Deserving Neither

This paper was written on or around November 9th, 2023. It was partially inspired by the utterly tragic story of Indi Gregory, a baby born in the United Kingdom that was denied care, and forced to die without the consent of her parents, and in defiance of their desire to seek further care outside their country. Understanding of the horrid details of this story may help the reader to better understand the context of this article.

Much of the history of the West can be characterized as a struggle between the ideals of liberty and 

security, and the rights of man to either. Far from a mere scrapping on the meanings of platitudes, these warring concepts have been the source of endless amounts of philosophizing, quarreling, and even bloodshed. And, at the last breath gasped during the argument, or the last drop spilt as it may be, Western man must hope to find a balance between these two weighty subjects, security and liberty, made manifest in so-called “good government”. Through discussion, legislation, and indeed, bloodiest revolution, the West has been able to establish what a government should, and most importantly, should not do to protect liberty and provide security to its people. If a government cannot, or will not facilitate these functions, then the process begins again; discussion, legislation, and bloody revolution.

The concept of liberty is one born of man’s innate desire to control his own destiny, to live as he wishes, and to orient his existence about his own values. Distinct from unlimited, anarchic “freedom”, liberty is the capacity of the western man to live civilly within his community while still maintaining mastery of his domain. Said domain can grow or shrink depending on the country, but in general, western society respects the right to property and privacy. In the past, the rights of parents to their children were guaranteed as well, with all but the most radical of persons recognizing the necessity of the nuclear family for rearing good, capable citizens. All of these sorts of “life rights” are most often protected by the now seminal right to free speech, perhaps the most beloved of all freedoms in the West. If the government is infringing on any of the rights of its citizens, then this most important freedom allows the citizens to speak up about it. Less abundant, but no less important than any of the above, stands the right to keep and bear arms, granting the people the ability to resist compulsion, and commit that final act of establishing good government. Western man gives up this right at unimaginable cost, whether now, or in the not so distant future.

Security in life is an elusive prize, chased with vigor and tenacity by generation after generation, such that little else can compare to this great treasure in the eyes of the wanting. Not merely safety from nature and brigands, though these elements cannot be ignored, the security begged by man is a sort of surety against chaos, and, increasingly so in the West, a promise of continued comfort. The West has managed, largely through the enshrining of liberty, to provide a level of security to its people unlike any society ever before, such that western man no longer wants for safety so much as protection from discontent. The discontented westerner is often not lacking necessities, but rather, lacking an abundance of resources or amenities that would make life easier or more pleasurable. For many, this is the sort of security that must be demanded from good government, a state in which the basic rights of property and privacy are not worth a damn if one cannot be at ease and fully gratified. 

The concept of security is further stretched in the West to include surety in ones very own identity, or sense of self. It is not enough to be granted freedom to master your own life and mold your identity through your deeds, no, the modern westerner must be recognized for what they claim to be; by their government, and, through force of law, by their peers as well. This is no less a matter of life or death than the wildest storms or fiercest bandits to those that claim such a right, and by the passing day, these self assured dimwits demand more recognition of their delusions, and furthermore, they insist that the State enforce such recognition. These mindless narcissists will even demand more security from the state simply because they are who they say they are, like aristocrats of yore, claiming a birthright owed to them by life itself. Make no mistake, every appeal for reparations, every winging call for subsidies, every demand for “gender affirming care” is nothing but the frustrated impositions of self-proclaimed aristocrats, desperate for more security in an unsure world. Only, these spoiled children are willing to give up far more than just their rights to get what they want; indeed, any one of them will place their rights, your rights, and even the blood of your children on the altar of fear and desire.

For every overture made toward the goal of security, the pillar of liberty is eroded a little more, and due to the ever-hungry nature of government, the state is always more than willing to let such erosions happen. Much ado has been made in recent dialogues about the right of any person to affordable healthcare in the West. Anybody with any sense knows that “affordable” in this case can only mean “free”, but this paper will not concern itself with the economical implications of free healthcare, but rather, a recognition of the further demand for security western societies have placed on the state. Modern medical science is a marvel beyond description, and it would not be a stretch to describe the capabilities of doctors as miraculous in comparison to even the last century. Our ability to stave off death and comfort the sick is truly incredible, and their are a great many in the West who believe that access to such care should be a right as unalienable as free speech. At its heart, this can be understood as an altruistic goal, and one that, barring the myriad obstacles, only the blackest hearted churls could not desire. And so, like privacy and property, the time has come to demand healthcare from the state; it truly is that simple. Only, there is a glaring difference between the rights of privacy, property, speech, and arms, and the supposed right to healthcare. In the former case, each protection is concerned with what the state cannot do. The state cannot violate your right to privacy, they cannot seize your property, they cannot disallow you from expression, and they cannot take away your weapons. In contrast, the right to healthcare necessarily involves the state giving its people something, and such a right cannot exist outside the total control of government. The security of free healthcare comes at the price of western man’s medical autonomy. To what degree may vary but only with time, as without fail, the state will claim as much power as it can, in whatever case.

Healthcare is merely one example of western man’s foolish sacrifice of liberty for security, one amongst a host of other ways in which we have allowed our governments to control our destinies. Business, finance, agriculture, even property; all of these things are abominably intermingled with the state in such a way as to make it near impossible to separate them. Like a parasite attached the nervous system of its host, removal of the state from these institutions can only constitute the death of whatever society. But would such a death be any worse than the future of life in this hideously mutated West? The sniveling little aristocrats have put up liberty as collateral, in exchange for comfort, pleasure, and ease and the state has extracted blood for its price. In venerated western societies today, the state has been granted control over life and death, and not over the condemned and the criminal, but over the most innocent. In the West, life has now been given a price, and we have allowed the state to haggle over its worth, to deem through its demonic dialogue whether a baby deserves to live or to die. The West has sacrificed its autonomy for security, and now, our progeny is paying the price in blood, and what is worse, western man cannot even defend himself or his children against such evils. For another sacrifice has already been made upon the altar of security, at least for most of the western world, and that is the right to defend your life, family, and property. It is not for bandits that the vigilant remain armed, but against that same state that would steal our children and allow them to die. 

Western man, was safety from brigands worth your only defense from tyranny? Is not liberty a prize worth guarding anymore?

The West was born during a time when security was never guaranteed; nobody ever thought it would be, and nobody had any allusion on the matter. Excepting the outbreak of war, it was understood that every man was the foremost guardian of himself and his family. The miracle of the West was the guarantee of liberty to pursue security, be it of a literal sort or that kind we know today. That liberty was embraced by a culture of people united under the morals and values of Christ, united in church just as much if not more than by community. But the prosperity of the West, it seems, was always just as dangerous as the perils it has managed to ameliorate. Such success could only be tempered by the strongest of moral codes, shared by the great many, to stave off the ever persistent specters of greed, lust, and fear. Now, it seems we have forgotten Christ, forgotten our morality, and forgotten what it means to be free. Led by the godless, we trudge ever onward in our quest to take as much as we can, ever fearful of a life lacking comfort, indulging in whatever pleasures we might. The discussion is over, we have legislated our own undoing, and the power to revolt has been sacrificed to our own fear. Whatever shall replace the cycle will no doubt be more hellish than anything we can imagine. 

Western man, guard your families, and pray.