Kyle Rittenhouse’s Lethal Pursuit of Happiness is an American Heritage

Kyle Rittenhouse is a free man today and the explanation for this lies in the disturbing American interpretation of “freedom” that has always been based on division.

The Platform of Thomas Jefferson of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” has inspired Americans for centuries, but the philosophy that inspired Jefferson’s words actually robs people of their freedom.

Jefferson’s language stems from the work of the English philosopher John Locke, who made it clear that the “Life, Liberty, and Property” trilogy is the foundation of civilization and democracy — and despite the words While these may seem innocuous, they lead to disastrous results.

By associating life and liberty with property, Locke undermines the importance of life and liberties in common and public spaces, making them exist in objects and territories that are possessed by someone. own. In America, property is the precursor to freedom.

No one should be surprised that Locke’s words were accepted by the colonists who carried out genocide to take the land of the natives, and the genocide to institute slavery. America. Locke’s outmoded interpretation of freedom also led to property and property becoming an extension of white identity. Whites came to the New World because of the freedoms that property and property were supposed to provide, and with the knowledge that destroying property or denying ownership threatened their liberties. White skin.

In Locke’s Second treaty on government, the chapter “Wealth” explains the role of property in society, preceded by the chapter “Slavery” which attempts to justify the institution

Locke’s convoluted and pointless attempt at doing so essentially consists in saying that humans cannot knowingly consent to slavery. So, if an oppressive relationship appears to be slavery, according to Locke, it is instead an agreement between one person or group of people to submit and submit to another person or group of people. For Locke, slavery was not slavery but the “combination” between the “legitimate conqueror and the captive”.

Jefferson was one of America’s most influential slave owners and politicians, his personal freedom and wealth stemming from both the land and the hundreds of people he owned. Locke’s words justified his immoral lifestyle, and it is not surprising that he instilled Lockean ideals into the fabric of the United States.

Jefferson and Locke’s concept of freedom depended on taking the liberty of others, but although Jefferson accepted Locke’s ideals, he understood that the trinity of life, liberty, and property would not inspire for the American people. The emphasis on wealth may alienate many non-property Americans, so replace it with “the pursuit of happiness.” listen more inclusive and democratic. With this revised language, Americans without assets – who are not considered property – can take comfort in the promise of being able to pursue possessions.

Because America’s Founding Fathers embraced Locke’s absurd ideas, America’s claimed liberal understanding normalizes division and makes us all less secure. The United States maintains that property is a requirement for liberty and that it is acceptable to deprive others of the liberty to obtain property.

It is easy to overlook today the impact of ideals forged in the 1600s and 1700s today, but the popularity of Americans justifying taking lives to protect property demonstrates that those This ideal still impacts our society today.

Kyle Rittenhouse’s acquittal is just one of many examples; Ahmaud Arbery’s murder was another example since three white men attacked and killed an unarmed Black man because they suspected he had broken into property owned by black people. White.

Rittenhouse, then 17 years old, traveled state lines with an illegally obtained AR-15-style rifle that he did not have a permit to carry because he said he wanted to protect property and businesses during the riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin. erupted after the fatal shooting of Jacob Blake, a black man, by Kenosha police officers.

These facts are not even disputed, and the only controversy concerning the events that preceded Rittenhouse’s unwarranted and deadly presence in Kenosha concerns his friend Dominick Black. ta. Since Rittenhouse was only 17 years old, he was not old enough to buy a gun so he gave Black money and asked him to buy a replacement gun. Black now faces charges of distributing firearms to a minor.

Since Wisconsin is an “open” state that allows minors to carry a firearm, as long as it’s not a handgun or shotgun, Rittenhouse has every right to go in public with a Smith & Wesson AR. – illegally obtained a breast-mounted semi-automatic rifle.

Additionally, the growing popularity of firearms and “open carry” states in the US stems from the court case Nunn sues the State of Georgia in 1846, that effectively turned Georgia into an “expanding” state.

Essentially, in 1837, Georgia banned certain types of firearms and weapons, but since nearly half of Georgia’s population were enslaved, white Georgians still needed guns to deny freedom to those in need. whom they consider their property.

The state of gun illegality in Georgia and the constant terrorist demand among enslaved black Americans has created a dangerous black gun market and a new culture of hiding guns when you carry them. Concealing resulted in white Georgians killing a lot of other white Georgians, but because giving up guns was not an option for a slave-owning nation, the Georgia Supreme Court ordered the ban. concealed and accepted to carry to protect the liberties and lives of white people.

In the 2008 Supreme Court decision in Heller sues District of Columbia Overturned Washington, D.C. Arms Ban, References Former Justice Antonin Scalia Nunn and claims that it protects “the natural right to self-defence.” After this decision, “expansion” laws were popular throughout the United States.

Not surprisingly, Scalia’s analysis ignored the enslaved’s right to self-defense and freedom.

By most accounts, it doesn’t appear that Rittenhouse came to Kenosha with the intention of killing anyone, but he was certainly prepared to use lethal force if necessary, to protect the property. Rittenhouse probably doesn’t even own any property, but his happiness and dangerous notions of freedom include the use of deadly force to pursue and protect property. The American legal system considers Rittenhouse’s murders to protect property an act of self-defense.

Since the founding of the United States, the nation has encouraged white Americans – in the name of freedom – to behave like Rittenhouse. When the Rittenhouse, and countless other Rittenhouses from colonial times to the present, kill and terrorize people to protect their property and “freedom,” our society has always said that their actions were okay.

For centuries, the United States has called these senseless killings “in search of happiness.”