Cæptain's Log

Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

As few people reading this my have already known, my 21st birthday is approaching shortly.  My 2 closest friends have already turned (one recently) and it’s not like we all have never been exposed to alcohol, so the whole ‘going out on a binge’ thing isn’t gonna be that big of a deal.  We do plan on doing it since it’s pretty much a tradition in our neck of the state (Nebraska in general has a major case of the underage drinking thing – but our town is a major college town to boot).

Something I’ve realized about the whole drinking age thing is that I don’t think the ‘real’ purpose is to nanny children.  If you don’t already know the history about the drinking age and how it came about, look it up, it’s interesting, but for the sake of making sure everyone understands – this was a now classic case of the inevitable Federal strong-arming where they recognize that there are still some ‘limitations’ on their power, so instead of acknowledging that they don’t have the authority to do something, they find some kind of circumvention.  The drinking age came along with the series of progressive highway reforms that culminated when congress decided to steal more money from the states and then threatened to not give it back unless they made the legal changes congress demanded.  A classic mafia maneuver.

Anyways – my theory is that the real purpose of a minimum drinking age isn’t to make sure people under 21 aren’t drinking.  If you look at the law for vending alcohol to individuals, the rule isn’t that the individual is 21, it’s that the individual has a valid, government-issued ID (of the type you can’t get unless you’re 21).  I can’t use my once-valid but expired license to buy alcohol when I turn 21.  I have to get it re-issued and updated to do anything with it.

I know that not having an ID is a preposterous idea to most people, but I’ve read a lot lately about freedom activists not signing their children up for social security.  It’s a noble thing to do, as something as big as submitting to a government authority is something that each individual needs to decide for themselves, it’s a contract, and to just assume each person wants to ’sign’ such a pseudo-permanent contract is merely another convenience for the government; it is morally wrong.

If someone wants to live outside the state – sans it’s benefits AND costs – they deserve the opportunity.  However, the government naturally makes it nearly impossible to function in society without submitting to it’s authority voluntarily – you can’t get a (legal) job, you can’t drive, you can’t get a bank account or get a loan or use any other bank functions, you can’t have a business (which is any form of productivity, which combined with the new federal crackdown on personal family organic farms, you can’t even produce things for yourself), and you can’t buy alcohol – just to name a handful.

I’m sure that the altruistic supporters of these measures are only out to do good for all of society, but if you view the state as it’s own entity, then it naturally makes sense that there are all these counter-measures to prevent people from rejecting its authority.  It may not be obvious or even the case, but it’s something to think about.

So if by the time you’re an adult you manage to get through life without signing up for social security (assuming your parents never signed you up) and you live under this government without an ID or anything of the sorts, then please let me know – because I’d like to meet someone that lives every day of their life on the edge of the shadow of an ever-growing government and who spends their very existence in the black market.

It’s a fantasy of mine to live in the woods somewhere, completely free – but since I’m already integrated into the ‘matrix’, I may as well continue to submit to authority and get my government issued plastic identification card so I can buy my cheap booze.