Apparently, those damn Tea Party members over in the United States are spreading vitriol all over Australia. Really? How did they get through TSA? Isn’t the Australian T.E.A. Party doing their jobs?
In fact, they are.
The Sydney Morning Herald reports, “Mr [Tony] Windsor [Minister of Parliament, or MP in Australia] said there were some ‘points of commonality’, to the debate over the rhetoric of the Tea Party movement in the United States.”
The Australian T.E.A. Party web site states that the TEA Party is, “A worldwide movement, united for Free Markets, Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Small Governments and Individual Freedom.”
So, yes, the TEA Party has a common goal. It is the supposed goal of the Republican Party in America, the PATRIOT act notwithstanding. But apparently, political science is way above his head. Or he is an elitist. The goal, Mr. Windsor, is freedom and liberty. Do you have a problem with that?
Windsor gives the U.S. TEA Party too much credit. Apparently, his own people can see that a tax based on a false science is tyranny. In the United States, it can only be considered valid with a generous twisting of the words of the Constitution of the United States of America. Since the “tax” is to be paid to the United Nations, it is totally unconstitutional.
In 1850, when France was fast moving to become the first Communist Empire, Claude Frédéric Bastiat wrote a treatise to his countryman, concerning the matter, called The Law. In this plea from this dying man, he wrote:
“And does not experience prove this? Look at the entire world. Which countries contain the most peaceful, the most moral, and the happiest people? Those people are found in the countries where the law least interferes with private affairs; where government is least felt; where the individual has the greatest scope, and free opinion the greatest influence; where administrative powers are fewest and simplest; where taxes are lightest and most nearly equal, and popular discontent the least excited and the least justifiable; where individuals and groups most actively assume their responsibilities, and, consequently, where the morals of admittedly imperfect human beings are constantly improving; where trade, assemblies, and associations are the least restricted; where labor, capital, and populations suffer the fewest forced displacements; where mankind most nearly follows its own natural inclinations; where the inventions of men are most nearly in harmony with the laws of God; in short, the happiest, most moral, and most peaceful people are those who most nearly follow this principle: Although mankind is not perfect, still, all hope rests upon the free and voluntary actions of persons within the limits of right; law or force is to be used for nothing except the administration of universal justice.”
He was a French TEA Party member spreading vitriol. The “vitriol” that he was spreading was that the only purpose of law was to maintain the right to protect oneself, their property and their liberty. That is, also, a collective right of the people (not the National Guard). There is no natural right for a person to attack the right of life, liberty or property of another person, according to this treatise. Therefore, there is no collective right, even legislatively, to attack the right of life, liberty or property. It is a central principle of the works of John Locke and a principle which was used in the writing of the Declaration of Independence. That is the point of the American TEA Party, even though—for the most part—it has been construed to mean Republican party. I’m pretty sure, from reading the Australian T.E.A. Party web site, it is central to their thinking.
According to the Sydney Herald article, Mr. Windsor said, “Just remember you could be responsible for driving someone that’s got a slight degree of mental illness to something that they wouldn’t normally do.”
You mean, like voting for a carbon tax based on false science?
I guess, since the NRA showed video of the Australian government melting down all the guns they stole from the citizens, they will now have to make a law keeping slingshots, pies and other dangerous weapons at least a thousand-yards from any politician.
This whole concept Bastiat calls legal plunder. The point is, Mr. Windsor, that the people of the United States are sick of this legal plunder. We are sick of being forced into communist unions to work instead of the free association of men. We are sick of giving paychecks to those who do not want to work or those who are here illegally. We are sick of the government taking away our RIGHT to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness.
I think the message, Mr. Windsor, it that your people are too.
Possibly related articles:
Tags: Australia, Bill of Rights, Carbon Taxes, Constitution, False Science, First Amendment, OpEd, Opinion, Second Amendment, Tea Party
Loading ...
