By Meghan Kellison and Rebekah Johansen

 

Pick a side: either you’re a crazy person who believes 9/11 was an inside job done by fluoride-drinking reptilians, or you’re a globalist puppet bent on enforcing statism and splintering the liberty movement for personal gain. At least, those are the straw man-based categories that the liberty movement can be divided into. However, is there a middle ground, somewhere in between the two extremes where there can be peaceful coexistence in the movement? Is it possible to be a “skeptical conspiracy theorist”? Reason, after all, must be used to assess any argument. But emotionally charged division can create confusion or even discredit libertarian principles in the eyes of others when egos are causing infighting. The liberty movement often seems to be a bit of a sausage fest, and that becomes glaringly obvious as some major male activists have taken center stage in bickering over the direction and image of the revolution. This article seeks to find common ground.

 

 However, why is it hard for some “skeptics” to believe that 9/11 could have been a false flag to further desires of the Empire? It has only happened all throughout history, so I doubt our government would be any different. There is nothing new under the sun, and those who have power over others will seek to retain and extend that power by any means and to the detriment of anybody. As for those with the access to the strongest military and weaponry in the world, you can bet that they will abuse that power over and over again. This nation’s government has been warring openly and covertly since the beginning of this country, and there is no rule of law that applies to the most powerful criminal elements in the government. Also, you cannot judge a powerful person’s actions within the parameters of your own moral compass because the rules don’t apply to them (defined as bankers, politicians, lawyers, judges, cops); therefore, they are more likely to break them. I will not go so far to say I know it was an inside job and exactly who did what, but if the premise holds true that government is evil perhaps we should take a closer look when they tout an official story of any kind.

The system is not designed to work for the average person, and perhaps this is one of the areas where Rebekah and I differ. We met while campaigning for Ron Paul in 2008, and she remained active at the local level throughout this last campaign while I chose to withdraw. I still watched the videos and reposted and encouraged everyone I knew to read Paul’s books and listen to his speeches and I debated about free market principles and voluntary exchange, but I had a growing sense of discouragement after seeing how we were treated in our own community years ago. Due to this and other developments I have seen over the past year in politics, I can no longer morally justify voting for anyone at this point unless it is Rebekah Johansen for State Committeewoman (wink wink).

Thanks for the endorsement :) Okay, now some background on me. I’m 21 years old and was homeschooled – really unschooled – my entire life until dual-enrollment at junior college. Like Meghan, I grew up questioning the norm. And although most of my life was outside the mainstream (my siblings and I were raised vegans and never vaccinated, and we were breastfed and home-birthed, for instance), my politics were solidly mainstream for most of my life. At 10, I first became aware of politics and vaguely supported George W. Bush because my parents did at the time… I later learned, because of his stated ideals of a smaller government and humble foreign policy. But I wasn’t very knowledgeable beyond the basics.

 

At 11, I sat with my family and watched the towers fall. The 9-11 attacks were the first world event I can remember, and what I remember is fear. My political socialization wasn’t just in the context of 9-11, it was 9-11. I still have some angry, nationalistic essays I wrote at the time saved on my old computer. Like Meghan, I learned to deal with confusing emotions through the outlet of writing – and soon, activism.

 

In 2004, I campaigned for George W. Bush with my siblings, with our patient mother driving us to the headquarters and to events. Fully involved in the “war on terror” mindset, I knew all the neo-conservative Republican positions and truly believed them for awhile, though I remember my skepticism for the Patriot Act and Iraq War, both of which made me deeply uncomfortable.

 

I was finishing junior college and about to enter the university level when I first started seeing Youtube videos featuring an awkward little man named Ron Paul. Apathetic and discouraged at the time because of Bush’s failed record of delivering smaller government, I began to tell people “I like Ron Paul except for foreign policy and the drug war.” The more I listened to Ron, though, the more I came to understand the principles of liberty in general.

 

In that process, conspiracy theories basically were just part of the territory. I’ll never forget the first few awkward meetups when almost everyone was talking about the New World Order or whatnot and I just went with it. After all, I was learning so much new information, why wouldn’t I believe these theories as part of my larger paradigm shift? Alex Jones, Mark Dice, Luke Rudowski, Adam Kokesh, Jesse Ventura… they became my icons, and I immersed myself in the conspiracy crowd, albeit with private misgivings. There were plenty of bad moments: don’t get me wrong. Much like in 2004, when I put aside my uncomfortable nagging feelings over some things, I learned to put aside doubts I felt when realizing how uncomfortable everyone’s reaction tended to be. I ignored how little effect I had over four years or the fact that I often found myself unable to convey a theory that seemed so clear in my head to any reasonable extent to others.

 

But over the next few years, I threw myself into alternate theories, third parties, and generally causing as much trouble as I could. I decided never to vote for Republicans – or not often – and became very involved in third party activism and stopped going to most events I considered “establishment.” But I soon became frustrated with the leaders of the conspiracy movement, beginning to question their credibility as well as the results they produced – and my experience with a third party in 2008 was enough to convince me that trying to recreate power structures will do nothing to stop the problems inherent therein.

 

For the following years, I was involved off and on with local things. I stopped really caring about things, but the cognitive dissonance was not sustainable. And then 2012 arrived, and I found a reason to be active again. I got back fully invested in local, state, and national politics and found that making friends and headway was actually pretty easy.

 

It was not until the early part of 2012 that I really sat down to think about the influence of so-called truther movements on the Ron Paul movement. I cannot justify to myself that there is any positive influence to this strand of liberty politics. Some time alone, some reflection, and some interactions with at least a few awesome people who really “get it” helped me sort out my priorities and realize that you can be a perfectly valid liberty supporter without believing everything is part of Agenda 21 or the New World Order.

 

As Meghan mentioned earlier about collectivizing – it is important that neither side do so. I don’t trust my government. I also don’t think there’s some grand conspiracy to every event. If there is, I’m speculating, and what good will I do in trying to spread my speculation? I don’t believe central organization is possible in economics because of limited information – so why would I believe the opposite when it comes to world leaders? And I firmly believe that at very few levels of power is it truly “us against them”; remember, we were all ignorant to liberty principles at some point. I find a good deal of skepticism and reliance on empirical evidence goes a long way, regardless of what your beliefs are.   

 

At this point, my goals are simple: to take advantage of existing structure to further liberty principles as effectively as I can. I owe it to my values to be effective, even if I have to be mindful of my words and actions. I see the reasoning behind the Rand endorsement and don’t think Jack Hunter is an inside job. If you come to REC meetings talking about 9-11, I’ll probably ask you to leave... but I’ll ask nicely. My goal is exposing people to liberty, not to Bilderberg. I’m involved with the Republican Party because it is the most effective vehicle toward accomplishing liberty, and I have no intentions of throwing up my hands or spoiling things without good reason. This is my path, but others may well be different.

I realized after being politically active in the traditional sense that I had no faith in politicians or any part of politics in regard to fixing the problems facing this country, and my favorite way of reaching people was in the realm of writing. Poetry, essays, essay long debates, blogging, personal connections with people, helping support projects like the silver dime cards---these were my preferred ways of spreading the ideas of liberty. I am not fully convinced that this country can be saved from itself because I don’t know if the people en masse want it to be. I have to focus on the numbers when it comes to the economy, and the numbers don’t lie when they imply we are heading for some severe economic problems. My focus is now on informing people of what’s to come and providing them with solutions for after the collapse, and I really hate the way that that sounds like conspiratorial thinking, but I am not encouraging bartering with silver and the participation in a silver economy for nothing. The truth is, there are many parts of this body of liberty, and each one is important in helping the uninformed come to the reality. Some people choose to run for office to raise awareness, some choose to write, some people create their own radio programs or TV programs, some start news/information based sites, some provide precious metals for future use, some create Moneyliths to encourage the silver economy, some rub shoulders and whisper in the ears of the big wigs at major networks, some provide survivalist gear for tough times, some move to another state to try to gain a majority to affect change, and the list goes on and on. Denigrating what some parts of the body do because it is not your approach is nothing short of egotistical and collectivist, and only amounts to a pissing contest.

 

I’m okay if someone disagrees with me. We’re all called to do different things. Think about what you’re trying to accomplish, and work toward that goal. It is time for a moment of reckoning in the liberty movement, because for too long, we’ve been trying to do many different things, and it’s been ineffective. If you believe politics is pointless, don’t get involved in politics. If you don’t believe in conspiracy theories, don’t get involved in the truther crowd. While I do believe certain conspiracy leaders are counterproductive and damaging, they can do their thing – just don’t interfere when I’m doing my thing. A split might be necessary, but it can be a peaceful split. We have common ground on many things, but a little respect for others’ territory is fine. The important thing is that we rely not on fear but on logic, reason, and, at risk of platitudes, what got us here: love.