What the hell are you doing on this site? It seems to me that you are part of the WE.

But, like I have said, Being part of the We, does not mean that you are not an individual .

So in the end, you are wrong and I am right. Face it.

“In their political, as in their intellectual life, they [the Greeks] practiced ultimate democracy. Army generals were elected or removed at sessions of the Areopagus. They were forever in disagreement and conflict with each other; nor could they establish national unity. But as a result of their freedom, they developed an unparalleled creative power; and when, for brief intervals, even a portion of them presented a united front against the vast Persian fleets and armies, they annihilated them with ease. The unappreciative Diodorus Siculus complained that his countrymen were forever “wrangling with each other over the most important matters of speculation . . . unable to believe anything at all with firm conviction, they simply wander in confusion.” Larsen The Story of the Origins of Christianity p33

“The will of democratic Power goes by the name of GENERAL. It crushes each individual beneath the weight of the sum of the individuals represented by it; it oppresses each private interest in the name of a general interest which is incarnate in itself. The democratic fiction confers on the rulers the authority of the whole. It is the whole that both wills and acts.

This personification of the whole is a great novelty in the Western world, and is a throwback to the world of the Greeks, from whom its inspiration comes. But the citizens of an ancient city state, being enclosed within its walls and having been conditioned by much the same education, showing in social standing differences that were but of degree, came much nearer to being a real whole than the people of an extensive nation, of various origins and traditions, and marked by a diversity of functions. This whole is not a fact, for all the care that is taken to break down every private formation and tradition in existence. It is a fiction, which it is sought the harder to accredit for being the tittle deed of Power.” De Jouvenel On Power p285

“Take Germany as a city cut off from the outside world by flood or fire advancing from every direction. The mayor proclaims martial law, suspending council debate. He mobilizes the populace, assigning each section its tasks. Half the citizens are at once engaged directly in the public business. Every private act-a telephone call, the use of an electric light, the service of a physician-becomes a public act. Every private right-to take a walk, to attend a meeting, to operate a printing press-becomes a public right. Every private institution-the hospital, the church, the club-becomes
a public institution. Here, although we never think to call it by any name but pressure of necessity, we have the whole formula of totalitarianism.

The individual surrenders his individuality without a murmur, without, indeed, a second thought-and not just his individual hobbies and tastes, but his individual occupation, his individual family concerns, his individual needs. The primordial community, the tribe, re-emerges, its preservation the first function of all its members. Every normal personality of the day before becomes an “authoritarian personality.” A few recalcitrants have to be disciplined (vigorously, under the circumstances) for neglect or betrayal of their duty. A few groups have to be watched or, if necessary, taken in hand-the antisocial elements, the liberty-howlers, the agitators among the poor, and the known criminal gangs. For the rest of the citizens-95 per cent or so of the population-duty is now the central fact of life. They obey, at first awkwardly but, surprisingly
soon, spontaneously.

The community is suddenly an organism, a single body and a single soul, consuming its members for its own purposes. For the duration of the emergency the city does not exist for the citizen but the citizen for the city. The harder the city is pressed, the harder its citizens work for it and the more productive and efficient they become in its interest. Civic pride becomes the highest pride, for the end purpose of all one’s enormous efforts is the preservation of the city.

Conscientiousness is the highest virtue now, the common good the highest good.” Mayer They Thought They Were Free p254

“There is also this: when we renounce the self and become part of a compact whole, we not only renounce personal advantage but are also rid of personal responsibility. There is no telling to what extremes of cruelty and ruthlessness a man will go when he is freed from the fears, hesitations, doubts and the vague stirrings of decency that go with individual judgment. When we lose our individual independence in the corporateness of a mass movement, we find a new freedom, freedom to hate, bully, lie, torture, murder and betray without shame and remorse.” Hoffer The True Believer p100

Characteristics of the “We”:
1. The crowd always wants to grow.
2. Within the crowd there is equality.
3.The crowd loves density.
4. The crowd needs a direction.
–from Canetti, Crowds and Power p29

The ideological root of collectivism is embodied in the concept of “We.” Once subsumed into the collective, there is no longer the sense of “I”. The entire objective of uniting with other people in common cause is to coerce, compel, oppress, and ultimately punish, those who do not conform to their values, ideology, and practices. I can think of no greater ruse and fraud perpetuated upon the inhabitants of this land than this phrase: “We, the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish…the Blessings of liberty to ourselves and Posterity…”

The document is a declaration of increased collectivism and Power. Within it, there is liberty only up to the limitations imposed by the collective. Outside, there is no liberty whatsoever. The creation of a Federal Constitution did not establish liberty–it constricted it with absolute rule. It is the manifestation of the totalitarianism that resides in every person who merges with the Group.

The Group, the Crowd, the Collective NEVER establish liberty. They constrict it. Liberty is what individuals have when no one coerces or compels them. Liberty, like unalienable Rights, are self-existent and coeval with Life. Neither can be given, and the idea of investing them in a representative within a Group, is a fraud. They are unalienable. The truly Independent Soul is he who is without the coercion of the group.

To me, WE is an individual who chose a side.

Example: Alex Jones is an individual who created Infowars a long time ago. He started with a very tiny audience. He kept on and now today, he has millions of people listening from all over the world.

Who are these peoples? They are the WE., and still they remain individuals. They create videos, write books, they start their own alternative sites, they educate people.

So, for me, Individuals can also be part of the WE. I see nothing wrong with that.

What was true then is true today, politically speaking. We have our wise critics who have made it their life’s work to criticize without shouldering any responsibility. They advocate abolition of law enforcement without seriously even addressing the consequences. More importantly, the conceptual framework of freedom works on a personal level as well. In contrast to the political sphere, most people are extremely conservative when it comes to personal decisions. It is natural to want to remain the same person you always were, and to not look too critically at your past decisions and assumptions. The personality becomes the fixed center point.. There can be no declaration of independence from our own idea of who we have always been, we tend to think. We have to be “true to ourselves.” No matter how many mistakes we make in the name of our self-allegiance, we stick by this dogma, and it sticks to us like glue.

What if we adopted the same spirit of responsible independence as the Framers in relation to our own personality? In the Declaration, all the grievances against the crown were enumerated in detail. Suppose we went over our own past and enumerated all of our errors, with the same kind of analysis, holding ourselves accountable, not to blame, but to separate our future decision-making from the old patterns of thought that led us into trouble? And then to take more responsibility for future outcomes, rather than letting the force of our old, familiar personality continue to be in control?

If you have stayed with me so far, this is not a lecture about what we all should do. This is a description of what I have been up to. It has taken me this long to figure out that I need to shoulder more responsibility, but not just in the usual way of working hard. I have done a lot of hard work that hasn’t had much lasting effect. The responsibility I am talking about involves saying “you’re fired!” to my delegated beliefs and patterns that do not serve me well, and being ready to fill the gap with something better, that is not yet in place, but will be.

So celebrating Independence Day is a time to admire the spirit of those men who were willing to say “You’re fired!” to the king, with only scattered militias and mixed loyalties within the populace to back that up. That took guts, but those were the type of men who already learned that fortitude from their own self-governance. They understood that what happens on the inside controls what happens on the outside.