This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: People Of The Lie: The Psychopathology Of The “Public Servant” And The Sociopathology Of The State

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Free Radical


People of the Lie:

The Psychopathology of the
“Public Servant”

and the Sociopathology of
the State


“We hang the petty
thieves and appoint the great ones to high office.”

– Aesop


As the recent
Pentagon scandal makes all too clear, truth is treason in the empire
of lies
.  Which is why
attempting to shoot the messenger – by imprisoning the whistleblower
and/or slandering the publisher
– makes perfect sense for an arm – indeed, the very arms – of the United States government.  So if we are to understand its logic (as all
of its actions, however insane, are perfectly logical to it), we must
understand the pathology that lies at its core. 
For unless and until we do, we cannot understand why government per se – i.e., the state, defined as “a monopoly on
the use of force within its borders”
– does what it does; why its
functionaries lie so shamelessly on its behalf; and, most importantly, why its
presumed masters – We the People – put up with it.

We begin by
amending Friedrich Nietzsche’s blunt statement – “Everything the State says is
a lie, and everything it has it has stolen” – with a simple substitution of one
word with another – i.e., “Everything the State says is a lie because everything it has it has
stolen.”  Being no less blunt, let us
examine this statement to determine its verity. 

First of all,
every thief is by definition a liar, since thievery – the dishonest taking of property
belonging to another person
– is itself a lie.  It follows, then, that if one steals for a living, one also lies for a living, the question being
why the state is not condemned by the general public for this reason, given
that it has nothing beyond that which extracts from society under threat of
fines and/or imprisonment.  The answer is
that a particular lie has been told,
so well and for so long, that for all practical purposes the question is not
even asked.  Yes, the application of the lie is questioned –
is such-and-such amount in such-and-such form appropriate – but the fact, the existence, of the lie is not questioned, no further proof needed
than that it stands side-by-side with death as one of the two certainties of

We are talking,
in other words, about a lie so big that it constitutes the biggest lie ever
told, finding perhaps its clearest expression in the following statement by
former Chief Justice of the United States, Oliver Wendell Holmes:


Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society.


That is to
say, without the taking of property by a
territorial monopoly, civil society is not possible
.  No matter that humanity long ago established
the immorality of it, theft – as long
as it is committed by said monopolist
is necessary if human society is to rise out of, and remain out of, barbarism.

But how can
this be?  How can that which is
universally recognized as immoral be necessary?  And what does the entrenched belief that it is necessary do to us? 

To answer
these questions, we begin by confronting the fact that the general public
interacts with the state in two contradictory ways.  On the one hand, it fully accepts the concept
of public service, which is to say,
of functionaries charged, in one capacity or another, with the delivery of
“public goods” that are by definition presumed to be inappropriate,
insufficient, or impossible for the “private sector” – i.e., for the people themselves,
via their mutual cooperation – to deliver. 
Portraying themselves as servants of the public trust, these
functionaries ask only to be treated with the same respect with which any servant should be treated, while
doing as they are instructed and in turn treating their masters, the general
public, with the respect that they

On the other
hand, even as the lower ranks of these functionaries treat the general public
with a combination of indifference, disdain, and outright abuse – openly admitting that
it’s not about service but about
getting this or that title – this same
public heaps adoration upon these titleholders to the point of divine worship,
building monuments to their
supposedly heroic acts; carving their images in mountainsides;
engraving their likenesses on our money; naming all
manner of roads, bridges, buildings, and towns after them; ensconcing them in magnificent mansions;
draping them in regalia; waiting on
them hat and glove; and
sending them hither and yon in magnificent flying machines
accompanied by entourages that
would rival the combined excesses of every king, queen, emperor, empress,
pharaoh, caesar, czar, kaiser, and sultan in human history. 

surprisingly, the result has been to turn “public service” on its head, the servants
becoming the masters and the masters
the servants, the only question being why
the adoration
, especially since approval ratings are so low that many of these functionaries
are utterly despised, their
ridicule, at least where our own country is concerned, dating back to its founding?

The answer is
that while the individual officeholders are often held in contempt, the offices
themselves are not.  Why? 
Because the general public is in thrall to the same mysterious force
that the officeholders are: political

And what is that power?  We think we know, of course, but do we really? 
Do we know, that is, that the term is derived from the Latin imperium, the dictionary definition of
which is (1) “supreme power or absolute dominion” and (2) “the right
to command or to employ the force of the state”?  And if we do
know this, do we seriously believe that We
the People
are that power and that we accordingly command those who
supposedly serve us?  Or do we know,
however unconsciously, that political power – being not a complement to but the inverse of economic power – is something over which we have no command at all
and, on the contrary, are so mesmerized by it that even as we build
Corinthian corridors
for our “servants” to roam, we then build even more expensive indoctrination centers for the purpose of keeping us away?

Is it perhaps,
returning to the aforementioned lie, that the real power of political power is
simply that it’s a license to steal,
said license deriving its power from the assumption, so long ingrained in us as
not to questioned, that if we don’t
grant it, we can’t be civilized?  That
despite our unique ability to “truck and barter and exchange
to our mutual benefit, we cannot do so without ever larger portions of the wealth that we
create in this manner being taken from us against our will?[i] 

But if true –
if taxes are indeed the price we pay for a civilized society – then does it not
follow that the more we are taxed, the more civilized we will be?  And does it not then follow that if we are taxed 100%, we will be civilized 100%, never mind that we’ve
already tried this, not just over there but right here?

isn’t the grip that a license to steal has at the highest levels precisely what
one of its foremost practitioners famously said
it is – the ultimate aphrodisiac
– which, translated into action, it is nothing less than the power to screw,
with both abandon and impunity, those who granted it?  For every time We the Licensors elect the
next round of licensees – and even more when we reelect them, over and over again – are we not quite literally
“asking for it”?  And should we not be
surprised, then, when those most inclined to “give it to us” do so? 
Is legalized theft,[ii]
after all, not only a power that few humans can bear but a power that the
barest humans – those with the fewest moral scruples – lust after the most?  And
therefore isn’t offering it at all
much less with an aura of selfless devotion to the “public good” – to offer to
the worst among us that to which they are least suited, while the best merely
give testimony to the fact that “Sending good people in to reform the state is like
sending virgins in to reform the whorehouse”
?  Is it not the nature of the state, in other
words, that good people do not change it
but that it changes them, their high ideals sundered by that
which is inherently immoral and therefore incapable of reform?  And is it not true, therefore, that the
giving of oneself over to that immorality is to inevitably succumb to it? 

Of course it is.  And thus is a license to steal not only an
all-too-prevalent gateway to licentiousness
but the means, more
importantly, by which the coercive power of politics trumps the cooperative
power of economics:


There are two fundamentally opposed means whereby man, requiring
sustenance, is impelled to obtain the necessary means for satisfying his desires.
These are work and robbery, one's own labor and the forcible appropriation of
the labor of others . . . [such that we] call one's own labor and the
equivalent exchange of one's own labor for the labor of others, the "economic
means" for the satisfaction of needs, while the unrequited appropriation
of the labor of others [we call] the "political means”…

The state is an organization of the political means. No state,
therefore, can come into being until the economic means has created a definite
number of objects for the satisfaction of needs, which objects may be taken
away or appropriated by warlike robbery.


Thus, via its
collectivity in the state, does the psychopathology that either attracts the
worst or infects the best result in a sociopathology that is by definition inimical
to the best interests of society and therefore to the human enterprise as a
whole.  For the cognitive dissonance that
arises from the concept of “public service,” on the one hand, and from the
perversion of the master-servant relationship, on the other, divides the public
mind to the point of defenselessness against those to whom it has granted the
license to steal.  Being literally of two minds, the licensing public is
bipolar vis-à-vis its licensees, at
once delighted when its preferred ones are elected and despondent when they are
not – or, as is increasingly the case, despondent after its delight, the failure of its licensees to live up to their
promises resulting in the desire to “throw the bums out,” never mind that they
will only be replaced with a new batch
of bums.  It never occurs to the general
public, in other words, that licenses to steal are ipso fact the cause of the problem and that until it stops granting
them, it will continue to effectively put a gun to its own head. 

having forgotten (if it ever knew) the profound wisdom that Jefferson articulated
– “It is sometime said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself.
Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?” – the general public
is oblivious of the fact that its granting of licenses to steal is the source
and sustenance of elitism.  For while, in
his willingness to “let history answer this question,” Jefferson was asking
what was obviously a rhetorical question, the elitist’s answer to it is as


While the vast
majority of men cannot be trusted
with the government of themselves, a tiny few not only can; they can also be trusted with the government of others. 
And, conveniently, we are that
tiny few. 


The result is
that the licensees are not content to use their stolen property within its
constitutional confines – almost exclusively for the protection of the lives,
liberty, and property of the licensors. 
Rather, with the gun still pointed at the licensors’ head, the licensees
cock the hammer and command that they do this, that, and the other, ad infinitum, on the presumption that
the licensors are no better than the grandmother in Flannery O’Connor’s “A Good
Man Is Hard to Find,” about whom The Misfit (after gunning her down) said: “She would of been a good woman if it had been somebody there to shoot
her every minute of her life.”  Which is
to say that, all pretensions to the contrary, the licensees have nothing but
contempt for their licensors.  And why shouldn’t they?  What are the We the Licensors, after all, but
sheep waiting to be sheared – over and over and over again – having been
conditioned by the licensing process to externalize our locus of control, foolishly believing
that by giving up our powers, we magically increase

And just as
importantly, lest we delude ourselves into believing that the licensees are the
ones doing the shearing, let us also be clear in understanding that it is not
them, but their overlords – the monetary fascists of centralized, fractional-reserve banking and
the financial fascists of the Washington-Wall Street nexus – who actually wield
the shears, this Happy Conspiracy “spreading
a contagious pathological mutation of capitalism” that is nothing less than “a
war to totally control” the essentials of the American way of life.  That is to say, those with licenses to steal
are themselves bought and sold, as
the nexus’s revolving door
sends the most pathological among them shuttling between Washington and Wall Street
in a veritable relay race to fleece the American people – i.e., to privatize
gains and socialize losses as fully as possible and as fast as possible.

But as obscene
– as utterly barbaric – as this state
of affairs is, the Big Lie doesn’t
stop there.  For as history has gone out
of its way to prove, a license to steal
is also a license to kill
– a permission slip, if you will, to commit that
which in any other context is murder – mass
murder being the inevitable result, not just of the enemy combatants and
innocent civilians of opposing states but of the state’s own civilians, this democide accounting
for nearly 170 million deaths in the last
century alone.  And simply put, given that psychopathology
and sociopathology both manifest “a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and
violation of, the rights of others,” it is the warfare state that renders the pattern all-pervasive, war being the
very health of the state.  And as every state is founded on the
injustice of legalized theft, all of its wars, no less than its other actions,
are unjust.  Which is to say that insofar
as they are fought between and among states, there is no such thing as a just war; there is just war, its cumulative
losses in blood and treasure – over 15 billion battlefield deaths “since the
beginning of authentic history,”[iii]
at a cost of over a thousand trillion dollars[iv]
being beyond comprehension.  Yet on and on it goes.

Let us
conclude, then, by confronting the people of the lie with who and what they
are: perpetrators, in the name of service to humanity, of virtually every known
evil against it.  And as the title of
this essay is taken from a book of the same name by the late M. Scott Peck, we do well to quote from


have spent a good deal of time working in prisons with designated
criminals.  Almost never have I
experienced them as evil people.  Obviously
they are destructive, and usually repetitively so.  But there is a kind of randomness to their
destructiveness.  Moreover, although to
the authorities they generally deny responsibility for their evil deeds, there
is still a quality of openness to their wickedness.  They themselves are quick to point this out,
claiming that they have been caught precisely because they are the “honest
criminals.”  The truly evil, they will tell
you, always reside outside of jail. 
Clearly these proclamations are self-justifying.  They are also, I believe, generally accurate.


Indeed they
are.  For to bear witness, not only as we
are to the present Pentagon scandal (which of course is as much a White House
and Congress scandal as it is of the Department of  Defense”) but to
the fact that not a single perpetrator of the housing debacle, or of the socioeconomic catastrophe
it will soon loose upon the land,[v]
has been indicted (much less arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, and
incarcerated) is to confront the ugly truth of Dr. Peck’s words: The truly evil
do reside outside of jail, primarily
in the conspiratorial embrace of the political means, its perpetrators only too
happy to imprison the rest of us in their collective self-deceit[vi]
a deceit that is all the more evil for its ability to deceive us, whether as wards of the welfare
state, as cannon fodder for the warfare state, or as victims of the political
rape that perpetuates them.

While it
remains to be seen how long We the People will lie there and take it, be assured
that we don’t need to and that
whenever we decide that we’ve had enough, all we have to do is stand up and say
so.  For while truth is indeed treason in
the empire of lies, the naked fact is that it is the emperor who has no clothes on. 
Let us then work for the day when, shriveled to the point of impotence,
he scurries off and, cloaked in the fine cloth of freedom, we are at long last
able to get on with the business of civilization the only way we ever have: through the free and
voluntary exchange of goods, services, and ideas that ceaselessly works to our
mutual benefit.


[i] Notwithstanding those who
insist otherwise, taxes most assuredly are
taken against our will.  How easy is
it, after all, to say that one does voluntarily what one can only refuse to do
in the face of a prison sentence?

[ii] Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
must be counted among the most honest of modern-day politicians for defending
the pork-barrel spending of a colleague with these immortal words: “We legally steal.”

[iii] See a photocopy, just as the horror of World War I was beginning to unfold, of the
research published in a September 1914 issue of the New York Times.

[iv] Inflation-adjusted as
follows: 15 billion deaths x $3,677 per death x 21 to correct for inflation = $1,158,255,000,000,000.  And again, these are battlefield deaths, which accordingly does not account for
“collateral damage,” a term for unintended death and destruction that only the
state could come up with.

[v] In truth, the crisis has
been in the making since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, during
which time the dollar has lost over 96%
of its value
and is doomed, due to the debt-based nature of the
Fed’s literal monopoly money, to lose the rest of its value in far less time,
quite possibly before it reaches its hundredth birthday.

[vi] As laden as the word is with
theological content, the following quote replaces sin with wrongdoing as it
relates to the hyperlinked reference to Madeleine Albright and to government
functionaries in general.  Thus, in Dr.
Peck’s definition of evil, “It is not their wrongdoing that characterizes evil
people; rather, it is the subtlety and persistence and consistency of their
wrongdoing.  This is because the central defect of the evil is not the
wrongdoing but the refusal to
[emphasis added].


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 10/03/2010 - 23:26 | 623275 Orly
Orly's picture

The difference between most common criminals and the professional politician, i.e., the legal thief, as you say, is that common criminals, in general, know that they are doing wrong.  They know they are harming other people when they commit their crimes, yet they do it anyway.

The career politician, on the other hand firmly believes that he is on the right side of history by pushing an overall agenda.  When one moves giant blocks of money around for a living, via "appropriations," it may be much easier to justify picking up a crumb or two along the way.

Truthfully, most of these criminals in government and the banking system see themselves as saviors, not thieves.

Sun, 10/03/2010 - 23:48 | 623295 RoRoTrader
RoRoTrader's picture

How do you know that deep thinking Orly?........saviors, not thieves.

Getting back to more imporatant issues; forget about BK.......think about us, Orly.

I can see you are artistic.

Love Roro

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 05:49 | 623502 mophead
mophead's picture

Invest in lamp posts bitchez!

Sun, 10/03/2010 - 23:39 | 623277 Fred Hayek
Fred Hayek's picture

Chapter 8 of The Road to Serfdom covers much of this same ground.

And, Lord Acton said it well, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely."

In many ways our Constitution ignoring government has adorned itself with aspects of absolute power.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:22 | 623326 Incubus
Incubus's picture

Power isn't some great corrupting force, all power does is allow flawed individuals to manifest whatever corruptive qualities they already had.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: these politicians and CEOs don't come from mars, or jupiter, or that goldilocks planet--no, they come from neighborhoods and families just like every other person in this society.  And if they're all mostly corrupt, what does that say about us? 

All isn't well in Amerika; we're rotten to the core. 


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:50 | 623360 TuesdayBen
TuesdayBen's picture

We are rottenest at the top

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 03:39 | 623446 Catullus
Catullus's picture

I've said it before, I'll say it again: these politicians and CEOs don't come from mars, or jupiter, or that goldilocks planet--no, they come from neighborhoods and families just like every other person in this society.  And if they're all mostly corrupt, what does that say about us?

I'd stop saying this.  It's just not true.  The people at the top are not from the same class of people.  They are not a representation of the society at large.  Even if they were a respresentation of the rest of society, through their actions in government, they're attempting to carve out a special exemption to all the rules they throw onto society. That means the state apparatus itself is the corrupting process.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:16 | 623579 MayIMommaDogFac...
MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

Power isn't some great corrupting force

It will ruin the strongest of men...History, philosophy and literature all contain many good examples of the phenomenon.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 12:02 | 623894 Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

Absolutely. I don't care who you are. Too much power and influence will only make you hurt people.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 12:19 | 623920's picture

Occasionally a man can walk away from proffered power. George Washington comes to mind. Not that he wasn't a son-of-a-bitch in some ways but he could have been king and he rejected the role.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:56 | 623367 RoRoTrader
RoRoTrader's picture

Lord Ashton huh?.........I always thought it was the Pope, but what the fuck do I know?

Sun, 10/03/2010 - 23:47 | 623294's picture

The author is not the same David White who portrayed Larry Tate on Bewitched, I assume. I can find nothing in this article with which to disagree. It is well reasoned and well written. Let's rock...

Gimme Some Truth

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 05:59 | 623508 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Refreshingly...brutally...honest wasn't it?

In the words of one of our most trustworthy and noble is a big effing deal ;-)

Sun, 10/03/2010 - 23:50 | 623296 gwar5
gwar5's picture

Politicians are blue collar criminals with white collar mouths and a government pension plan.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:21 | 623324 Kali
Kali's picture

yes.  I got bitch slapped at a public meeting (re: raising professional fees, the only thing fee increase was doing was giving raises and maintaining bennies for very bad service) when I said "you aren't public servants, you are self servants".  The primary purpose of any bureacracy, public or private, is to perpetuate itself.  In the gov case, that usually results in more regulation and more fees.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 06:43 | 623518 Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

When you suck really bad you have to adopt self rewarding as "other" rewarding stops working. IE the filim and music industry. They are so interested in achieving self rewarding because once they get to that point they are self punishing. And they don't think what they did is that big of a deal.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:00 | 623304 msjimmied
msjimmied's picture


You lost me there David. Your preamble did a marvelous job till I got to your FOXX fix. This is not the Appalachian vote you are skewing for. This is ZH. Get your bearings.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 11:36 | 623849 Dick Buttkiss
Dick Buttkiss's picture

Um, what?  She said what she said in the context cited.  She and her partners in crime do legally steal.  What more bearing does one need?

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:01 | 623306 IAmTheStig
IAmTheStig's picture


This sums it up for me.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:28 | 623332 Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:24 | 623328 scratch_and_sniff
scratch_and_sniff's picture


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:46 | 623354 Coldfire
Coldfire's picture

True and wise words. The state is manifestly evil. On a practical note I recommend starving the beast by going and staying on strike. Escaping the US plantation by transferring assets overseas and renouncing citizenship was the empowering event of my life. The America of 1789 is dead but the ideal of America lives on in all right-thinking people. Perhaps someday to rise again.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 07:44 | 623563 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture


"On a practical note I recommend starving the beast by going and staying on strike."

I'd say that we get to watch Spain and see how your recommendation works out--I'll bring the popcorn.

- Ned

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:47 | 623356 No More Bubbles
No More Bubbles's picture

Lies ARE "the Core" ----


we must understand the pathology that lies at its core.


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:48 | 623357 JR
JR's picture

Although I refuse to call America’s present paper money tyranny “capitalism,” just imagine, that without the Fed’s power to generate money out of thin air, Congress would be obliged to go to the people and say, We need some additional taxes from you to help out the bankers and also to fund our global wars of empire and to subsidize corporate welfare for its low-wage workforce, so would you mind dropping by the courthouse in the morning and leaving the money on the counter. And remember, this month there’ll be an additional increase for bank bailouts.

The American people have no idea of how much value is being taken from them by taxation and inflation via a fiat currency, or where that value is going.  The corporations collect the monies and the value, but the people never see the breakdown—except in their standard of living.

Without a Fed-issued, unlimited money supply there’d be none of this light oh-hum banter we’re hearing about today between Bank of America and Rosenberg on how to solve the bankers’ little challenge of when and how all this QEII money can be diverted into risk-lite for massive profits amongst the bankers and friends.

As Ron Paul said, “No one would welcome a counterfeiter to town, yet this same authority is blindly given to our central bank without any serious oversight by the Congress.

“When the government [and Wall Street] can replicate the monetary unit at will without regard to cost, whether it’s paper currency or a computer entry, it’s morally identical to the counterfeiter who illegally prints currency.  Both ways, it’s fraud.”

Says Paul, “If unchecked, the economic and political chaos that comes from currency destruction inevitably leads to tyranny.”



Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:42 | 623408 StarvingLion
StarvingLion's picture

I think "The People" should own the printing press.  Then the NFL would take over.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:56 | 623432 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

JR I feel that you are my wise, older brother.

CD is the cool uncle my parents don't get but us kids love him.


CD, reading Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago forever burned into my heart and mind the immense evil perpetually waiting to slip into the breach.

We are approaching a mass horror.  

"What's wrong with Socialism anyway?"


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:59 | 623435 Voluntary Exchange
Voluntary Exchange's picture

Even if the entire world were to be covered in concrete, cracks would appear, and up through the cracks a flower would grow, and that flower is a Solzhenitsyn.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 00:55 | 623364 sbenard
sbenard's picture

The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If `Thou shalt not covet' and `Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free." -- John Adams (A Defense of the American Constitutions, 1787)

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:12 | 623365 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

This is quite loud. And carries many expletives. Perhaps you can relate:

"...I got f'd by__________ .... Now _______ can go f' themselves!"

For Whitey Houston, it was apparently 'Liberty Mutual'.

"Please calm down. Calm down, mister! Calm down! This conversation is over."



Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:08 | 623374 williambanzai7
williambanzai7's picture


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:14 | 623384 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Heh, thank goodness they aren't armed... oh, wait.


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:25 | 623399 RoRoTrader
RoRoTrader's picture

william.......what the fuck........were you kicked out of disinformation school?

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:43 | 623409 williambanzai7
williambanzai7's picture

;-) Have a Wingnut

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:21 | 623422 RoRoTrader
RoRoTrader's picture

thx, and best ever........amazing talent......if, they only knew.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 03:02 | 623436 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

That looks like my hat!

******g brilliancy!

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:33 | 623404 JR
JR's picture

Artistic hilarity!!  At last, a cause to unify the people.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:18 | 623388 Kreditanstalt
Kreditanstalt's picture

Because they governments have the guns, and because they are able to pay extensive retinues of retainers, cops, the military, jailers and courts, it is next-to-impossible imagining the people  rising up against them.

In addition, the majority of the people are net gainers from the system, paying less in taxes (if any) than they consume in services.  They won't bite the hand that protects and succors them.

But all over western social welfare states, growing numbers of people are quietly and perniciously withdrawing their consent to be governed.  They are undermining the legitimacy of the state, just as Soviet and East Europen citizens did years ago.  Underground economies are growing. The legitimacy of taxation is being questioned.   Trust in government has evaporated.  Petty tax evasion is rife.  The police are more widely seen now wholly for what they are - not "public servants" but enforcers for government.  Even here in investment-land, gold and other subversive monies are eating away at the soft underbelly of government - finances.

When some of my government employee neighbours lose their jobs, perhaps their attitudes will change too.  

It's heartening to see that people today - of necessity - seem to spend a lot of their time finding ways to avoid government restrictions and get things done and a lot LESS time trying to comply... 

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:34 | 623405 StarvingLion
StarvingLion's picture

Underground economies are growing

Oh you mean grow-ops.  Too late.  The government has taken over that biz...they too will soon be in jail.  But hey you just stop paying property taxes and let me know about that avoiding government notion...

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:13 | 623418 Kreditanstalt
Kreditanstalt's picture

Agreed on property taxes...but more people are not licensing their cars, not registering their guns, selling under the table, becoming self-employed, retiring, become speculators, emigrating,  working only part-time, eating only untaxed basic groceries, doing illegal alterations to their property, selling online, avoiding the banking system, hiding or investing money overseas, operating businesses out of their homes, hiring "illegals", working mostly on weekends for cash, deliberately concealing income at tax time, shopping out of state or province, buying only untaxed second-hand appliances, repairing instead of buying new, refusing to buy the newest tech gadgets, bartering, saving in precious metals, paying cash for everything, growing their own (everything), omitting to register for health insurance schemes, not voting, buying & selling at flea markets and farmer's markets, exchanging services, keeping ("illegal") chickens, networking online...


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:52 | 623433 Minion
Minion's picture

The public serpents would panic if people operated like that on a national scale.  It worked in India.......

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 06:06 | 623511 MarketTruth
MarketTruth's picture

"And I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property -- until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered... The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." -- Thomas Jefferson wrote on May 28, 1816


"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." -- Thomas Jefferson


"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams, speech at the Philadelphia State House, August 1, 1776

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:02 | 623623 doggings
doggings's picture

Agreed on property taxes...but more people are not licensing their cars, not registering their guns, selling under the table, becoming self-employed, retiring, become speculators, emigrating,  working only part-time, eating only untaxed basic groceries, doing illegal alterations to their property, selling online, avoiding the banking system, hiding or investing money overseas, operating businesses out of their homes, hiring "illegals", working mostly on weekends for cash, deliberately concealing income at tax time, shopping out of state or province, buying only untaxed second-hand appliances, repairing instead of buying new, refusing to buy the newest tech gadgets, bartering, saving in precious metals, paying cash for everything, growing their own (everything), omitting to register for health insurance schemes, not voting, buying & selling at flea markets and farmer's markets, exchanging services, keeping ("illegal") chickens, networking online...


this is the way to hurt them, jus step aside and dont play

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 12:50 | 623953 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

"Citizens! In all times, two political systems have been in existence, and each may be maintained by good reasons. According to one of them, Government ought to do much, but then it ought to take much. According to the other, this two-fold activity ought to be little felt. We have to choose between these two systems. But as regards the third system, which partakes of both the others, and which consists in exacting everything from Government, without giving it anything, it is chimerical, absurd, childish, contradictory, and dangerous. Those who parade it, for the sake of the pleasure of accusing all governments of weakness, and thus exposing them to your attacks, are only flattering and deceiving you, while they are deceiving themselves."
Frederic Bastiat

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 05:55 | 623505 mophead
mophead's picture

The majority pay less in taxes? Not true. Taxes at the top always trickle down to the bottom. Just look at the latest 3.8% tax on investment income (part of the health care bill). If your net rental profits fall by $200/monthly due to higher taxes, what are you gonna do? Raise rents. Obviously.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:18 | 623393 Voluntary Exchange
Voluntary Exchange's picture

I think it is important for people that when they think  the word "state" that they think of certain key services, notably security and adjudication.  It is important not to PURCHASE (voluntary transaction) your "state" type of services from a monopoly or you will end up with tyranny. This is the inherent nature of monopolies of force or adjudication.They always eventually attract the sociopaths and psychopaths (those who use force or fraud to get what they want).

Non monopoly security and adjudication worked for over 1000 years in Ireland. Please see:

Stateless Societies: Ancient Ireland by Joseph R. Peden (page 3):

Property Rights in Celtic Irish Law by Joseph R. Peden:

For a New Liberty by Murray Rothbard, Pg. 215:

Anarchy and the Law By Edward Stringham, Page 565:
Preview Here:

Medieval Ireland, An Encyclopedia by Seán Duffy, Ailbhe MacShamhráin, James Moynes, Pg. 383:
450,000 to 960,000

Irish History - Brehon Law by Pat Flannery:


Here are additional links to help cure people of the illusion of the utility of monopoly services by monopolies of force or adjudication:


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 03:29 | 623441 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

Wonderful resources.

"It's my island!"

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 04:20 | 623450 Voluntary Exchange
Voluntary Exchange's picture

Sure didn't the Almighty send me to watch your back? The Irish (especially pre-Catholic) show us a way back to  freedom. NO wonder their history has been so strongly suppressed or twisted.


I didn't like him (the tyrant/traitor) anyway, he wasn't right in the head.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 14:05 | 624117 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

Thank you for the valuable resources!

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 03:32 | 623444 Catullus
Catullus's picture

Anatomy of the State is a great one as well.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 13:44 | 624071 aerojet
aerojet's picture

As much as I hate to admit it, I'm pretty sure that anarchy does not scale.  None of those books cover how to provide electric grids, water and sewer, or other infrastructure systems to the populace.  You always run into property rights issues and that is what government is supposed to arbitrate.  We could probably get by with some minimal state, but it would just eventually re-expand to control everything all over again--it's like the buckthorn in my backyard.  You can cut it down, dig it out, and you're mostly rid of it, and then next spring it pops out again somewhere and if you don't get right after it, the infestation is restored.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:20 | 623395 Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:47 | 623410 StarvingLion
StarvingLion's picture

The Language of International Influence is Glass...Can't ya see. Even the Slave Trade is too crowded.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:53 | 623412 StarvingLion
StarvingLion's picture

Dear Citizens: My mayoral platform is that I believe the pension age should be reduced to 55 so that all of them can be institutionalized by force and fed massive diets of pharmaceutical pills "goodness" so that Ponzi Amerika can prosper.  It would solve a lot of our problems.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 01:59 | 623414 Grand Supercycle
Grand Supercycle's picture

Updated GOLD monthly chart:

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:00 | 623415 StarvingLion
StarvingLion's picture

Do you people realize that the largest US Research programme is neuroscience.  Goethe:  "The ones who are truly enslaved are those who are not even aware of it".

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 11:41 | 623855 Dick Buttkiss
Dick Buttkiss's picture

Actually, the English translation is: "None are more hopelessly enslaved that those who falsely believe they are free."

But your heart was in the right place.  


"The state can kiss my ass."

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:10 | 623417 piceridu
piceridu's picture

What good habitual liars we've become. No surprise, we were schooled from a very young age to lie.

Whether it is learned or innate, by a very young age, children trust their parents. Most children, until the age of six or so, don’t have the ability to see things from anyone else’s perspective. The parent, or caregiver, is just an extension of the child. The child cries, the parent responds. When parents explain something to their children, they have no reason or basis to disbelieve their parents. If you saw the movie Galaxy Quest, children are very similar to the Thermians - aliens that take Commander Peter Quincy Taggart, (played by Tim Allen) and his crew for a ride through the galaxy. The Thermians are a peaceful and naïve alien race who have no concept of fiction or what a lie is. It was never part of their culture. Young children have the same view.  They can’t reason why a parent would say something that is dishonest because they only distinguish from their own perspective. Like the Thermians, a lie just doesn’t make sense. Trust is what parents rely on when they lie to their kids. “If you don’t eat your spinach you won’t grow up to be like Popeye.”  We tell these illogical lies because we know we can fool our child into believing them. “If you keep crossing your eyes they’re going to stay that way.” Young children don’t ask if what their parents are saying is reasonable, they just believe it. When parents start to lie, and see the immediate results of this form of manipulation, it becomes routine and they become habitual liars.

Lying shares the unusual distinction of which our own personal moral handbook and that of society’s legal handbook converge. Most legal codebooks have provisions regarding lying or call it fraud. Lying is committing a fraud. The basic belief that lying is wrong seems to exist in all civilizations.  Most societies can’t carry on without an acceptance than we must tell the truth to one another in order to coexist and survive. Thriving in these societies is dependent on the truth. How can you coexist with me if you give me false information that makes mine ambiguous? Lying creates instant inequality. For instance lets say you’re about to buy strawberries from a vendor and the strawberries on top look good but the ones on the bottom are a bit rotten. The vender knows this and says nothing or lies and says that they’re all fresh. The vendor has information that makes his position superior prior to your transaction.  The vendor lies but expects the truth from me. He expects that I will give him real and not counterfeit money at the conclusion of our transaction. The vendor’s lie does not change him knowing his position but his lie makes it impossible to compute mine. He expects something from me that he is not willing to give.  Children expect the truth and never imagine the opposite. Our children depend upon their parents to know their position. They trust until made to “untrust”. Children follow us blindly and believe whole heartily in what we transmit to them. They believe in what we believe and observe what we demonstrate. Is it not imperatively dangerous to play Russian roulette with this trust? When our children come of age, how they deal with the outside world will directly affect us and reflect on us. We can’t sidestep this responsibility unless we completely and knowingly shirk our duty as parents. The lies we propagate to our children paralyze their soul and ironically embezzle what we were trying to endow. 

Sissela Bok, professor at Harvard and Brandeis universities and author of Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life, and Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation says in her book , “The first lie must be thatched with another or it will rain through.' More and more lies may come to be needed; the liar always has more mending to do. And the strains on him become greater each time... After the first lies, moreover, others can come more easily. Psychological barriers wear down; lies seem more necessary, less reprehensible; the ability to make moral distinctions coarsen...”

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:30 | 623424 Voluntary Exchange
Voluntary Exchange's picture


How can those who wish to live honestly come to agreements with those who gain through lies. It is impossible. Those who choose fraud or force are predators at perpetual war with all those who choose voluntary exchange. It is time for us (the ones who don't want to live by lies) to understand that we are at WAR. Do not aid and abet the enemy.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:10 | 623562 bada boom
bada boom's picture

I Agree. 

The process of passing lies down to the children extends and even creates more lies.  Consequently, this creates even more confusion for the next generation.  I think most take the lies of their parents, add to them perhaps, and the process continues on. The cycle of lies amongst the generations leads to very ugly places.

Some individuals have a "second coming of age."  They look around, realize that everything is not what is seems and question everything.  The first coming of age is only partial one.  In the second, the person must accept what she/he has done in the past may have been totally wrong because it was based on lies.  They have to look at their parents, teachers, other influential people and revise their prior views. Why did mom/dad tell me this, why did they do that, etc, etc.

I think most unknowingly cling to false premises because they don't want to recognize the ugliness of the lies they have been told.  If you question things, you might find out they are not what they first appeared to be.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:43 | 623600 ExistentialSkeptic
ExistentialSkeptic's picture

Enough with the romaticism of childhood.  Just because it takes some years before children can understand lying behavior in others, there is no reason to believe the same activity is not indulged in by those same children at a much earlier age.  Human psychology is much more complex than "monkey see monkey do!"

The inner need for the (child's) ego to lie arises simultaniously with the awareness that the primary caregiver has a separate existence from the ego itself (and may therefore fail to fulfill the ego's needs).  This is how we get the child who cannot understand why Mama says she likes Grandma's cooking when she really doesn't, and will in the same five minutes claim not to have eaten a cookie that is still smeared all over it's little face.

Please please please accept that the issue of "lying" in its various forms is much more complex than you make it out to be.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:18 | 623638 francismarion
francismarion's picture

When you say children 'indulge' in lieing, you postulate conscious decision to lie. This presupposes a capacity that is not proven. What if the spontaneous capacity to lie is innate in children, sort of like breathing and crying?

What if lieing is the product of Original Sin? That explains the behavior and provides a mechanism as plausible as yours.

The creation of causes ex nihilio is the office of the Creator and playwrights. You are neither I suppose.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 13:03 | 623979's picture
Original Sin

Your code begins by damning man as evil, then demands that he practice a good which it defines as impossible for him to practice. It demands, as his first proof of virtue, that he accept his own depravity without proof. It demands that he start, not with a standard of value, but with a standard of evil, which is himself, by means of which he is then to define the good: the good is that which he is not.

It does not matter who then becomes the profiteer on his renounced glory and tormented soul, a mystic God with some incomprehensible design or any passer-by whose rotting sores are held as some inexplicable claim upon him—it does not matter, the good is not for him to understand, his duty is to crawl through years of penance, atoning for the guilt of his existence to any stray collector of unintelligible debts, his only concept of a value is a zero: the good is that which is non-man.

The name of this monstrous absurdity is Original Sin.

A sin without volition is a slap at morality and an insolent contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is outside the province of morality. If man is evil by birth, he has no will, no power to change it; if he has no will, he can be neither good nor evil; a robot is amoral. To hold, as man’s sin, a fact not open to his choice is a mockery of morality. To hold man’s nature as his sin is a mockery of nature. To punish him for a crime he committed before he was born is a mockery of justice. To hold him guilty in a matter where no innocence exists is a mockery of reason. To destroy morality, nature, justice and reason by means of a single concept is a feat of evil hardly to be matched. Yet that is the root of your code.

Do not hide behind the cowardly evasion that man is born with free will, but with a “tendency” to evil. A free will saddled with a tendency is like a game with loaded dice. It forces man to struggle through the effort of playing, to bear responsibility and pay for the game, but the decision is weighted in favor of a tendency that he had no power to escape. If the tendency is of his choice, he cannot possess it at birth; if it is not of his choice, his will is not free.

What is the nature of the guilt that your teachers call his Original Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge—he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge of good and evil—he became a moral being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by his labor—he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience desire—he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment. The evils for which they damn him are reason, morality, creativeness, joy—all the cardinal values of his existence. It is not his vices that their myth of man’s fall is designed to explain and condemn, it is not his errors that they hold as his guilt, but the essence of his nature as man. Whatever he was—that robot in the Garden of Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love—he was not man.

Man’s fall, according to your teachers, was that he gained the virtues required to live. These virtues, by their standard, are his Sin. His evil, they charge, is that he’s man. His guilt, they charge, is that he lives.

They call it a morality of mercy and a doctrine of love for man.


-- Ayn Rand

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 13:58 | 624099 aerojet
aerojet's picture

And here I thought that people in government were just all alcoholics--the worst liars that every existed.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 16:47 | 624454 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

They are not!     (Ooops, there I go lying again.)

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 02:34 | 623428 GeoffreyT
GeoffreyT's picture

The key thing that enables the political-parasite class to continue their gang rape of the societies that they infest, is the existence of another subhuman branch of our species - the vermin who will carry out whatever order they are given, and will derive pleasure from it.

TSA, CIA, Police, military - those 'less than full men' who will abdicate all responsibility for free thought in order to kiss the whip, take the masters' shilling and offend against their own class.

As a former state 'trained killer' myself, I can tell you that folks like me are the last thing you want roaming the streets; folks who can shoot another human in the face without blinking (or indeed thinking). I have joked in the past that murder is an under-utilised personnel management tool, but frankly that's how folks like me were taught to behave as part of the Death Machine (admittedly, for me that's 25 years ago now - but it's not gone).

The state's enforcement arm is designed to produce sociopaths, and it does that well: those who don't become sociopaths, either quit or - if they 'soldier on' - suffer post-career breakdowns. There is no middle ground: there is no such thing as a career 'arms' soldier who is not a nutcase, and that goes twentyfold for anyone with non-trivial specialised killing training.

The State relies on having a cadre of men (and they're almost always men) who are prepared to pull a trigger on someone they don't know, for an offence that might not be an offence tomorrow. On April 6th 1933, there were men who were prepared to kill citizens for the 'crime' of drinking alcohol; the following day the stupidity of prohibition was a historical footnote. It takes a specific type of worthlessness to be willing to do shit like that.

To update Diderot for the 21st century: man will be free when the last politican is bludgeoned to death with the severed arm of the last police sniper.


(I fucking hate snipers. They are gutless: if a soldier is less than a man, a sniper is less than a maggot. Real men kill up close, not hidden away like fucking pansies. Soldiers detest snipers - even those on their own side).





Mon, 10/04/2010 - 06:35 | 623527 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"(I fucking hate snipers. They are gutless: if a soldier is less than a man, a sniper is less than a maggot. Real men kill up close, not hidden away like fucking pansies. Soldiers detest snipers - even those on their own side)."

While I understand your sentiment, this is not ancient Rome we don't fight that way anymore...Carlos Hathcock's mates felt otherwise and was glad he was there ;-)

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:08 | 623569 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

GT-I'm all about the least "fair" fight I can get into.  'cuz I know that the other side ain't gonna be "fair" towards my side.

At least today, the military's discipline (in general) is pretty iron-bound, even the Soldiers.

Of course, there are areas (like the market) where "rules" are supposed to work--HA!

Those areas are supposed to be different.

- Ned

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:29 | 623585 Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

Nice post. BTW alchahol is easy to make. It was never a crime to drink alchahol. It was a crime to drink it from a non certified monopoly. Once the monopoly was secured the ban was lifted.

Never confuse your needs with your hosts needs. That's not your body. You don't need to eat. You don't need to breath. You don't need to survive. The whole body genetic life experiment thing is just a convenient way to wrap people in sensory stimuli and drown them out with an attention whoring host.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:48 | 623608 francismarion
francismarion's picture

I hate doctors. They save people that are worthless as well as worthy. They excise cancers that have done nothing to themselves. They do it for money. They use technology that was unavailable to Galen. They are smart. They dress like priests. Nurses hate doctors.

Doctors are good at what they do and they like it. They memorize the organs and tissues like it was a Bible. Doctors are bad. I hate doctors.

I was a surgeon. I saved a rapist once. All surgeons are scum. If we did away with them it would be better. Like the jungle. I hate doctors.


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 14:08 | 624121 aerojet
aerojet's picture

Are you kidding me?  At least a sniper is a person actually on the  battlefield!  He's not some pilot dropping ordnance, or an artilleryman, or worse, a drone pilot sitting in Las Vegas!

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 04:39 | 623487 fiftybagger
fiftybagger's picture

3 If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?

Psalm 11
King James Version


Years of constitutional law have taught me one thing: men don't understand the constitution.  The framers may have been inordinately overrepresented by theists and deists when juxtaposed with their constituent populations.  But they nevertheless agreed on core principles, just as they did in the declaration:


"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature  and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"


If these truths are not self evident to you, you are what the framers would call a Godless reprobate.  If you cannot assent to first principles, you certainly won't abide by their logical corollaries.  You have condemned yourself to tyranny; may your chains rest lightly upon you.


“I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers and it was not there; in her fertile fields and boundless forests and it was not there; in her rich mines and her vast world commerce and it was not there; in her democratic Congress and her matchless Constitution and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.”

Alexis de Tocqueville


“Our constitution is only fit for a moral and religious people. It is wholly unsuited to the governance of any other kind.”

John Adams

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 06:57 | 623537 primefool
primefool's picture

umm - LEAVE

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 07:00 | 623538 primefool
primefool's picture

Yessuh - there are many many places in this world that would welcome you - as a righteous christian saviour - to - ummm, bring civilization to the natives and so on. So you must take your prodigious skill set and technological prowess and leave this god-forsaken land for greener pastures ... - and never look back.

Heh Heh Heh Heh.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:15 | 623578 fiftybagger
fiftybagger's picture

Interesting irony that our Protestant forefathers who founded this nest that you are currently fouling would've been received in like manner, hence their escape.  Perhaps you may soon have your wish..... and just as deeply regret it.....

4 And the third angel poured out his vial upon the rivers and fountains of waters; and they became blood. 5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus. 6 For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy. 7 And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.

8 And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire. 9 And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.

10 And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain, 11 And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.


Revelation 16
King James Version

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:56 | 623614 ExistentialSkeptic
ExistentialSkeptic's picture

I just can't take seriously any translation that has "a camel pass through the eye of a needle" in it.  Foolishness.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 12:52 | 623955 piceridu
piceridu's picture

Moral does not = Religion... I don't have to believe in fairy-tales to be moral which means I don't have to be a righteous christian to be moral. Being moral keeps me alive, it's self-serving. Saying "please, after you" at the watering hole has nothing to do with religious beliefs; it has to do with survival. Being moral is life affirming.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 13:07 | 623987's picture

Quite correct.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 07:03 | 623541 primefool
primefool's picture

A helpful hint:
If ya dont got da cash for yer 1 way ticket to greener pastures - its OK shhh. Just charge it on yer credit card and leave.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 05:23 | 623494 Fat Ass
Fat Ass's picture

The slaves are the willing enablers.

"The Usa" would cease to exist tomorrow afternoon if everyone playing the game, stopped playing the game.

The gentleman writing above .. "On April 6th 1933, there were men who were prepared to kill citizens for the 'crime' of drinking alcohol; the following day the stupidity of prohibition was a historical footnote. It takes a specific type of worthlessness to be willing to do shit like that." has got it exactly right.

Voters are slaves. Taxpayers are slaves. Walk away, don't play the game.

Don't complain  and complain about Statism - rather, STOP being an ENABLER.




Mon, 10/04/2010 - 07:16 | 623547 primefool
primefool's picture

Well said Fat Ass ( no offense)
Indeed - you must. Stop enabling. The best way to do this is to get a one way ticket OUT - to .. lets see.. I understand china is superb - have you seen pictures of Shanghai? real nice. And they would welcome a person like you - because you see they are starved for your brand of , shall we say, Expertise?
Yeah - just get a one way ticket to Guangdong( OK - the names are funny - but so what?eh?). Just charge it on one pof your 24 visa crds and leave.
Hint from a special friend : Once you leave you will not have to pay your visa bill. Or taxes etc. Sure there are laws and such - but , hey, you are leaving - so they wont apply to you. I think.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 08:38 | 623596 francismarion
francismarion's picture

Anarchists are always ardent revolutionists. Revolutions eat their parents as well as their children.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 13:11 | 623994's picture

"Capitalism is the fullest expression of anarchism, and anarchism is the fullest expression of capitalism. Not only are they compatible, but you can't really have one without the other. True anarchism will be capitalism, and true capitalism will be anarchism." -- Murray Rothbard

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 05:47 | 623501 mophead
mophead's picture

Invest in lamp posts bitchez!

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 13:12 | 623997's picture

The Diogenes gambit?

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 07:11 | 623546 kiwidor
kiwidor's picture

all this speculation and chit chat achieves nothing. 

forget investing in lamp already have thru your taxes.  there are two basic problems;  should you be able to get something for nothing? do we deal with people who aren't capable of 'paying' their way.

if the state looks after you, then pay up. if not, then burn it down.  it's that simple.

an alternative financial system is the only way forward, once those whose prejudice deprives you of anything but supporting a system of usury are disemboweled.


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:11 | 623635 GoingLoonie
GoingLoonie's picture

"if the state looks after you, then pay up. if not, then burn it down. it's that simple.

As one that has been grievously wronged by the state, poisoned with their knowledge as they took my families health, home and job-this is an interesting concept.  If you just read the papers it is obvious that my family is not the exception but the rule in todays society.


So, when do we start?

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 07:51 | 623556 francismarion
francismarion's picture

Third monthly meeting of the Berkeley County Landowners' Association, South Carolina, April, 27, 2013. Francis Marion, Chairman.

The meeting was called to order by the chairman and a prayer was offered by the regent of the D.A.R.

Old business was brought up by Thomas Pinckney of the Black Farmers Association. He said he had had no luck contacting any organized group in Charleston or Dorchester Counties regarding ammunition and food barter but had found a new prospective member claiming to represent a cooperative of five landowners just north of the Santee River.

Being satisfied by land plats and sworn statements that the lands of the five landowners were contiguous to Berleley county, the chairman accepted their application. Steven Burbage rose and said he had organized a  barter table for ammunition in the anteroom for BCLA members after the meeting and that no silver would be accepted.

Scott Lee rose and said that he had been contacted by someone on shortwave radio claiming to represent the governor's office in Columbia but that, per instructions of the chairman, he did not divulge the location or identity of the BCLA, despite repeated demands to do so,and that he would attempt to recontact the other radio operator when he had received further instructions.

John Cumbee rose and said his vagrant sweep of the past two weeks had yielded thirty four men and twenty seven women and children for impressed labor on the Stony Landing Cooperative and East Cooper Cooperative Lands.

The chairman admonished Mr. Cumbee that according to BCLA rules these individuals had a right to have their names and cases presented to the association for disposition. Mr Cumbee countered that he had authority over all people on his Cooperatives lands and proceeded to curse the chairman for a weakling and a usurper.

The chairman pulled out his revolver and laid it on the table said if Mr. Cumbee wanted to leave the BCLA now was a good time. Thomas Pinckney, Jr. then lunged as Cumbee and began to fight with Cumbee's sons.

New business was placed on hold and the regent of the DAR declared the meeting adjourned before there was bloodshed in her living room.

Submitted by Albertha Pinckney, Secretary, BCLA

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:05 | 623607 Winisk
Winisk's picture

The sociopaths are self centered attention seekers. The behaviour we see has no purpose beyond that, which is why we are puzzled when the actions of the sociopath seem so unproductive and bizarre at times. Politicians are rarely motivated for public service, thus the lies and false promises.  The thing is they expect all people to be as untrustworthy as them. When they find naive people who aren't players, they milk them with contempt. If you withdraw the attention, the sociopath will quit trying to seek positive attention through veiled attempts of service and go on a full scale search for attention by any means, even by openly forceful violent means. That's when the sociopathy becomes visible. It seems to me we are at that tipping point.  It makes no sense until you adopt that view.  I'm sick of it.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:29 | 623656 surfsup
surfsup's picture

Tipping point indeed.  And true power is never manifest in the presence of wrong action -- only a "posturing" of power can fill that shadow -- and hence all it can do is manipulate which in itself is a sure sign of weakness.  There is never anything to take up "against" for wrong action is its own dark sorcerer -- far more corrective to the bearer than anything the outer world can throw at it.   tick tock...

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:10 | 623631 nowhereman
nowhereman's picture

I have, in the past, worked as a "Public Servant". The first thing I was told on getting the job was that I could not be held legally accountable for anything I said.  No shit, if you came to me and asked a question about your file, I could legally lie to you and I would not be held accountable. 

So, it came to be known to me that being a bureaucrat meant that my job, with respect to the public was to provide a standard level of service to everyone.  The upshot of this was the standard public servant credo to treat everyone equally shabbily.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:32 | 623665 Dick Buttkiss
Dick Buttkiss's picture

Thanks for the insider acknowledgement, nowhereman; that sums it up nicely.  Perhaps "public serpant" would be a more appropriate term.

The state can kiss my ass.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:30 | 623660 Stevm30
Stevm30's picture

Great post.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:39 | 623674 blindman
blindman's picture

excellent . 

broad brush piece.


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 09:52 | 623685 jelyfish
jelyfish's picture

A very powerful essay thanks for the post. 


Mon, 10/04/2010 - 10:05 | 623702 Fix It Again Timmy
Fix It Again Timmy's picture


The Politics of Obedience:
Mon, 10/04/2010 - 10:20 | 623719 blindman
blindman's picture

The Neoliberal Experiment and Europe's anti-Austerity Strikes: Governments must Lower Wages or Suffer Financial Blackmail


by Michael Hudson


"Iceland's looting by its bankers came first, but the big news was Greece. When that nation entered its current fiscal crisis, European Union officials recommended that it emulate Latvia, which stands as the poster child for neoliberal economic devastation. The basic theory is that inasmuch as members of the euro cannot devalue their currency, they must resort to "internal devaluation": slashing wages, pensions and social spending. So while Europe enters recession it is following precisely the opposite of Keynesian policy. It is reducing wages, ostensibly to "free" more income available to pay the enormous debts that Europeans have taken on to buy their homes, to pay for schooling (hitherto provided freely in many countries such as Latvia's Stockholm School of Economics), transportation and other public services that have been privatized (at sharply, drastically increased rates - which the privatizers justify by pointing to the enormously bloated financial fees they had to pay their bankers and underwriters to buy the infrastructure being sold off by governments that the neoliberals blocked from taxing the wealthy).

The result is economic shrinkage. Europe is creating economic suicide - and demographic and fiscal suicide too. Every attempt to "solve" the problem of this shrinkage, neoliberal style, only makes things worse.
Latvia's public-sector workers have seen their wages cut by 30 percent over the past year, and its central bankers have told me that they are seeking further cuts, in the hope that this will lower wages in the private sector as well. What these cuts are doing, hardly by surprise, is spurring emigration - and also is destroying the real estate market, leading to defaults, foreclosures and a flight of debtors from the country. The emigration is headed by younger workers seeking employment in the shrinking economy. Indeed, Latvia's working conditions also happen to be Europe's most neoliberalized, that is, dangerous, unpleasant and almost neofeudal.


No doubt many post-Soviet economies will find themselves obliged to withdraw from the euro area rather than see a flight of labor and capital. They remain the most extreme example of the Neoliberal Experiment to see how far a population can have its living standards slashed before it rebels."

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 11:30 | 623793 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

Every once and a while, I have the fortune of defending (more like being a helper monkey) a landowner in a condemnation action.  Often times, these involve taking by the state for highways and other related matters.  In virtually every case, I cannot fathom how the state's principal actors can sleep at night. 

What happens in these cases is generally as follows:

1.  State decides where a new highway will go (generally purely incentivized through federal funding);

2.  State figures out which parcels will need to be taken to effectuate the new highway;

3.  State institutes condemnation proceedings, invoking its inherent authority to take the land (seriously);

4.  State sends notice to landowners of the taking, therein offering them ten to twenty cents on the dollar (offer vs. market value) and also explaining their right to contest the amount, etc.; and

5.  Approximately 80% of the landowners (representing 80% of the land) accept the state's offer at face value, generally because of either the need for immediate cash, basis in the land (many times an elderly person who needs the money and has a basis of next to nothing), inefficiency of fighting, and/or complete ignorance as to its value.

Every time, I find myself wondering why another citizen would not only utilize such an extreme power so lackadaisically, but also why that same citizen would effectively steal the land by offering such a ridiculously low offer, hoping the majority of persons are either not in a position to or cannot contest it.

Luckily, some of the landowners are sophisticated enough to call their attorney.  At that point, it generally means expert testimony as to the value of the taking...  and a jury trial.  Generally speaking, we end up getting 80%-100% of the value sought by the landowner. 

However, sometimes, the jury splits the baby (probably appealing one of these given there was no evidence to support the jury's verdict, it was all or nothing).  Or, worse, the jury returns a verdict closer to the state's offer (never actually lost one of these).

In virtually all the cases, the reason for a lesser jury award is either "I know him and I don't think he should have any more money, in general" or "I paid X for my land that is 20 miles away and there is no way this land could be worth more than X, therefore my judgment is vastly superior to the expert".  Generally, the jury system is one of the greatest inventions man has had the occasion to stumble upon...  however, these situations are incredibly troubling.  In the former example, how could a fellow citizen think he is entitled to make a determination as to whether his fellow citizen is forced to submit his land to the state at pennies on the dollar, through no fault of his own?  Said juror has not the slightest notion of the concepts that allow him to exist and prospectively live in this society...  likewise, how could the power to justly compensate a victim of the state's power be taken so ignorantly and any less seriously?

Generally, juries are interested in awarding a reasonable amount for the taking and will vastly outpace any offer by the state...  However, they are also generally aware that any payments made by the state is, in reality, made by them...  they have to balance these issues to come to a conclusion and generally do so in a fair and reasonable way...  On the other hand, sometimes, our fellow citizens are completely happy the land is taken and do not have any care in world if the aggrieved landowner is fairly compensated. 

The latter persons are the "bad seeds" that our captors successfully utilize to perpetuate their madness...  the people who are either unable or unwilling to recognize the horror and pain that may be utilized by a state wielding such power.  The people who have not the slightest notion of the sanctity of private property nor the consequences of its desecration.  Not only are there state actors who make ridiculous offers to landowners for the taking of their property, but there are peers, our fellow citizens, who enable the state to make such decisions...  again, every once and a while I am lucky enough to defend the taking and, if not being successful on the taking (snowball's chance in hell), then at least ensuring that the aggrieved party has been fairly compensated by the state...  I just wish more people would step up to the plate and decide to fight the state when they have been taken advantage of...  instead of enabling further action.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 11:30 | 623843 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Excellent post! I was reading People of the Lie when I was coerced into attending federal jury selection. Luckily for the judge, she didn't ask me about the book while questioning me about my refusal to obey whatever arbitrary orders she might issue during the trial.

I'd recommend it to anyone.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 13:20 | 624015 playitcool
playitcool's picture

It gets even creepier when one realizes the word government literally means mind control. 

Tue, 10/05/2010 - 14:58 | 626843 michael.suede
michael.suede's picture

This post....


is the best post on ZH I've ever read in my life.

Tue, 10/05/2010 - 15:24 | 626958 Free Radical
Free Radical's picture

That is high praise indeed, Michael. Thank you so much.

I'll try to do better next time. :-)

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!