The Practical Implications of Liberty
Stephen Valentine Hodos

Recently, in the “Life, Liberty and Property” series, much ground has been covered on issues very important to an understanding of the American heritage. As this is the last article in the series, a reiteration of some of the core concepts already touched upon should help to reinforce what has already been covered in order to provide grounds for a concluding presentation on the real life application that necessarily follows from a proper understanding of these basic human rights.

It is important to note that while life, liberty, and property may bring to mind three distinct concepts, each one is tied intrinsically to the other two. Without the concept of life the concepts of liberty and property are meaningless, and vice versa.

Since the terms life, liberty, and property all refer to abstract concepts it is also important to remember that abstractions are a result of human thought. Human thought is intrinsically linked to the concept of human individuality due to the fact that only individuals have minds. As a result, common sense alone tells us that a collective does not have the capacity to think. It is only individuals that have the capacity to reason, regardless of whether or not they belong to any over-arching organization, i.e., collective.

If man is endowed with reason, and the necessary consequence of being endowed with reason is liberty, and if life, liberty and property are ultimately corollary concepts, then it must follow that man possesses an intrinsic right to life, liberty and property. They are the natural and unavoidable result of his rationality. Jefferson preferred using the words ìpursuit of happinessî over the term “property.” While we may speculate as to his reasoning, there can be no doubt that he meant to incorporate in his definition everything that Locke meant when referring to life, liberty and property.

Now for the practical application:
Rights are not privileges endowed by the state. A government that infringes upon the intrinsic rights of man, therefore, sacrifices its legitimacy entirely. Sadly, such is the state of our government today. It is only due to government inculcation and mis-education that the citizenry of any nation may find themselves lacking the ability to determine the legitimacy of any authority which presides over them. In America today it is mis-education, often coupled with the implicit threat of force, which brings so many Americans to allow an illegitimate government to trample their rights on a daily basis. As Alan Moore writes in his classic of political fiction, ìPeople should not fear their governments; governments should fear their people.” 1

When man employs his reason and consequently recognizes his own intrinsic rights, he has a myriad of options as to how to express those rights. Furthermore, wherever any form of government has been established to protect manís rights, man should then have the ability to appeal to the government for justice when those rights are infringed upon. If, tragically, government refuses to enforce the justice which it is supposed to preserve (such as is the case when it is the government itself which commits the usurpation,) then man may either sit back and allow the government to someday continue itís illegitimate reign over his children or he may attempt to strike change. Change can come by many routes. One such route was successfully found by the founding fathers of our nation. Another route is currently being proposed by an organization called the Free State Project. The Free State Project is a group which seeks to find 20,000 individuals across the U.S. who are actually committed to the preservation of liberty. The idea is that if and when 20,000 people have signed up in support of the Free State Project, those same 20,000 people will move to the state of New Hampshire, a state already full of people dedicated to liberty. Please be aware, this is more then just a plug for the Free State Project. Certainly, a reasonable individual may choose to move to Alaska, as one example, where by illegally squatting on uncultivated land, he might evade detection for most or all of his life time and, in so doing, be free of the burdens of an over-bearing government. Surely, a few have probably taken similar routes. Yet, should one have to remove himself from civil society and return to a state of nature in order to alleviate the encroachment of government on his life? Thomas Jefferson stated that every generation should have its own revolution. Certainly, this would be another option. Unfortunately, government schools have put this nation into such a deplorable state of affairs that the majority of the citizenry are completely unaware of what their rights are and why those rights exist in the first place. Before any such revolution might take place, a good education must first be had by the general populace.

Conclusion:
Human reasonability necessitates certain individual rights. So it is that life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the acquisition of property all presuppose one major tenet: that man is reasonable. Without the capacity for reason man is no higher than an animal and has no rights but to kill and be killed. Self-awareness is man coming to terms with his own existence; reflection is the process by which this is accomplished. If we wish to forestall the further usurpation of our rights, we must first start thinking and not gape with fear at intellectual pursuits. This holds true for every individual on the face of the planet. If we expect our rights to be acknowledged we must first show that we are, in fact, agents of reason.

Man is born with inalienable rights. Because these rights are inalienable, because man is born as an agent of reason, because it is man, the individual united with other individuals who establish governments for the protection of private property, we have the right to demonstrate our reason and our rights in the pursuit of justice. If and when any government is found to be no longer properly executing its responsibilities to the governed, if instead of preserving life, liberty and property it is found to be destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish that government. Take it from the men who crafted our government – they rioted over a tea tax. Remember, comfort today may cost us the lives of our children or theirs after them. Do we really want it to come to that? While putting knowledge to use may sometimes prove difficult, knowledge and understanding are void of value when action does not follow.
http://www.liberty-forum.org/