My core premises

.

The purpose of this document

Two quotes by the novelist-philosopher Ayn Rand compelled me to construct 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 — described below:

“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, and relate to their own lives, 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 — because unfortunately, many whom I encounter, who assume they are ideologically allied with me, find instead that they are not, in one or more fundamental ways.

To save time — my own, and those of potential collaborators on, and funders of my projects — I will summarize these premises in the introductions to each of my proposals/outlines, 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. It is clearly better to identify these issues in the earliest stages of a relationship, rather than discover them later, when they may hamper, or prevent completion of one or more projects.


My core premises

Click on each item for an expanded discussion of that premise.

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

One need not attend a course in philosophy, or obtain a college degree in that discipline, in order to grasp the virtue of human freedom: in summary, to think, to act, to express oneself as he/she wishes, and to create, acquire and freely exchange property, provided one does not violate these exact same rights in others.

The history of freedom vs repression, in any form — be it by mystic rulers, violent conquerers, or collectivist “democracy” — is so well-documented, so thoroughly validated, that knowledge of this basic clash should be as commonly held as the fact that the sun rises in the east, and that water flows downhill. This is especially true in 2019, in which this evidence is available to anyone with an Internet connection, anywhere in the world, often for free, or at little cost.

Yet as discussed below, not only is this knowledge all but unknown to the most “educated” in the freest among nations, freedom is being whitewashed out of existence.


(2) Freedom in America and other nations is being destroyed.  The research data showing how quickly this is happening is surprising even to policy experts.

Over the course of the past twenty years, I’ve been compiling and organizing data that documents this phenomenon, which I compiled into this report: “America At The Precipice.”

Here is a sampling of the data my report contains, which almost invariably surprises the intellectual and policy experts to whom I’ve submitted it, in Washington, DC and beyond:

[1.13] 83% of U.S. college graduates and 68% of elected officials cannot identify the functional differences between the free market and a command economy.

[2.1] “The Communist Manifesto” is the most-assigned economics textbook in U.S. colleges, assigned more than twice as frequently as any other economics book.

[3.1] 64% of Americans overall (across political parties) now agree with Marx’s core doctrine, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

[3.2] 58% of American Millennials say they’d rather live under either communism, socialism or fascism, than under capitalism.

[3.3] 45% of 16-20-year-olds say they would vote for a socialist; 21% say they would vote for a communist.

[3.6] 19% of American college students overall (including 22% of Republican students) believe it is “acceptable” to initiate violence stop a invited guest, whose critics claim makes “offensive and hurtful statements,” from speaking on campus.

[3.7] 38% of American adults think the First Amendment “goes too far” in protecting freedom of expression.

[1.1] 80% of seniors at America’s most elite colleges and universities cannot pass a high school history test, yet all will be able to graduate without taking a single history class of any kind.

[1.4] Less than 50% of American adults understand the basic purpose of the Constitution, or can identify even one of their rights under it.

That data takes on greater significance when one considers that the U.S. spends more on “education,” per-student, than any nation in the world. We and both of our major political parties are literally funding this war on freedom, and the suicide of America, as a free nation.


(3) Freedom is being lost not because of the effectiveness of those advocating anti-freedom ideologies, but rather, due to the unwillingness of those who advocate freedom to recognize this as an ideological war, or to fight it as such.

In a traditional war, two or more organized elements engage in violent conflict, and supporting measures, until one side destroys or secures the surrender of the other.

An ideological war has been declared on the freedom ideology, free nations and free people, not based on facts and reality, but based on lies and deception. See this report I produced for metrics of how badly America, and other free nations, are losing this war. A sampling:

(2) You cannot win a war that you are not willing to

x

x

x

x

x

Yet those who claim to be working to defend freedom have, on whole, rejected the principle that one cannot win a war that one does not name, or is willing to fight as such. And at present, no organization I’m aware of has declared, or is fighting this war, for what it is. They produce highly intellectual white papers, books, websites and essays, that are far beyond the reading ability or interest of the vast majority of non-intellectuals people. Keep in mind that the average American adult cannot read above the 8th grade level, and most college students have difficulties with xxx.

In contrast, as discussed below, those who are at war with freedom use simple, straightforward arguments, media and activism strategies, that are understandable and persuasive even to children.

(2) The vast majority of people in free societies who have accepted any facet of anti-freedom ideologies, have almost invariably done so not based on a working knowledge of their natures, theories and histories. Rather, they’ve done so because (a) they’ve been tricked into doing so, and (b) no cohesive presentation has ever been made to them that contains essential facts of those ideologies — or the freedom ideology — in a format that they can genuinely understand, relate to their own lives, and easily share with others.

In “The Smear,” investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson documents how a narrative about a certain idea, political candidate or issue seemingly arises out of nowhere, and hits the general American population from all directions at once, in a repetitive fashion, until that narrative becomes the accepted reality. Because of what we’ve allowed to be done to our “educational” system, and how we’ve allowed anti-freedom advocates to effectively take it over, the vast majority of Americans have been indoctrinated to believe in some variant of statist ideology, and this narrative is reinforced in their minds, every day, from seemingly every direction.

As stated earlier and in following segments, the primary reason for this is because serious freedom advocates, and those who fund them, neither view nor are willing to fight this as an ideological war.

(X) This war can never be won by freedom advocates who are always reacting to what anti-freedom activists do, or by chronically playing defense.  The only way this war can be won is by freedom advocates going on the offense, and taking the fight into the minds, home bases of those who are at war with freedom.

Currently – disparate elements, some competent and motivated, all fighting in their own way, without organization, strategy or leadership. It’s as if the Allies during World War II attempted to attack the Nazis each in their own way, without coordination or collaboration.  They Allies would be wiped out. This is where we are right now.

I am not advocating that all persons and organizations who are serious advocates of freedom succumb to being organized under one central, supreme commander. What I am saying is that a completely new mode of thinking needs to be gestated, that is focused on designing and implementing knowledge tools, activism strategies and tactics that will enable advocates of freedom to go on the offense in this war, in a confident, resourceful way. My life is committed to creating such tools, strategies and tactics.

(x) If average people throughout the world are provided the essential facts about the freedom vs anti-freedom ideologies, in a format that meets them where they are, intellectually, I believe the vast majority will embrace freedom.

 

(3) The most crucial target audience for advocates of anti-freedom ideologies is adolescents, and they practically dominate this audience.  These adolescents could and should be the most enthusiastic supporters of freedom — but they have been almost universally ignored by freedom activists, and sacrificed to those who are indoctrinating them with disinformation and anti-freedom ideologies.

(4) Anti-freedom activists are so far ahead of advocates of freedom, in terms of their understanding of this war, and the media tools, activism strategies and tactics that they employ, that the difference is comparable to that of “The Jetsons” vs. “The Flintstones.”

(5) The war for freedom cannot be won by merely catching up to anti-freedom activists’ media tools, strategies and tactics, or producing marginally better responses to them. So much time and momentum have been lost, that only a revolutionary means of leapfrogging ahead of everything they’re doing, establishing basic facts among the general population of the world, and finally putting anti-freedom activists on the defensive — in terms that a young teen can truly grasp — will have a chance of reversing this trend.

(6) The above are some of the key reasons why freedom-oriented philanthropists and foundations could pour twenty or more times the money into their preferred think tanks, today, and it would have no substantive impact in the metrics of this war.

(x) Nothing less than a 100%, total, relentless, publicly-declared ideological war against those who advocate anti-freedom ideologies will have a chance of turning back the statist tidal wave.

(7) The war for freedom can be won — but only if the knowledge amassed by its most accomplished advocates of the past and present is distilled, summarized and “weaponized,” into a format that young adults throughout the world can easily understand, relate to their own lives, and easily share with others.

(8) The objective of this war must be to publicly paint such a radiant, logical, appealing vision of freedom in the minds of people, from children on up, and infuse in them an appreciation of its preciousness, and those who thought, fought and died to give it to us, that they become as enthused to practice and protect it, as people today are to receive the latest version of the iPhone.

(9) My unique range of complementary creative skills and life experiences are ideally suited to help formulate, create the tools for, and significantly contribute to the execution of this ideological war.

(10) Given adequate financial backing, I can begin to create a new, hybrid multimedia development studio and think tank that will be 100% dedicated to fighting, and winning, this ideological war.


 


[Opening; applicable to America, Western nations and Israel.]

(1) America, and freedom, are at the precipice of being destroyed from within — brought to this point not by effectiveness of their enemies, but primarily by their defenders’ unwillingness to recognize, or fight this threat, as the ideological war it is.

We’ve felt the breaking apart in recent years, seen the stress fractures appear, but thought we could continue along until some breakthrough event happens, by pouring more resources into existing groups and approaches. If anything, the metrics show that our situation has gotten worse:

[Examples]

Catastrophic systems failure.


(2) The war for America and freedom can be won — but only if the knowledge amassed by their most accomplished advocates of the past and present is “weaponized,” and employed as part of a well-thought-out, total, relentless, public ideological war.

Note: My use of the term “war” is meant as an ideological war, only. The only time violence is appropriate and moral, to me, is to protect oneself from it, and only against those who initiate it.

For more than 100 years, advocates of anti-freedom ideologies have been at war with freedom, and particularly, its “home base” — America.  Their objective has been to win this war. They organized, and defined the battlefields to be all the venues in which people, especially children, obtain information and form perceptions about civic, historical and moral issues. They strategized, created weapons and tactics with which to penetrate, and ultimately dominate these battlefields. Which is practically where we are right now.

In response, historically and currently, the forces that claim to be defending freedom range from a small pocket of laissez-faire capitalists, to standard-issue conservatives, to crony capitalists, welfare statists, and everything in-between.

Ideologically, they view this conflict as more of a misunderstanding, a debate, or anything but a war. They believed (and most still believe) that the best, the most they can do, is to attempt to correct erroneous claims through civil means, mostly beyond view of everyone but their peers, and a tiny, motivated sliver of the general public.

Nothing less than a 100%, all-out, coordinated effort to fight and win the war for freedom will suffice, at this late date, as we are on the cusp of our final descent into statist totalitarianism.

 


(3) The majority of people across the political spectrum who have accepted anti-freedom ideologies have done so not based on a working knowledge of their natures, theories and actual histories. Rather, they’ve done so because no cohesive presentation has been made to them regarding those ideologies — or the freedom ideology — in a way that they can genuinely understand, and relate to their own lives.

With rare exceptions, they compromised, sacrificed ground, As a whole, they sacrificed each of the battlefields the anti-freedom activists

 

 

The advocates of freedom did not declare war

(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 tools/weapons with which to fight it.

— Those with the most knowledge about the core issues – as well as those who fund them – neither see this as a war, nor are willing to fight it as such.

— This war cannot be won if neither the enemy nor victory are defined, and a rational strategy for success is neither formulated nor implemented.

 

Conclusion: A personal note

The objective of this war — to me — is not merely to better respond to the lies and tactics of anti-freedom activists, nor is it to persuade Americans to join the Republican Party. It is to establish vital facts in the minds of young people, in such a compelling way, that they come to understand the virtue and preciousness of freedom,  with such a burning desireradiance, such


Appendix

My definition of “freedom”:

Freedom is 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 will.

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