Dear Friends,
It seems to me, we are being trained to fear that which is less dangerous, and to embrace that which is more dangerous. Just as, to so fear water… that you turn and face a lion, is a sure way to a short life, turning from a mundane danger to an existential threat is suicidal. Rational people don’t readily make this type of emotional and intellectual move unless we are tricked into it. Our own sense of self protection, inhibits us from putting ourselves and our children into greater danger, to avoid a lesser danger. Yet if we continue following the elite without even glancing around, that is exactly what we are doing… embracing lava, for fear of hot wax.
Every time the unbiased media show a news story of a civil murder or other violent crime our perception is that our fellow man is dangerous. The more often these stories are shown to us the more fearful we become of our brothers. This holds true even if the actual amount of violent crime is down both as a percentage of population or in totality. The more we are told, other people are dangerous and only want to do us harm, the more we believe it. This is not to say that other people cannot be dangerous or that crime never happens, it is to say, our perception of the frequency is heightened when we are shown it more often. Since there is always violent crime there will always be some to show.
We are told both explicitly and implicitly that the answer to all the violence in our society is more regulation and more laws. If only this or that law was passed crime would go down. But, as I have explained above, even if crime does go down, but we are shown more examples, we will become more worried about it and more pliant to greater government intrusions in our lives, “to keep us safer.” The unbiased media don’t have to be explicitly involved however their complicity can be implicit. As the old saw goes, “if it bleeds it leads,” shows why violent news stories are always so prevalent, they are in demand. We have a prurient interest in societal violence. This is used against our own liberty whether we know it or not. So it is best to know it.
If a business has a camera on it’s premises to prevent theft or even predict what a consumer will want, is no intrusion on privacy because it is on private property, which you and I can boycott if we find it obnoxious. The private property owner has an economic incentive to have people at his or her business, and providing a safe, helpful environment is part of meeting that incentive. Government however, cannot be boycotted, it is everywhere all the time. There is no escaping government. The pro government argument goes… If only we had a government camera on every street corner crime would go down. The media shows murders happen often in front yards and… we take the next step down the slippery slope, why not at everyone’s front door… Eventually leading to, why would the honest citizen care if his phone is listened to by the government, it is for his own good.
Statistically, over the last thousand years, you and I are far more likely to be killed by our own or another government, than by any common criminal. I have seen one example where it is estimated 20 people are killed by their own governments, whether by famine, genocide, war or a myriad of other imaginative ways, to 1 person killed by a jealous husband, armed robber or other common criminal… in the last century. Yet, despite these facts, most people are more in fear of our neighbors and passersby, than we are of government. In that irrational fear we turn from the less dangerous to the more dangerous.
We are being trained to fear the mundane menace and to embrace the existential threat. Crime reporting is the propaganda arm of this effort. The more we see violence on television them more we fear each other. Our increasing fear of one another makes us emotionally react, turning to government, as a way to be safe. By doing this we loose sight of the fact we are in far more danger from our government than we are from crime. Our unmeasured emotional reaction makes us run from possible crime to certain oppression. A measured reaction however…
Sincerely,
John Pepin
