The Silver Curtain

On the 5th of March in 1946, in Fulton Missouri, at Westminster College, Winston Churchill delivered an address (since christened the "Sinews of Peace") lamenting the burgeoning power and influence being slowly but surely gathered up by the Soviet Union.  Perhaps the address will be familiar to some of you owing to its most famous passage:

From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia, all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I must call the Soviet sphere, and all are subject in one form or another, not only to Soviet influence but to a very high and, in many cases, increasing measure of control from Moscow. Athens alone — Greece with its immortal glories — is free to decide its future at an election under British, American and French observation.

Ironic, as I will address, that he should mention Greece.

Much less well known perhaps is this later passage:

Our difficulties and dangers will not be removed by closing our eyes to them. They will not be removed by mere waiting to see what happens; nor will they be removed by a policy of appeasement. What is needed is a settlement, and the longer this is delayed, the more difficult it will be and the greater our dangers will become.1

The "Iron Curtain" came, of course, to signify the cavernous ideological, and eventually concretely physical, divide between East and West.  It took some 43 years before it was lifted once more, first and haltingly, in the form of the removal of Hungary's border fence in mid-1989 and then, of course, finally via the fall of the Berlin Wall in November that same year.

Not to be compared with a production of Italian Opera, the Iron Curtain did not describe a sudden, smooth, abrupt descent over the stages of Eastern Europe.  Quite the contrary, its drop was in stutters of discrete, fractional lowerings, such that it was a full fifteen years after Churchill used the term before its ultimate expression, the Berlin Wall, was finally erected in response to the emigration westward of a full fifth of East Germany's population between 1950 and 1961.

Appeals to patriotism (or accusations of treason, the criminalization of abandoning the state "Republikflucht" and eventually the very credible threat of deadly force) did little to stem the tide of departures from the East until it was erected.  But, obviously, it is in the nature of confiscatory governments to fence in the subjects from which they wish to appropriate- whether the asset that fuels their lustful avarice is freedom or (merely) capital.  (As if there is a difference).

Is it not despicable when for the sake of a few alluring job offers or other false promises about a "guaranteed future" one leaves a country in which the seed for a new and more beautiful life is sprouting, and is already showing the first fruits, for the place that favors a new war and destruction? Is it not an act of political depravity when citizens, whether young people, workers, or members of the intelligentsia, leave and betray what our people have created through common labor in our republic to offer themselves to the American or British secret services or work for the West German factory owners, Junkers, or militarists?2

A copyeditor might change only five words in the above passage for it to be easily mistaken for the words of a democratic representative on the House floor before slipping into the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 an amendment imposing confiscatory taxes on expatriating U.S. Citizens.

This last bit of déjà vu is interesting, and was not lost on foreign commentators.  When the United States tightened its grip on departing expats in 2008, the Economist went so far as to call it "America's Berlin Wall."  The comparison is more than apt once one discovers §8 USC 1182 ("Inadmissible Aliens"), which asserts:

Classes of aliens ineligible for visas or admission
Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, aliens who are inadmissible under the following paragraphs are ineligible to receive visas and ineligible to be admitted to the United States:

[...]

Any alien who is a former citizen of the United States who officially renounces United States citizenship and who is determined by the Attorney General to have renounced United States citizenship for the purpose of avoiding taxation by the United States is inadmissible.

Just a few paragraphs away from the exclusion barring the admittance of:

Participants in Nazi persecution, genocide, or the commission of any act of torture or extrajudicial killing...

You know... Republikflucht, Nazi persecution... same deal.

Fortunately (or unimportantly), it is not the soul of its subjects the United States seeks to hem in.  (Yet).  In fact, the failure of the Iron Curtain to contain what Thatcher called "the essence of the human spirit and desire for freedom" seems to be a lesson well learned by what can only be termed "the left" in these pages.3

Avoiding direct assaults on this essence is a lesson the left have transformed into a most adept mastery of and adroit affinity for the more Machiavellian elements of political science.  Shadowy machinations like: The midnight vote.  The backroom deal.  The bill we must pass in order to read.  Reconciliation.  The anonymous earmark.  The bankruptcy priority end-around.  The Cornhusker Kickback.  The Chicago Way.  This deeply Chekist approach is a subtle acknowledgement either that postmodern subjects simply cannot be made to believe in the optimistic assertions of the benefits of these interminable social programs, or that clandestine-legislation is the only means to sneak damaging edicts past an increasingly educated and informed population.  So far, this approach has worked swimmingly for both the left and (despite?) the right.  Consider:

It is almost impossible not to smirk just imperceptibly in admiration when contemplating the achievements of Rep. Barney Frank.  He did, after all, manage in the short span of fifteen years to transfer several trillion dollars from the middle and upper classes to his constituents (and if you think these are limited to Massachusetts residents you aren't paying attention) right under the nose of an opposition party via the DeBeersian invention of "The American Dream of Home Ownership."  Even linguistically, simply grafting the term "Home Ownership" onto the brand of "The American Dream" is a bit of elegant marketing genius that should forevermore serve as a centerpiece in graduate level marketing programs.  As if this were not itself impressive, he has managed to deflect essentially all criticism related to the inevitable collapse onto the evil specters of greedy bankers.  Lavrentiy Beria would have wept to be able to wield such control while maintaining such a low profile.

The selection of Supreme Court Justices now almost excludes the possibility of selecting talented and brilliant jurists in favor of those political devotees unassailable enough to be confirmed by virtue of the raw rarity of written work which might actually tend to illuminate their skills and talents.

Despite terms like "Lockbox," "Trust Fund" and "Trustees" the only assets currently held by the Social Security Trust Fund are IOUs from the United States Treasury that will, in any event, have to borrow (or seize) the money to repay them- literally an impossible endeavor to complete.  Of course, this effectively means that for some time now, social security has been nothing more than a tax and that its description as "security" or a retirement scheme has long been a rather unimaginative lie.  Against this background Kevin Drum asserts:

Back in 1983, we made a deal. The deal was this: for 30 years poor people would overpay their taxes, building up the trust fund and helping lower the taxes of the rich. For the next 30 years, rich people would overpay their taxes, drawing down the trust fund and helping lower the taxes of the poor.

Well, the first 30 years are about up. And now the rich are complaining about the deal that Alan Greenspan cut back in 1983. As it happens, I agree that it was a bad deal. If it were up to me, I'd fund Social Security out of current taxes and leave it at that. But it doesn't matter. Once the deal is made, you can't stop halfway through and toss it out. The rich got their subsidy for 30 years, and soon it's going to be time to raise their taxes and use it to subsidize the poor. Any other option would be an unconscionable fraud.

The ease with which the assertion that this was obviously merely a regressive to progressive mutating tax scheme all this time and everyone knew better comes to Mr. Drum should be instructive (though others are prone to call it historical revisionism).

If it was really true that this was merely a tax scheme all this time with proceeds intended all along for the general fund why not say so?  Voters may have been upset perhaps?  Of course, this implies a rather deep penchant for deception on the part of the political class.

On the other hand, its possible that Social Security was the progeny of the best intentions, and was merely raped and pillaged wildly by Congress to fund... well... whatever they liked.  This would make the same political class nothing more than felons in effect.

Of course, in the end it makes no difference if the political class are charlatans or outright thieves.  What is of no small import is the pattern of governance here.  It is a pattern that has become so prevalent that my own ego cannot resist the temptation to label it with a term that I hope takes root.

This manner of government is not driven by overt collectivism and the blatant, state-enforced social subjugation that characterizes communism.  Nor is it well understood to be dominated by the pernicious nationalism, autocratic industrial centralization and megalomaniacal personality cults framed by fascism.  Neither can it be sketched as the consenting construction of broad and broadly parasitic labor pools and growth retarding redistribution schemes that make up the key tenants of socialism.  Quite differently, this manner of government is premised on the suspension of disbelief via sophistication, word play, disguise, deception, mistaken identity, the deliberate use of nonsense and absurdity to distract and will, no doubt, end in a melodramatic chase scene (treasury officials in absurd uniforms chasing stage left to stage right after foreign borrowers perhaps?)

In short, the United States has come to be governed by Farcism.

Farcist PIIGS

The success of Farcism depends on, and in some ways derives a measure of legitimacy from, the acquiescence (or abject ignorance of) a lazy citizenry.  Truly, it is hard otherwise to explain phenomena like the perpetuation of the myth that President Reagan shrunk the government, or that President Clinton ever presided over a surplus in the United States when budget and historical debt outstanding figures are openly available permitting anyone at all to falsify these claims in seconds.  In fact, under the Clinton administration it was the wholesale pillaging of the Social Security trust fund (accounted for in Intragovernmental Holdings instead of "public debt") that permitted the specious claim that somehow a material slice of the aggregate debt of the country had been paid off.  In other words, the sort of accounting and insurance fraud that would send anyone in the private sector to jail and so familiar to forensic accountants and prosecutors it actually has a name: "Cookie Jarring."  The last real surplus was in 1957, by the way.

Likewise, and in a more contemporary construction, that any member of Congress or the current administration might assert that pouring trillions of dollars of liquidity via Government Sponsored Entities into cheap mortgages had no real inflationary effect on housing prices and, almost in the same breath, scold the public on the importance of supporting via blank check the unaudited Fannie, Freddie and Federal Housing Administration to prevent a housing crash, and so assert without howls of public protest strains the very imagination in the absence of rampant Farcism.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, America is not alone in these practices.  In fact, with apologies to Churchill, a silver curtain, lovingly lowered by Farcist leaders, has long since descended over the free markets of the West.  It encompasses and conceals from public view the finances and balance sheets of all the major powers and many private firms housed therein.  It is typified by the sort of opacity that permits the United States to claim a mere $12.9 trillion in debt.  It is the blocking force that simply dares "independent" ratings agencies to even think of downgrading a sovereign (clearly Egan Jones must then be a member of the financial Maquis on this basis).  It smothers the utility of FAS 157, drawing a metallic shield over the balance sheets of large banks until guessing what lies behind becomes an exercise in futility.  It surrounds and isolates price inputs like short sellers and buyers of credit default swaps.  It permits European banks to reduce capital requirements (read: increase leverage) by loading AIG up with $172 billion in exposure in its "foreign regulatory capital portfolio." It retains the heat required to keep mysterious Special Purpose Vehicles within e.g., the Federal Reserve warm and dry.  And in the United States, member of a very exclusive club of sovereigns that tax worldwide income of their subjects, a club in which North Korea is also a charter member, as the desperate need for capital to support a flagging treasury begins to bite down, it carves out a "death strip" and orders its revenue agents to audit on sight, and its immigration officials to banish forever any subject with thoughts of Republikflucht.

It is somewhat Ironic that Greece, also called out by Churchill would be among the first to begin to emerge (entirely involuntarily as it happens) from behind the silver curtain.  It is as if Farcism, which erected the barrier in the first place, is itself eventually corrosive to the metal.  No surprise that Farcism's NKVD immediately targeted and hunted down, like Western agents caught in East Berlin, traders in sovereign credit default swaps.  In the case of Greece, they even used the state intelligence services to do so.  (Sheesh, at least Germany only uses its Gestapo foreign intelligence appendages to track down tax evaders).  Perhaps lies, damn lies and GDP statistics eventually burn holes in silver curtains, when the painted over rust that is a Farcist economy can no longer support its own weight.  Until then, however, you must realize that you actually have no idea how much something in a Farcist market is actually worth.

For a moment, just a brief moment this week, the silver curtain seemed at least translucent in the United Kingdom.  Some days ago, carefully after the shadow of Gordon Brown seemed sure to recede, Governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King made several simply astounding pronouncements prompting Jeremy Warner at the Telegraph to Headline "Free At Last".

With crooked finger King pointed at the United States, shattering for a precious moment the illusion that letters like AAA should appear on the same page with the words United States or United Kingdom.  But even as the ripples in the pond undulated, the forces of Farcism, reeling for just a moment, seemed to collect themselves and reassert their dominance.

I do not want to comment on a particular measure by a particular country, but I do want to suggest that within the Euro Area it’s become very clear that there is a need for a fiscal union to make the Monetary Union work.

Read: Euro wide tax and spend authority.

Act III, The Chase Scene

Even the smallest cracks in the silver curtain may permit subjects in the United States to finally realize the extent and duration of the outright lies they have been subjected to by the Farcist political and regulatory classes.  It remains to be seen if these revelations will have any impact or if, in fact, the great power of Farcism (denial) will overcome enlightenment until utter collapse finally takes hold.

The fact is that, absent assumptions that strain the very fabric of space-time (perhaps the United States will invent cheap fusion power and become an energy exporter to the world? Or will the massive deflation of such a discovery merely accelerate the debt collapse?) there is simply no math that results in a calculation whereby the United States can pay off its outstanding obligations.

The United States will not outgrow its debt.  The United States will not tax away its debt (even marginal rates of 70% and 80% would not achieve this).  ("Mr. Obama, tear down this wall!" seems unlikely to do much good.)  The United States almost certainly lacks the political will to austere away the debt (to even balance the budget would require a 40% across the board cut using the 2009 or 2010 baseline, a 30% across the board cut using the 2011 baseline... etc).  Even a Republican sweep is highly unlikely to bring out the required change.  Instead the country must, as Greece has, begin to pursue frantically any source of capital it can grasp at.  Taxes must not only increase, but broaden, and capture more and more of the economy.  In this connection, slipping into the unread health bill the requirement that 1099s be filed for effectively every single transaction in the country over $600 easily reminds one of Greece's recent ban on cash transactions over €1500.

When a business buys a $1,000 used car, it will have to gather information on the seller and mail 1099s to the seller and the IRS. When a small shop owner pays her rent, she will have to send a 1099 to the landlord and IRS.

And here too is a measure of the power of Farcism.  It seems to Americans impossible that their 401(k) plans or IRAs might be the targets of sovereigns in the Final Chase scene.  "We would never let that happen!"  Of course, they forget that outright seizure and forfeiture are the hallmarks of communism and fascism.  Farcism is hardly so crude.  The Farcist government doesn't pass laws with overt seizure of retirement funds spelled out.  The Farcist government waits until midnight before slipping a small provision into the fast-tracked Child Protection and Education Act of 2011 that simply levies a corporate level tax on greedy retirement communities, the wealthy and exploitative licensed medical professionals who service them, slaps safety surcharges on the sale of each of those dangerous "ultra-light super compact electric vehicles," (read: Rascals), establishes a Homeland Security and border protection fee on all cruise tickets to the Bahamas, and establishes a surcharge on Kenny Rogers tickets.

This is Part I of a multi-part series on global rise of Farcism.  Part II "On the Pensioning of Roman Veterans" can be viewed here.

• 1. The full text of the address is available here.
• 2. From an East German propaganda booklet describing the horrors of the newly created offense "Republikflucht" (flight from the republic). (c. 1955).
• 3. I use this term collectively and with particular intent.  I have long since abandoned the quest to learn if the likes of Barney Frank actually believe the laws of supply and demand to be optional, or if they are merely power hungry charlatans who no more believe that rent control is a good idea than do economists, as the correct answer actually has no mitigating effect whatsoever on the damage wrought by their collective movement.

Comments

[hedgeless_horseman]

The six-pack Bubbas have a name for those underground facilities like Mount Weather, none of which are unknown to the locals.  They call them Meat Lockers.

Bureaucrat, it's what's for dinner (after TEOTWAWKI).

[Hulk]

You mean these Bubbas WW?

http://www.break.com/index/bulletproof-vest-test-goes-wrong.html

[velobabe]

i simply can not watch things like that. violent porn.

[Hulk]

I was trying to illustrate the stupidity Velobabe! Not the violence.

Maybe they will test out on a watermelon next time, but probably not!

[velobabe]

now you can appreciate how tough life really is for my small brain.

sorry.

[Mr Creosote]

My first thought was "Do they vote?"

[Ripped Chunk]

+ !!  Well done Husk

[P-K4]

Absolutely one of the best articles ever posted to a website in this galaxy !  Precise and eloquent, yet frightening. A wake up call to all. C'est magnifique !

[Alexandra Hamilton]

This manner of government is not driven by overt collectivism and the blatant, state-enforced social subjugation that characterizes communism.

Neither can it be sketched as the consenting construction of broad and broadly parasitic labor pools and growth retarding redistribution schemes that make up the key tenants of socialism.

The trouble is that words have definitions and they do not correspond with your characterisation at all. You may be refering to Stalinism or Maosim - not to Socialism or Communism, at least not to any definition I would be aware of - a closer more careful look would reveal that neither Socialism nor Communism was implemented in any of these states - for a simple reason: Both need a democracy as its base. What was practised in both cases was some kind of authoritarian regime (which is foreign to both socialism or communism) in which a tiny elite controlled all means of production, distribution, exchange of communication (which is also foreign to both socialism and communism).

The only reason why you would not call this State Capitalism, is because they had no legal title to claim this as their own private property. Formally, the party elite controlled it. In due time, it will morph into Fascism. The reason is simple: Capitalism rests on the concept of 'survival of the fittest', or on social darwinisim. Once it fully controls the institutions, it will show its true face. However, you might not notice - the same way as many Germans did not notice what they were dealing with - it was simply very difficult to find out the truth because of the propaganda. It works the same way today as it did in Germany from 1933 to 1945.

[Mercury]

If utopia is achieved it's called communism or socialism if not it's called something else - we got it already.  Please, enough.

I think most of us have probably sat around on plenty of beer stained university couches with the Che-shirt crowd and beat this subject to death by now. The point is all nominally Marxist/communist states become living hells so this kind of semantic hair-splitting is just so much mental masturbation.

There is no vegetarian version of communism and there never will be.

[Temporalist]

I'd say you are mostly right Merc.

They may start vegan but ultimately end up cannibalistic.

[Marla And Me]

Alexandra, the Utopia necessary for socialism or communism to work is no different than the Utopia required for true free markets to function.  Human nature will ensure that none of these systems ever come to fruition.

[tip e. canoe]

certainly as long as Farcism rears its ugly head

marx was right bout this though:

"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce. "

[i.knoknot]

m and m, you nailed it.

any system that denies the opportunistic nature of animals, is doomed from its inception. capitalism works fine at the swap-meet. clearly not on wall-st. to many ways for the vendors to obscure the truth of the product and the truth of the natural price.

communism works in the family household, but has never really worked anywhere there are more than 10 people involved. the arbiter of 'fair distribution' usually has the keys to the pantry and is usually more portly (given the importance of his responsibility, etc.).

when the government has designs to protect me from my neighbor, i'm quite certain that it won't be able to afford that promise, so i must always be in a position to protect myself from any threat - by myself - so that the government need not take on that burden. that it makes the promise at all that indicates its folly as a viable entity.

and i will gladly pay for my police, my fire, my army (on demand, per conflict), my roads, my water, my electricity - as i use them.

and i will gladly assume that if i don't pay for these things, that i have no right to the benefits (direct or indirect) of them.

when will i be allowed to disengage from those elements i do not support?

slightly simplistic, but much like Dr. Paul, if we're going to make mistakes, these would be much less damaging mistakes to move toward.

[tip e. canoe]

you were on fire today i.kno.  

"when will i be allowed to disengage from those elements i do not support?"

an interesting question in the abstract, but how will this work practically?   does society break down as most people are always looking out in their supposed 'self-interest'?  is the answer privatizing everything, including the fire dept?  if so, what would be the medium of exchange?  is it monopoly money aka the U$?

how could a community who chooses "capitalism" integrate/exchange/trade with a community that chooses "communism"?

not trying to bait you...actually agree with you on this.   just trying to stimulate some thought.

also think that decentralization vs. centralization would be well worthy of a discussion in and of itself.

[i.knoknot]

your questions bely the simplistic nature/theme of my post. you are right that it isn't simple. but i think the idea should still be perpetuated.

it can probably only work in smaller communities, where everybody can sort of 'see' everybody.

i'm not sure that the underlying lesson we *aren't* learning here is that humans don't scale very well...

if nothing else, i wish the more 'practical' policies were always designed with the premise of being able to disengage wherever possible - as an integral part of the policy-making process. right now it's not even seen as of value.

so - we disengage where we can, and write letters to keep the idea alive.

[tip e. canoe]

"i'm not sure that the underlying lesson we *aren't* learning here is that humans don't scale very well..."

acute observation amigo.   maybe we can, but only virtually (since we can always turn it off at our leisure).

"the premise of being able to disengage wherever possible"   Steinbeck's 'timshel' : thou mayest.   it's always there i.kno, even now.  it's just buried under layers and layers of manipulation.   even those who have suffered through enormous amounts of persecution at the hands of others have had a choice.  we should be grateful that we still have the luxury to choose between circumstances that aren't quite so dire as what they faced.

thanks for responding.   i like these conversations that take more than 24 hours to develop.

[Attitude_Check]

The proper term is Marxist-Lenninism.  Lennin put the cloak of Marxist Communism over a mailed fist of Fascism, and hijacked the very concept of Communism.  The reality is that he was successfull and the present meaning of communism is Lenninism, not to be confused with Marxism.

[Pegasus Muse]

Marla --

You are so smart it hurts my head. 

Farscism -- love it! I promise to use it daily.

Thanks.

[Comrade de Chaos]

Brilliant. 

While we were asleep and content with the comfort in our lives, free market has left. This is so true. Eventually, the free market will be back. It might take ten years, it might take seventy years, however nothing in the end can stop the best invention of humanity up to the current level of development. 

The real question is, WHAT do we do to make the free market come back faster?

It is untrue that the Soviet Union did not have wealthy people. Ninety nine percent were poor but one percent was relatively wealthy. That one percent had one thing in common, the connection to the PARTY FEEDER.

Now do we want our American dream of "given enough hard work, some talent and some luck, one can become successful" to turn into "given one has a connection to the party feeder", one can become successful?

Time is running short and there is only one reasonable solution. The solution is  to increase competition within the political arena. The current state of politics in our country has been MONOPOLIZED. That's right kids, only monopolies stay away from the innovation and make the same stupid unambiguous decisions. 

So how could we increase the competition in politics? We should stop voting for any main party candidates whatsoever. If you do not see an independent or third party candidate on the "voters list" do not vote. Doing so will create an INCENTIVE for other none affiliated candidates to run for the office and thus will increase competition in politics.

And remember, no one will force the real meaningful change and direction for our country to be going in the direction foretold by the founding fathers but YOU!

[mezcal]

Thank you, Marla. Just exemplary.

Or, in more Zeroeque terms, "TRUTH, bitches."

[Trifecta Man]

One day when the US goes into hyperinflation mode, the problems will get addressed.  Before then, the US government will issue some restraint to prevent the revolution.  There's a limit to the number of people they can afford to enprison, and if they ever get to the point that the government start shootings at us as the alternative, then terrorism would become a response.  The politicians will likely not choose to provoke that.  Hence I think the action that must eventually occur will be when the current system can no longer handle the hyperinflating currency.

[Apostate]

Trifecta, the prisons are already being emptied. There is no Batman, but they'll certainly look for one.

They will reap what they sow, and it's just our job to survive and prepare for the rebuilding. 

[Henry Chinaski]

"fraud that would send anyone in the private sector to jail"
Marla Singer 5/14/10

"For example, why is fraud criminalized when applied to the private sector, but praised as compassion when practiced by the federal government and liberal politicians?"
Rush Limbaugh 4/8/10

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_040810/content/01125109.gues...

[chumbawamba]

So, is it OK to start talking about hanging the politicians and bankers from lamp posts yet?

I am Chumbawamba.

[Henry Chinaski]

DEFENESTRATE THEM!

Nawww... that won't happen.

My money is on Barabas freed and Jesus crucified.

[WaterWings]

+1

Barney Fwank, washing his hands.

[Marvin_M]

Sensational Marla!  I marvel at your clarity and ability to sum up complex issues in a word or phrase.  What better word could be coined to describe the evil joke that is the US and World Governments than "Farscism".  Simply astonishing...

[glenlloyd]

Absolutely brilliant. I wait for the days when you post, the clarity is so spot on!

[chumbawamba]

Farcism: http://wethefree.blogspot.com/2009/11/farcism.html

I am Chumbawamba.

[Species8472]

Regards "401(k) plans or IRAs might be the targets of sovereigns in the Final Chase scene."

No need to tax directly, a VAT will collect the $ when it is spent. Also, expect ROTH withdrawals to be used in calculating how much Social Security is subject to tax.

[Pat Shuff]

In 1990 a dollar equals $1.67 in 2010.

In the span of a decade a third disappears

into institutionalized 'price stability' policy magically

compounded at an annualized 2% 'no inflation.'

Nontaxable is oxymoronically to account as jumbo is to shrimp.

Retirement contents may settle during shipping.

Whizzing in one's Wheaties makes no one IRAte

because what isn't known doesn't hurt. 

The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to get

 the most feathers with the least hissing , the only hissing

is the air going out.

[Ruth]

Thanks is not enough for the insight into your mind's eye, for in brief moments such as this we see a glimpse that educates and enlightens us to face and call out the realities our mind's eye might see but surely at times screams and tries to repress.  Thank you for opening us up to a world of Farscism like only you can explain so brilliantly and precise.   WAKE UP AMERICA, WAKE UP WORLD, TRUTH IS CALLING YOU OUT IN THE OPEN!  We love you Marla, take care, we can't imagine a world without the influence of your passions.  Thank You and the entire ZeroHedge Team & Community.

[Bitch Tits]

"Even a Republican sweep is highly unlikely to bring out the required change."

Surely you jest, Marla. As if the Republican contingent of this fraudulent government is any more responsible or accountable than the Democratic? Please don't make me laugh. Republicans are worse, because they pretend to be for small government, even while they increase it exponentially themselves. It isn't a matter of what meaningless emblem they paste on their name tag, but rather, a culture of abuse by both parties. 

Our job is to get them ALL out of power. Break up the Crony Cabal.

[Gully Foyle]

Only to be replaced by the next cabal.

This isn't the Paris Commune.

[crzyhun]

P/o to read later in depth. Thanks and good to hear from you again.

[BlackBeard]

So....what keeps you up at night Marla?

[Rusty_Shackleford]

"As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And, it is in such twilight that we all must be aware of change in the air however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."

Justice William O. Douglas

[Mr Lennon Hendrix]

It does not get any better than "Silver Curtain".

[Invisible Hand]

Great article.  Several things that made me think, several things that made me sad.

No solutions, but I think everyone knows the solution, we just shrink from acknowledging it because it means the end of our lives (in some cases) and certainly the end of our comfort. 

"We pledge our future, our fortunes and our very lives to this venture!" (creation of US of A)

John Adams (I think, or maybe I just made it up)  Even if he didn't say it, he lived it.  How many of us have the guts to do the same? Too few, I fear, but mankind sometimes surprises.

[Gully Foyle]

Someone said, Institutions are attacked by radicals which in turn become instutions attacked by radicals.

It is a no win situation.

Except by NOT playing the game. Like

http://www.details.com/culture-trends/career-and-money/200907/meet-the-m...

Meet the Man Who Lives on Zero Dollars In Utah, a modern-day caveman has lived for the better part of a decade on zero dollars a day. People used to think he was crazy

[Mr Creosote]

Thanks for the interesting link.

[tip e. canoe]

now we're talkin

[piceridu]

Ayn Rand couldn't say this any better!

Superb writing!

[Gully Foyle]

Maybe someone can answer this, what next? If you are dissatisfied with government, and you change it, what do you change it to? What solutions are there? How are opportunists kept from power? How are the smart predators kept in check by the mediocre proles?

Throw them out is fine, but throw them out for what?

I'm not seeing any type of win scenario on the horizon. One isn't even being offered. Everyone wants change but winds doing the same old same old.

I'm fairly certain that the Utopia one person carries in his head is not the same for the guy next to him. And much like the rumor game that individual utopia becomes radically different the further away we become from our comfort zone of support.

Even if we had a total collpase tommorrow and a total rebuild the same pressures would exist. The same personalities would dominate. The same system would rise once again.

Are there any realistic methods to end the viscious cycle?

[i.knoknot]

GF,

anyone who doesn't answer those questions is in denial of the problem, eh? an organism's first and primary responsibility is to maintain its existence and growth at the expense of any/all of it's remaining obligations. witness governments from this perspective.

one of the most novel and distinguishing elements of the constitution and early US government was the number of direct rules designed to do nothing more than limit the government's size and breadth - relative to the states and the citizens.

these limitations are pretty inconvenient to the government, so they have slowly and methodically removed those limitations through a morphing behavior, rather than overtly rescinding them.

this is where we have lost the battle.

my answer to you is to support the design of the intended original US government, and add even more fail-safes to the growth of that cancerous beast called the government.

and we can begin that effort when pigs fly.

[Husk-Erzulie]

Pretty good summation there.  I don't think that last sentence is a productive starting point though (LOL).  Seriously, I believe that most of the founders had a pretty clear idea what they were trying to achieve and it worked for awhile.  Ultimately they failed however, perhaps by underestimating the true power and the slow corrosive growth of tyranny (like rust in a steel fish boat, you  never really get rid of it, you just resign yourself to constant maintainance).  We do need to get back to first principles, put ourselves in the founders shoes and take another crack at creating a sound footing for government by and for the people.  Read self government.  This is what I would bring to the table:  A federal government has only two legitimate roles.  First is to create and maintain a sound currency (not via central banking obviously) so that goods and services can move freely through and across the economy.  Second is to provide a clear, simple, non retributive system of law aimed at resolving disputes, allowing contracts to be honored and keeping the peace.  That's it.  No standing army, no alphabet soup of federal police agencies/quasi fiefdoms.  No intelligence gathering and drug running.  No international plotting and manuvering.  No top down mandates.  Strict, strict limitations on growth of bureaucracy.  Maximum emphasis on personal and economic freedom. 

What choice do we have really?  I mean pure anarchy might work, but could it maintain an efficient economy?  We're going to have to come up with some way forward, that or just give up so we might as well start talking about what that might look like.  One thing for sure; Barney, Nancy, Barrack, Hillary, Newt, Arnold, Sarah, Ben and all the rest of those goddamn jokers sure aren't going to do it for us.  (Forgot my personal most despised joker...Smilin' Joe Lieberman...)  Nothing to lose by having the conversation...

[i.knoknot]

if you ever see this, i agree completely with your described role of government.

basically help folks insure that their contracts are honored and that they don't hit each other...

even grouping together to build/maintain infrastructure could be done within this framework using usage-based fees to maintain then, once built. no use, no fee. etc.

your post is/was great.

re: the last sentence - i actually meant to be less pessimistic and offer more of a 'no false promises' sensibility. kind of flip. must have been my mood.

[NoDragons]

Look to Noah Webster's "Examination of the Leading Principles
of the Federal Constitution, 1787". 

"Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command: for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. In spite of all the nominal powers, vested in Congress by the constitution, were the system once adopted in its fullest latitude, still the actual exercise of them would be frequently interrupted by popular jealousy. I am bold to say, that ten just and constitutional measures would be resisted, where one unjust or oppressive law would be enforced. The powers vested in Congress are little more than nominal; nay real power cannot be vested in them, nor in any body, but in the people. The source of power is in the people of this country, and cannot for ages, and probably never will, be removed."

Uh, wait!  Reading this makes me wonder how in the hell we got here.  It certainly clarifies the need to do something about the 2nd though, doesn't it.

[Paul Bogdanich]

It's a fairly well crafted propaganda piece from someone who was trained in the art at one of the better universities.  It's main purpose seems to be to obfuscate the fact that the phenomena is cross administration and consistent over long periods of time.  Like one of the posters said "They work through the government."  They are not the government.  The piece tries to obfuscate this fact and provide a rudimentary answer for the feeble minded. 

[Uncle Remus]

Actually, the piece is cleverly written to appear as obfuscation and rudimentary to the feeble minded. Or even arbitrary or conspiratorial. But probably not apologist.

[halvord]

Thank you. EP/FR/MS generally has more fizz than body; in earlier times she did some excellent work. Lately it's been lower grade with periodic Fox News-isms popping out. 

It is a populist piece. Populists think that the system is OK, but those at the top are evil. Fight Club was partly about the upper-middle-class manipulating the proles to action. ZH has a more than a whiff of this Eloi-populisting-the-Morlocks scam.

[kaiserhoff]

Well done Marla,

You understand the sweep of history.  Better yet, you have your priorities right.

Now about Tyler's hair...

[kwvrad]

Marla, this has to be one of the finest writings of the decade, this deserves

space in all media as well as libraries, this article will be looked

at in future decades as a masterpiece, as well as those who read it in the future

will wonder why the hell people didnot heed the warnings this documents provided.

Thankyou for sharing such a work of art.

[Mercury]

<oops, fat finger!>

[Zam-Man]

Bravo!

This should be pinned, not just for today, but forever.

[Mr Creosote]

I wonder if HB has any "Farcism" shirts available yet? They'd fly off the shelves.

[tip e. canoe]

especially with an image of Mr. Creasote on them as well.

on the back :

"Better.  Better get me a bucket..."

[cheap uggs for sale]

It’s a interesting news,i like it.Additionally,wellcome to my website prettyboots.org ,here are so many UGGS On Sale such as:UGG Elsey wedge|UGG Elsey wedge black|UGG Elsey wedge chestnut|UGG Elsey wedge espresso|UGG Langley|UGG Langley black|UGG Langley chestnut|UGG Lo Pro Button|UGG Lo Pro Button black|UGG Lo Pro Button blue|UGG Lo Pro Button cream|UGG Mayfaire|UGG Mayfaire black|UGG Mayfaire chestnut|UGG Mayfaire chocolate|UGG Mayfaire sand|UGG Mayfaire red|UGG Nightfall|UGG Nightfall black|UGG Nightfall chestnut|UGG Nightfall chocolate|UGG Nightfall sand|UGG Sundance II|UGG Sundance II black|UGG Sundance II chestnut|UGG Sundance II chocolate|UGG Sundance II sand|UGG Ultimate Bind|UGG Ultimate Bind black|UGG Ultimate Bind chestnut|UGG Ultimate Bind chocolate|UGG Ultimate Bind sand|UGG Ultra Short|UGG Ultra Short chocolate|UGG Ultra Short sand|UGG Ultra Short black|UGG Ultra Tall|UGG Ultra Tall chestnut|UGG Ultra Tall sand|UGG Ultra Tall balck|UGG Ultra Tall chocolate|UGG Suede|UGG Suede black|UGG Suede chestnut|UGG Suede sand|UGG upside|UGG upside black|UGG upside chestnut|UGG upside mocha|UGG Roxy Tall|UGG Roxy Tall black|UGG Roxy Tall chestnut|UGG Roxy Tall chocolate|UGG Roxy Tall sand|UGG seline|UGG seline black|UGG seline chestnut|UGG Corinth Boots|UGG Liberty|UGG Liberty black|UGG Liberty cigar|UGG Highkoo|UGG Highkoo amber brown|UGG Highkoo espresso|UGG Highkoo grey|UGG Highkoo black|UGG Knightsbridge|UGG Knightsbridge black|UGG Knightsbridge chestnut|UGG Knightsbridge grey|UGG Knightsbridge sand|UGG Knightsbridge chocolate|UGG Adirondack|UGG Adirondack brown|UGG Adirondack chocolate|UGG Suburb Crochet|UGG Suburb Crochet black|UGG Suburb Crochet chestnut|UGG Suburb Crochet chocolate|UGG Suburb Crochet grey|UGG Suburb Crochet white|UGG Kensington|UGG Kensington black|UGG Kensington chestnut|UGG Roseberry|UGG Roseberry black|UGG Roseberry sand|UGG Gaviota|UGG Gaviota black|UGG Gaviota chestnut|UGG Gaviota chocolate|UGG Desoto|UGG Desoto black|UGG Desoto chestnut|UGG Desoto chocolate|UGG Brookfield Tall|UGG Brookfield Tall black|UGG Brookfield Tall chocolate|UGG Gissella|UGG Gissella black|UGG Gissella chestnut|UGG Gissella espresso|UGG Payton|UGG Payton black|UGG Payton chestnut|UGG Payton red|UGG Bailey Button Triplet|UGG Bailey Button Triplet black|UGG Bailey Button Triplet chestnut|UGG Bailey Button Triplet chocolate|UGG Bailey Button Triplet grey|UGG Bailey Button Triplet sand|There are so much style of cheap uggs for sale ,so once you go to my website you will be very surprise.

[meichou]

ugg boots london I saw something shocking uggs london on my way to work the other day. uggs new york While bundled in a long sleeved shirt, wool sweater and coat, with a Pashmina, hat and gloves,ugg boots london sale I saw a man with his bike a the bus stop in SANDALS. He wasn’t overly well dressed for cold weather, in jeans, t-shirt and open jacket. Now, having lived in Oregon for the past decade I have come to be aware of what “true Oregonians” consider winter attire. ugg boots london shop This primarily consists of the inbred belief that flip-flops are a necessity year round, and sweaters and umbrellas are for tourists. I do not uphold this belief.ugg boots sale london I love getting dressed up for winter, layering on leggings with my sweater dress and ugg boots new york, a sweater and a jacket, and a rotating army of scarves, hats and gloves.ugg boots london stockists I don’t enjoy being frozen, especially knowing how easy a situation that is to avoid. uggs new york sale So personally, buy ugg boots london I do not consider myself a “true Oregonian.” I like umbrellas, and only wear flip flops when it’s above 75 degrees.Based on the population of Oregon, ugg new york I’m probably in the minority. Although I have come to accept that these people are just immune to cold in a way I am not, uggs new york of sale I do still think they are crazy. I’m guessing that the good folks at UGG Australia caught wind of these people because look at what they have to offer: sandals with fleece!uggs new york on sale