My core premises 2

.

Preface

Those who arrive at this page were given the link because I believe there’s a chance we might collaborate to in create revolutionary media and activism projects, to help save freedom, in America, and beyond.

When two or more people consider working together on an epic quest of such grand scope, it is wise to identify, at the earliest possible stage, the core beliefs and ideals that they have in common, and identify their differences, and the reasons behind them. It is far better to devote the time to conducting a candid survey of these issues before the partnership is to commence, rather than to discover something crucial at a later date, when the relationship, and the projects that blossomed out of it, may be threatened.

Two quotes by Ayn Rand compelled me to create this page:

“Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.”

“The truth or falsehood of all of man’s conclusions, inferences, thought and knowledge rests on the truth or falsehood of his definitions.”

Please see the Appendix for my definitions of “freedom” and “free nations.”

The purpose of this page is to articulate the core premises under which I operate, in order to pursue the main mission of my life:

“Until and unless a means is developed by which to present the conceptual nature, history, moral supremacy and requirements of freedom, in a format that functional 12-year-olds in Boston, Beijing, Berlin and Beirut can quickly understand, relate to their own lives, and easily share with others, our culture is going to continue disintegrating, and descending into statist totalitarianism. The main mission of my life is to design knowledge tools and activism strategies that will enable advocates of freedom throughout the world to begin doing this, in a systematic, efficient and morally confident manner.”

– Jon Sutz, Charlottesville, VA, May 2019

I have conceived of a variety of media and activism projects that are designed from the ground up to advance my life mission, in what I contend are extremely unique ways. These projects include:

  • A theatrical movie (a comprehensive, hybrid script-treatment is now complete, and copyrighted)
  • Three documentary films
  • Five TV shows
  • Numerous civic activism campaigns, focusing on various target audiences in the USA, W. Europe, the Middle East, and beyond

Each of my projects blossomed out of research data I’ve amassed over nearly twenty years, illustrating how rapidly freedom is being lost, and the fact that everything that’s been thrown at this problem has had little or no effect. Out of this research data, I’ve generated a body of premises — contained on this page — that serve as the undergirding of all my projects.

What roots are to the trunk of a tree, these premises are to my projects. Everything I do for the remainder of my life will grow out of these premises. As such, I consider it of vital importance that I explicitly state my premises, as I embark on the journey to acquire the financial, intellectual, artistic and business alliances that will be necessary to bring these projects to life.  While some of those whom I contact agree with all or most of my premises, others, who assume they are ideologically allied with me, find instead that they are not, in one or more fundamental ways.

Thus, to save time — my own, and that of potential collaborators on, and funders of my projects — I will summarize these premises in the introductions to each of my proposals, then provide a link to this page.  This will serve to enable both I and others to quickly determine if we are likely a good match, where our differences lie, and if they can be overcome or mitigated, to advance our common objectives.


My core premises

(1) The basic principles of freedom should be the easiest ideas in the world to “market,” especially to adolescents.

(1) The war for liberty can be won, in America and, eventually, beyond — but it will require (a) an acceptance that this is, indeed, a war, (b) a clear definition of victory, and (c) a revolutionary strategy, and breakthrough knowledge tools/weapons with which to fight it.

(2) Freedom in America and other nations is being systematically destroyed, far more quickly than many freedom-oriented policy experts are even aware.

(3) The vast majority of people in free societies who have accepted the basic tenets of anti-freedom ideologies, particularly statism, have done so not based on an accurate, basic knowledge of their natures, theories and histories. Rather, they’ve done so because they’ve been indoctrinated or tricked into doing so — and no cohesive presentation has ever been made to them about the freedom ideology, in a format that they can genuinely understand.

(4) The primary reason for this lack of knowledge among, and infusion of disinformation into the general public, is not a lack of effort by leading freedom advocates, many of whom have produced vital work. Rather, it is due primarily to their unwillingness to recognize this as an ideological war, and to fight it as such.

(5) The ideological war that is being waged against freedom can never be defeated by chronically playing defense. The only possible way to win it is through a total, relentless, creatively-fought offensive war, which will require a completely new philosophy for freedom-oriented intellectual combat.

(6) For such an offensive war to have a chance of being victorious, it must focus primarily on developing knowledge tools and activism strategies that target the average person where they are, intellectually, and in terms of how they consume and share information.

With few exceptions, the bulk of freedom-oriented outreach has focused on two key audiences: (1) Policymakers and “the choir,” meaning, those who already support freedom-oriented principles (eg Fox Business viewers, etc.), and (2) highly literate audiences. I assume that these freedom advocates hope that their ideas and interpretations will influence today’s policymakers, and “trickle down” to the general population through social media sharing, etc.  This leaves the general population still completely unaware of the freedom ideology, and those who seek to advance it.

I argue that this the wrong approach, and it has played a major role in bringing us to the point at which we now find ourselves. Instead, I advocate a complete refocusing of freedom advocates’ efforts and resources, to target the average person, and ideally, the young adolescent, who has been and continues to be subjected to round-the-clock indoctrination and reinforcement of anti-freedom ideologies and interpretations of current affairs. [Continue]

Fight for EVERY CHILD’S MIND. Do it proudly, relentlessly, and with media that is designed from the ground up to meet them where they are, knowledge wise, and in terms of how they consume and share media. in a way that they can genuinely understand, and relate to their own lives. Get them on board, and the info will “Trickle UP” [advocacy approach.]

(7) Conceptual visualization, including dramatization & simulation, can play a crucial role in this war-fighting strategy.

The only way this war can be won is by freedom advocates going on the offense, and taking the fight into the minds and home bases of those who are at war with freedom.

 


Appendix

My definition of “freedom”:

In its simplest form, I define freedom as the individual’s moral right to be in full control of his/her mind, body, actions and relationships, and to create, obtain, use and dispose of property, according to his/her sovereign, independent will — provided that in the exercise of these rights, he/she does not violate these same exact rights in others.

My definition of “free nations”:

In the ideal, I define a free nation as one in which the freely-elected government recognizes, in law, that these rights are the non-negotiable foundation of a free society — provided the individuals exercising it do not violate other peoples’ same, equal rights. To support this vision of freedom, I believe the only proper, legitimate function of government is to protect these rights, against anyone — be they an individual, a group or a nation — that violates or attempts to violate them. While I recognize that there is no completely free nation, according to the above definition, I believe our world can be divided into two categories of nations, which are separated by a clear dividing line:

(1) Those that support, to any significant degree, many or most of the rights contained in my definition of freedom

(2) Those that militantly reject this definition, as evidenced by the nightmare societies over which they rule.

Thus, when I refer to “free nations,” I classify them as not the ideal, but those where at least the issue of freedom vs. controls, of individualism vs. collectivism, of capitalism vs. statist totalitarianism, can be openly discussed, debated and advocated.

 


 

.

.

.

 

 

To share/print this item:

Top