A Sign of Very Bad Things to Come

You may never have heard of the SEA, and may not believe it when I tell you what it is. I am not making this up. The SEA is the "Sewage Enforcement Agency."

The, "Cambria County Sewage Enforcement Agency," protecting society from two dangerous Amish outhouse operators, apprehended them for violating Pennsylvania state sewage laws. They "were sentenced Thursday to 90 days in jail."

Their crime? "Andy Swartzentruber and Sam Yoder do not have permits for outhouses at a school and have been disposing of waste "improperly." The fact that this is how the Amish have done this for hundreds of years, and no one noticed it was "improper" until now is more than a little suspicious—that they would suddenly be threatened with jail over this is downright vicious.

It was not long ago I said I would know things had finally become intolerable in America when it was the Amish that were being targeted. I expected the issue would be one of schooling and endangering children. The actual issue is close to that, and I will not be surprised when it's turned into an excuse to remove the children of the Amish, to protect them from vicious sewage law violators, on some pretence like, "health concerns."

Not Possible?

There was a time when such an outrage would have been unthinkable in this country. That was a time when people prized individual liberty above all things and regarded the lives and liberty of others sacred, not to be violated by anyone. It was a time when most people were proud to be responsible for themselves, self-reliant, independent, and decent. Such people minded their own business and minded it well, and would have regarded any intrusion into the private lives of others a gross indecency.

You may be one who still holds those values; your initial reaction to this story may have been the same as mine—why can't people just mind their own business. What kind of person could bring themselves to harass these people who want nothing from anyone but to be left alone. They harm no one and ask nothing of anybody.

I can tell you the kind of person who would do that. A small minded petty bureaucrat, a government lackey whose statist mind cannot bear the thought that someone can live happily and successfully in this world without a government to protect him, provide his every need, and to tell him what to do.

You and I might find the practices of the Amish quaint, old-fashioned, even backward and limited, but the last thing we would think of the Amish is that they are any kind of threat to anyone. To the midget-minded collectivist, however, the Amish are a supreme threat, a threat to his very being. He cannot imagine being totally responsible for his own life; he cannot imagine living independently without his government and society to guide him, provide for him, and support him; he cannot imagine any value or virtue except those conferred on him by the approval and agreement of others. Because the Amish do not need his government, do not need his society, do not need the approval of others, and especially do not need him, their very existence is an indictment of his second-hander soul.

Very Dangerous Times

There was a time in this country when, if anyone suggested that the purpose of an individual's life was to serve their government, or serve their society, they would have been marked as a socialist or communist, which is exactly what they would be. That was when people still understood the supreme principle upon which this nation was based was individual liberty to pursue one's own happiness, and everything else followed that.

Those people and those views have been replaced by a society which no longer respects either freedom or individualism. In every area of society today, the dominant view is collectivist and trust in an all-intrusive government.

As examples, the following are some of posts from a certain forum where this travesty being perpetrated on the Amish was discussed:

1. The first is someone explaining conservativism:

"Real conservatives believe in the rule of law, liberals are the ones who believe that laws are only meaningful as long as they want to follow them. Conservatives also believe in democracy and representative government. The laws the Amish are violating were made by representatives of the people duly elected by them. Conservatives also believe that there should not be favoritism under the law based on race or religion.

"The Amish don't want to obey the law and haven't gotten the law changed. Suffer the consequences. No sympathy from me."

Conservatism is now defined as total faith in mobocracy, meaning just anything the majority votes for is right, no matter what it is. One has to wonder if these "conservatives" understand the Nazi regime was "duly" elected by the German people. No doubt this "conservative" would gladly go along with this recasting of his statement if made in Nazi Germany, "The Jews don't want to obey the law and haven't gotten the law changed. Suffer the consequences. No sympathy from me."

2. Describing the Amish, one poster commented positively, "they do not participate in these 'worldly' endeavors. They don't believe in government welfare, social security, public schools, suing others, or a whole myriad of other(s) ...."

To which one of the collectivists, I mean, conservatives responded:

"This is the United States. If they want heard, they vote. If they refuse to participate in this country's process as responsible citizens then they can just shut the Hell up."

In Australia, and some other countries, it is against the law to not register to vote, and against the law not to show up at the polls on voting day. Most Americans regard the freedom to vote a freedom only if it is not required. An obligation to vote implies that one belongs to the government and is obliged to do its bidding. No doubt this "conservative" would find that delightful. The correct name for that view is "statism."

3. Another poster asked: "What is the difference in dumping human waste on a field or dumping horse, cow, pig, or chicken waste on a field?"

To which a certain collectivist responded:

"Who cares? They must live by the same laws we do. If they don't like the laws then they should participate in their making. Since they refuse, then they will suffer with the rest of us. They don't get to act like they are not Americans subject to all laws any American is subject."

The collectivist view could not possibly be expressed more clearly or explicitly. "It doesn't matter what the law is, we are all subject it, good, bad, right, or wrong." This "conservative" does not care whether a law is moral or not, whether it is benevolent or destructive, good or evil, he just wants everybody to obey it. He doesn't really care how anybody behaves so long as they all behave the same way. What he cannot bear is that some people might actually be able to think for themselves, be able to determine what is right and wrong and choose to do right, the law be damned.

People like this are terrified of independent individuals, because the only way he has of evaluating his own life is in terms of obedience. So long as he can say to himself, "I'm obeying the law," that stands in the place of virtue and decency for him. If the law says, "persecute the Amish, or the Jews, or spy on your neighbor," he'll do it, and be proud of himself like any good Nazi.

The key is in this: "If they don't like the laws then they should participate in their making," which he knows perfectly well no one can do, and is a ruse which any child can see through. But, even if they could influence a change in the law, the argument is really this: "even if a law is wrong and obeying it is evil, you must obey it until you can get it changed—because you must not do right unless there is a law that requires everyone to do right. How dare you be different?"

4. The last example is a response to this post:

"This is NOT the United States I grew up in - or served in the Military for - and tried to improve on for the past 7 decades!"

Here is the disgusting response:

"And you think allowing an entire sector of people to refuse to participate helps those matters? ... you sit there thinking we should give the Amish a pass on participation and enforcement of the law ...."

Notice the, "refuse to participate," implies some kind of obligation that is being evaded and it could not occur to this statist collectivist that perhaps to refuse to participate in one's own oppression is just exactly what is called for. This conservative apparently forgets that while most early Americans were "participating," a handful of rebellious lawbreakers began the revolution that brought this country into existence. No doubt, this conservative would not have been among those freedom loving men—he would have been one of those "obeying the law."

When such blatant anti-individualism, collectivism, and statism are mistaken for what used to be call conservatism, and when decent harmless self-sufficient men of character are despised and hated with such venom, no matter how much you disagree with their personal values and views, there is very little hope for the survival of liberty in America.