proper perspective.  That is- anything that is naturally occurring, can be proven logically by use of scientific method.  If something is not inherently found in nature, it can only be created and/or maintained by human intervention.  Another way of explaining this is that anything that is not naturally occurring in the environment, must be made to exist. 

A hammer does not exist, so therefore I must make it exist by manipulating naturally occurring materials and laws of nature to create it.  Government does not exist in nature, so it must be created and subsequently maintained by force.  A typical household with parents and children also does not exist innately but is instead implied and maintained by force (in other words, if you want to live in this house then you will live by my rules)  I shall proceed to explain the difference in these three examples within the context of what is natural and/or logical.

First, I am not hurting a hammer by owning it, and I am not hurting it when I keep it locked in the garage, or slam it into a piece of wood to drive a nail.  To survive, I must manipulate the environment around me, even if my desire is to have some presumed minimal impact on the environment.  Picking apples from a tree, or building a hut out of rocks is using force on the tree and the rocks, but they are not human.  If I do not eat food and do not have shelter from the elements, I will die.  Natural consequences occur regardless of our religion, sex, gender, or physical ability, and we have no control over them. 
Pages: [1]   Go Up