Liberty

by

Top 100 Movies for Troubled Times

The Art of Manliness is an outstanding website for men.  It features traditional values and advice on how to be a real man. Here is their list of the top 100 essential movies for Men.  I own and love most of the movies on the list, but there isn’t much there for women, nor are all it’s movies essential for our troubled times.  Soooo…..

Many years ago, I was Director of International Development for Blockbuster Video. That was in the days before Blockbuster was made obsolete by the internet, Netflix, Red Box, VUDU, Youtube, etc. We were goin’ and blowin’ then. I digress.  The point is, I developed a love for great movies.  Years later, that led me to put in a good sized dedicated home theater with a performing stage in our home in Atlanta. We had many wonderful experiences with other families and their kids, either watching and discussing great movies or making up and performing plays and reader’s theater on the stage.

One very special memory is of a teaching moment when I sat all my kids down to watch the movie, Gandhi. I kept the remote in hand.  After each significant scene, I paused the movie and we taught and discussed an important life lesson. Gandhi is a long movie.  With discussion and some breaks, it took a good part of the day to get through it. The time could not have been better spent. It’s times like those that I am most proud. Times that paid great dividends in the lives of my now adult children.

Those experiences led to my commitment to build the amphitheater stage with outdoor theater in the Village. The physical facilities are there and we have enjoyed movies under the stars many times, but my dream is, as yet, unfulfilled. So far, the theater has been used mostly for entertainment. I miss the deep discussions. I’ll keep looking for those opportunities to learn and share like we used to with our kids and close friends in Atlanta.

This brings me back to the top 100 movies for men list. It occurred to me that we should develop a top 100 list for the Village.  Not sure what we should call it yet. Maybe something like the “Top 100 Movies for Troubled Times.”  It should be made up of movies that:

  • Teach about character and positive values (either through positive or negative examples showing consequences of bad choices).
  • Provide perspective for our troubled times (Dealing well with adversity.  History is a great teacher of perspective as we repeat past mistakes.)
  • Give us strength and courage to persevere in difficult times.
  • Show great role models for healthy social interaction – How to treat one another with dignity, respect, trust, and love.
  • Teach practical solutions to real problems. Time proven survival skills and strategies.
  • Give inspiring examples of freedom-loving people with an independent spirit; people who are self-reliant, hard-working and willing to fight for their freedom.
  • Inspire us to be better,do more, be more creative and stronger.

.

.

I’ve already done a top 80 list from my personal catalog,
but then it’s just my list.   I could use some help getting to the best 100.
All you “like-minded” people out there, post a comment with your top 10
… or more.
I’ll take the best from your lists, combine them with mine and share the best of the best.
As a starter, here are 10 that I think should make the list

.

Gandhi (no surprises here)

It is impossible to capture the life of any man in one film, much less the life of a man who saw and did as much as Mahatma Gandhi. Thus the filmmakers who tried to capture his life on the silver screen sought not to give a blow by blow account of Gandhi’s life, but instead to capture his spirit in what they did show. The film begins with Gandhi’s assassination and then starts the retrospective of his life, beginning with his being thrown off a train for being Indian, and through his non-violent efforts to win Indians their rights and then their independence. One man truly can free an entire nation, if not change the entire world.

Best line: “They may torture my body, break my bones, even kill me, then they will have my dead body. NOT MY OBEDIENCE!”

.

Defiance

Jewish brothers in Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe escape into the Belarussian forests, where they join Russian resistance fighters.   They provide leadership and protection to about 1,000 Jewish non-combatants who have fled to the woods, build a Village, learn to survive and fight off the Nazi army.

.

Life is Beautiful

With humor and an indomitable, positive attitude, a Jewish man wins the love of a beautiful woman.
With inspiring courage and discipline, he must call on the same qualities to protect his son in a Nazi death camp.

.

The Kite Runner

After spending years in California, a soft and pampered Amir returns to his homeland in Afghanistan to help his old friend Hassan, whose son is in trouble.  It’s a story of sacrifice, deprivation and danger as he risks his life against a deeply corrupt and depraved regime.

.

Groundhog Day

On it’s surface, Groundhog Day is just another comedy. But if you delve deeper, you’ll find a story that drives home some profound messages. Bill Murray is Phil Connors, a cynical egotistical weatherman who annoys just about everyone and gets stuck living the same day over and over. It’s Groundhog Day. We don’t know how long Phil is stuck in this purgatory of repetition. Maybe a month.  Maybe a thousand years.  From Phil’s plight we learn that real change in life can only come from within us.  It’s a movie about the slow and agonizing process self-improvement, known in some circles as repentance.

Best line: “I’m a god.” “You’re God?” “I’m a god. I’m not *the* God… I don’t think.”

.

Cover of

Sommersby

Set in the deep south immediately after the Civil War, Laurel Sommersby is barely surviving, working the farm without her husband Jack, who is believed dead in the war. Jack Sommersby was an abusive, coarse man, so his return is unwelcome to Laurel, who has been seeing another, kinder man.  But Jack has changed a great deal.   Some, especially Laurel’s suitor, believe that this is not actually Jack but an imposter. Laurel herself is unsure, but takes the man into her home and learns to love him.  This is a story of reformation, integrity and supreme sacrifice under conditions of extreme poverty.

.

Ikiru

A Japanese bureaucrat tries to find meaning to his life after he is diagnosed with terminal cancer.  He must learn courage and take up a  respectful, yet dogged struggle against the bureaucracy to right previous wrongs and injustices.

.

Braveheart

Mistake #1: Primae Noctis? Are you crazy, Long Shanks?
Mistake #2: Slicing up William Wallace’s woman? Are you asking to get your fort burned down? Never hack off a Scotsman.
Mel Gibson’s portrayal of the battle painted warrior poet William Wallace is easily one of the greatest heroes in all of movie history.

Best line: “Every man dies, not every man really lives.”

.

City of Joy

Dr. Max Lowe (Patrick Swayze) abruptly deserts his practice as a surgeon and falls into depression.  He flees to Calcutta, India to lose himself, but finds Joan Bethel, a local social worker and discovers the joy of unselfish service and a life with meaning.  He makes friends with a family in desperate need.  Hazari Pal and his family are desperately poor, having been swindled out of all their money.  Hazari takes a job working for a local godfather, but things go from bad to worse.  Dr. Lowe finds himself in the middle of brutal suppression.  He steps into the breech to defend Hazari’s family at great personal risk.

Best Line:  “How long are you going to keep drilling holes in the ocean?”

.

Jericho (TV Series)

A series of terrorist attacks leaves the US in a state of disaster.  The small Kansas town of Jericho must come together to deal with a new reality.  Along the way, they unravel a massive government conspiracy, organize a militia, fight off desperate neighboring towns, but most of all, learn to trust and work with old friends and rivals.
It’s TEOTWAWKI.  Deal with it!

.

.

.

Sharing, teaching and reinforcing positive values through the arts can make our Village(s) better prepared for times that are tough or even if they’re not.

 

by

Individual Freedom vs. Unchecked Power. Where is the balance?

I would like to share a discussion string from our community website, “Friends of Sewanee Creek”  Names, other than my own, and emphasis have been changed.

Grant shared an article on 06/13/2011 07:06:20 am
Whoa!! And I thought it was a good thing to be considered a “sustainable developer”.

Jodi – 06/15/2011 01:40:06 pm
Will watch Glenn Beck and Pass the Video to MANY. Thank You!

Debbie  6/18/2011 00:05:37 am
Agenda 21 is very disturbing.
Glenn Beck discussed Agenda 21 on June 15, 2011

Ben  06/20/2011 03:34:03 pm
This is my first introduction to Agenda 21 so I am very unfamiliar with the details but the concept of social engineering is nothing new. I think China is a good example of this with the one child policy. In this case you have a country that is facing a huge ecological mess (pollution, water shortages, decreasing arable land from desertification) where a government steps in and attempts to avert having natural factors like starvation or disease controlling population growth by implementing a law to control population growth.

Again I am unfamiliar with the details of this particular “agenda” but I think it is a reality that increasing numbers of humans in the emerging markets pushing into western middle class lifestyles is going to pose some ecological challenges to the planet. Historical notions of sovereignty create complications when dealing with issues like nuclear disasters, disease, or climate change which do not respect borders. I think many of us see this as the nuclear meltdown in Japan directly affects our welfare.

How does the world begin to deal with these larger transnational issues?

Grant Miller – 06/21/2011 06:41:28 am
Good comment, Ben. It strikes me as both thoughtful and brave, two qualities I admire greatly.

Clearly, as the world shrinks and technology increases the power of mankind to foul his own nest (as well as that of his neighbors) the need for some form of control increases. This need is at the heart of your question.

The dilemma lies in the fact that corruption is endemic to power. I keep coming back to the well worn quote, “Power Corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” How do you have a global government where there is no higher recourse without sacrificing liberty and enslaving the world? Of more immediate concern, why would we want to turn that government over to those who have already proven themselves to be thoroughly corrupt?

I am among a growing population that recognizes the behavior of world, US and local leaders as nothing short of self-serving thuggery. People of all political persuasions are increasingly recognizing that national resources and the wealth of the people have been plundered by those with the power to do so. It is increasingly clear that there is collusion between people with their hands on the levers of power whether at the point of a gun (military or police), through government (congress, parliament, unelected bureaucrats, presidents/kings/czars/dictators) or through sophisticated financial manipulation (Powerful Corporations, Global Banks, Wall Street/The City). Many bury their collective heads in the sand, pretending that none of this exists by labeling it “conspiracy theory”. Thinking people are not cowed by this thinly veiled insult. They recognize that we are all subject to our selfish interests and that as power approaches the absolute, corruption is guaranteed.

The genius of our founding fathers was in their recognition of these facts. Their solution, indeed the only solution that has worked since the beginning of mankind was simple and elegant. To limit all kinds of thuggery, power itself must be limited, checked and controlled.

Ben, you just asked the right question in a forum where you might have perceived a risk of being shouted down. That is brave. In doing so, you elevated the conversation. There is great power in thoughtful, honest questions.  We all owe you a big thank you.

Frankly, I don’t know the answer to your question. I wish I did. The only level at which I think I have an answer is the local one, precisely because I have no power at the global or any other level. But I do believe that if enough people will exercise the power that they do have, locally, to live a thoughtful, wise, brave, chaste and righteous life, the world would change for the better. That is because people with unlimited power have it only to the extent the masses give it to them.

My dream for the Village is that we will have people here who desperately want to live their lives and surround themselves with others of like mind and commitment to virtuous character. Until that small kernel grows into something more powerful, we will at least provide ourselves a measure of insulation from a world that is out of control due to the greed and lust of all-powerful men.

by

Principles for a Strong, Free Community

Cover of "The 5000 Year Leap (Original Au...

Cover via Amazon

I’m reading, thanks to some friends of Sewanee Creek, an insightful book that chronicles the creation of the United States. It is called The 5000 Year Leap. by Cleon Skousen.

There have been many aha moments, but I just read the opening lines to the 7th principle of freedom: the proper role of Government. It resonated so strongly with me that I felt compelled to jump on the computer and share it.

Under the bold header, “What Powers Can Be Assigned to Government” it reads, “The founders recognized that the people cannot delegate to their government the power to do anything except that which they have the lawful right to do themselves.”

My experience in business management taught me that this is a true principle. In many ways I have always been a bit of a contrarian, preferring to march to the beat of my own drum and driven by strongly held, biblical principles of right and wrong. Often, in the course of my employment, I found that my principles were at odds with those in higher authority. On a couple of occasions I tried to institute change from a grass roots level. That approach invariably landed me in hot water and confirmed to me that this is a true principle. In a corporation, those who have position power will have their way, that is as long as they are clever enough to exercise and maintain power, as they usually are upon reaching a high or ownership position.

That understanding emanates from business experience, which can/should be very different from government of a democratic republic.  But the underlying principle is eternal and immutable. You can not delegate power that you do not have.  In the domain of government, where in America our underlying assumption is of a government for and by the people, the application can become circular and confusing until one inserts the concept of God-given, unalienable rights. These rights and the power that proceeds from them are few and broad, but must be tightly defined.

To return to my business analogy, as a mid-level manager, I had neither the right nor the power to institute change within an organization that I did not own or been delegated rights and powers, regardless of my sense of right and wrong. As stated elsewhere in this great book, rights stem from ownership. Where I disagreed with my superiors my options were, (a) execute exactly as I was directed, (b) convince those in authority of a better way or (c) resign and find a place to work more closely aligned with my values.

Only when rights of ownership and true authority are respected can an organization of any sort reach the potential to achieve the purpose for which it was created. If it is true that the rights of government of the USA are vested only in the people, it is clear that there has been a boardroom coupe.  America is ruled by unelected bureaucrats who report indirectly to hands-off elected officials who have made themselves unaccountable to those who should be vested with power, the people.  But the people have become deservedly dis-empowered because of their witless incompetence in the exercise of their power. Anyone who has participated in boardroom politics will recognize that only those who exercise their power with wisdom and clever insight will retain power. Even owner/founders are routinely deposed by hired managers. The American people have lost power because they have failed to exercise their true, God-given power.  God giveth and the government taketh away.  America is no longer a Republic.  It is a corporation, ruled by hired managers.

I want to relate this back to something more local, as that is all I feel empowered to speak of with any confidence any more. The Village values individual freedom and rights. Rights stem from ownership. Ownership should be the result of honest thought, labor and investment. This is why individual (not communal) property ownership is a keystone to successful community whether at the Village or Nation/State level. That is why the Village on Sewanee Creek is different from most “intentional communities” that typically end up in flames because they are often built on a utopian socialist, common-ownership model.

It is a little understood fact that the constitution of the United States was not ratified or even drafted till years after the successful conclusion of the revolution. Similarly, I have felt it inappropriate to impose homeowner association bylaws for the Village which should be the product of land owners within the village. George Washington declined the offer to become a king. He was a public servant in the best sense. I desire to do the same. My wife and I own most of the Village property now. But when it is sold, I am a Villager, created equal and with equal rights to other Villagers.

For those who might be interested in a model for government of the Village (not to mention the Republic of the USA) read The 5000 Year Leap.

by

Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged – a philosophy to unite Left and Right

I have occasionally hinted in my blogs that “I like liberals” or that I feel a strange kinship with some aspects of progressive thought.  As I have written these things, I cringe a little inside, expecting to be castigated by conservatives for association with such hated labels.  Finally, here is a piece that explains my feelings.  Here is the core of my hope that there is ample reason to believe that a majority of Americans from both ends of the political spectrum can find common cause if they will cast off the labels and think for themselves.

Thank you, Tom Mullen, for articulating this so well.  I include the full text of his article as well as a link to the original below.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Why Progressives Might Enjoy Atlas Shrugged
By Tom Mullen

I had the opportunity to see Atlas Shrugged, Part I on Saturday in the only theater in which it is being shown in Tampa, FL. It is currently running at Cinebistro, a specialty theater where you can enjoy a high-end meal and fine wine served at your seat, which is very similar to a first class airline seat. Admittedly, it is just the kind of venue that progressives might associate with an elitist gathering of selfish capitalists. However, the movie itself tells quite a different story than they might expect if their understanding of Rand is limited to her interviews with Phil Donahue or Mike Wallace.

Like libertarians, Rand’s Objectivist economic theory was rooted in what we today call “the non-aggression axiom,” which Thomas Jefferson and the liberal faction of America’s founders called “the law of nature.” According to this philosophy, each individual has an inalienable right to keep the product of his labor and to dispose of it as he sees fit. The non-aggression axiom forbids any individual or group from using force to take away the justly acquired property of another. Neither does it allow for anyone to interfere with voluntary contracts, as long as those contracts do not involve the initiation of force against anyone else.

This prohibits the government, which is by definition the societal use of force, from redistributing wealth or enacting laws which go beyond prohibiting aggression. Establishment media figures who interviewed Rand immediately focused on the implications of her philosophy for social safety net programs, charging that Rand’s philosophy would not allow for programs for the poor or handicapped. While this is true, it obscures the most important implications of Rand’s philosophy for economic policy in the United States.

What would likely startle progressives watching the film is its emphasis on the evils of what free market proponents would call “crony capitalism.”  This is completely consistent with the novel, which demonstrates that the beneficiaries of government regulation supposedly enacted for “the common good” or “the benefit of society” are really the super-rich. Indeed, the film never criticizes the beneficiaries of social programs. Instead, it spends all of its time demonstrating the difference between those “capitalists” who acquire their wealth through government privileges and those true capitalists who acquire their wealth by producing products that consumers voluntarily buy.

This is a crucial distinction that has eluded progressives from Woodrow Wilson to Michael Moore. After seeing Moore’s film, Capitalism: A Love Story, I pointed out in my review of that film that there was very little that libertarians would disagree with. All of Moore’s criticisms of what he calls capitalism are really the result of crony capitalism. The biggest culprit in the economic collapse of the last decade was the Federal Reserve, a central planning/wealth redistribution institution that Rand explicitly condemns in her novel. Unfortunately, Moore incorrectly concludes that the economic distortions, inequitable distribution of wealth, and widespread harm to middle and lower income Americans were the result of a free market.

Rand would agree completely with progressives on the injustice of today’s American corporate state. That might also surprise progressives who probably assume that Rand would have supported the mainstream Republican policies of George W. Bush. Not only would Rand have condemned Bush’s version of state capitalism, but she was openly critical of Republican hero Ronald Reagan. When asked by Phil Donahue about Reagan during his administration, Rand said in so many words that he should have stuck to acting.

The only opportunity that progressives might have to disagree with anything in the film is the portrayal of the labor union official who tries to sabotage Dagny Taggarts launch of a new railroad line. This encounter takes all of about 3 minutes of the 113 minute film and is not a condemnation of labor unions in principle, but rather the illegitimate power that corrupt union officials can wield because of government privileges.

However, the true villains in the film are not union officials, beneficiaries of entitlement programs, or any other group associated with progressive philosophy. The villains are exclusively corporate executives and the government officials they get in bed with to illegitimately acquire wealth. The heroes are those who acquire their wealth by productive achievement and voluntary exchange. If one had to sum the film up in one sentence, it is an effective demonstration of the evils of crony capitalism and its difference from a truly free market.

I encourage progressives to see this film and to read Rand’s novel. If there is one thing that I hope they take away, it is that even great wealth can be acquired legitimately, when it is the result of human beings trading the products of their labor with the mutual, voluntary consent of all parties. Once progressives begin making the distinction between legitimately acquired wealth and wealth acquired because of government privilege, they will find libertarians and all other proponents of truly free markets standing by their side, fighting the evil corporate state.

______________________________________________________________________________________

I pray that the deep chasm dividing Americans will be healed around our common desire to live free in the pursuit of happiness and prosperity, our birthright.


by

We have extra land. Anybody want to farm it?

Food security is the ultimate liberty.  If you can do it in  urban NYC, you can do it anywhere.  For some more inspiration, watch this YouTube video.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDxBEUOImjI

The Village on Sewanee Creek is about 750 rural acres on Tennessee’s lush Cumberland Plateau.  Of that, about 80 acres is cleared land that could be farmed.  Some of it is.  (The balance is either in deep woods or in a deep rugged canyon nature preserve) We have already built a community raised bed garden.  But there’s more.  Either on lots currently owned by Villagers, but as yet unfarmed or on unsold lots.

Want to farm but need land?  We have it and we can help you learn to farm.  Call us at (931) 442-1444.