Please consider this post a sincere attempt to promote a broader and deeper interest in freedom.
I want to ask why Olympic athletes are considered to represent "their country," as opposed to representing themselves, as individuals? To whom do world class athletes, or anyone for that matter, owe their allegiance?
Also, why do parents send their children into government education institutions for virtually their entire childhood and into early adulthood?
Why do Americans obey the state and at the same time, say that they are free?
Are we to believe that a violent monopoly is a benefit to humankind and that therefore, the individual is required to pledge his allegiance to the particular gang that forces it's monopolized "services" over him, and finally, that such allegiance qualifies the individual as free?
Statism is rather absurd.
It's apparent that the Olympics serves to foster state worship by pitting many of the different countries against one another in a grand display of sports excellence and simultaneously serves to mask the fact that humankind is actually in a severe government-induced state of oppression.
Americans surrender their children over to the state because they seemingly have little choice and it is within the education system where Americans learn to surrender their individuality and to become obedient "citizens."
The state has virtually become God.
Under this aggressive assault on humanity, the individual is expected to believe that violent monopolies over needed services, such as security, infrastructure, meditation, and virtually everything involving human interaction and behavior, are morally and logically legitimate. They are not. Under this tyranny, the individual is ordered to relinquish his market choices and is forced to cooperate with the God-like government monopolies. The individual is prohibited from unsubscribing from government "service" and he is forced, at the whim of the government, to pay for these services.
Ironically, the individual in this predicament is portrayed to be free, or in the least, that because he is to be afforded some "rights" by virtue of his citizenship, that this somehow qualifies him as free.
Thankfully, there is a rising challenge to this evil system known as statism. This challenger is asking the question - from where do violent monopolies, aka governments, derive their authority? Because the idea of implied consent to a non-existent social contract has no moral or logical support, some are beginning to question the legitimacy of government authority. Perhaps an era of critical thinking is emerging.
In the next couple of weeks, while you watch the Olympics and while you are getting your children ready for their return to school, sincerely ask yourself what qualifies aperson as free?
Ask yourself whether you are actually free or if you just believe that you are free, because you were told so.
Google voluntaryism.
Peace and love,
Jamie