RE: RE: That's not censorship
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: That's not censorship

Words
235
Reading
2 min
Listen
Play
7y

Most of the colonists were loyal to the Crown, only a minority led by second-rate aristocracy and smuggler mafia rebelled against their rightful masters. The only reason for the 'Muricans worshipping "free" speech of the "press" is because all the propaganda outlets in the Colonies were in the hands of the rebel leaders. It was not the "free" men who rebelled against their betters, but second-rate malcontents grasping at that which is beyond their ken. It is not at all surprising that the Colonies experienced economic collapse only a couple of years after their ill-conceived rebellion. If the 'Muricans did not reorganise their government into a more centralised authority, in order to steal indigenous land, the rebellion would have ended with the colonists returning back to His Majesty King George the Third.

There is no such a thing as "free" man. It is a meaningless drivel the merchant scum use to manipulate the muck into action contrary to their own self-interests. Shiny new baubles will not bring-forth garden of Eden, when men are displaced in their thought and action by edemic rebelliousness, malcontent, ingratitude, and hubris. Men need to be governed; the anarchy, for which you desire and pray, will ensure the extinction of the human race. The miseries of the human race were not engendered by the orderly governance according to natural and divine law, but by the ignorant rebellion of the humanist muck.