This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

"We The People"

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Mark J. Grant, author of Out of the Box,

“We the People”
Glorious words in many ways. They begin the preamble to the United States Constitution as America threw off the chains of tyranny and became a country. How much has been gained, how must lost, since those times when the citizens were dedicated to a common cause. The road has been long, no end in sight, and I rejoice in the continuation if sometimes not in a moment’s chosen path.
However it must be said that Americans are not the only “We the People” country on the planet. This declaration is to be found in democracies everywhere and should be cherished and praised as citizens of each nation get to make the choices appended to self-determination. The desires of the governed must always rule those who are governing and when the leadership fails in that recognition they should be replaced. When political leaders do not listen to the voice of their citizens they will be voted out if not tossed out. The United States, cast in stone some two hundred and thirty seven years since its founding, was not always such a safe bet. We have erred and lurched and struggled with our principles but still here, still beating the drum, still on our own two feet.
Recently one of the German politicians referenced two of the Italian largest vote getters as “clowns.” I reject the comment and I admonish Peer Steinbrueck for his inadequacy. What higher moral ground does he claim that supersedes the voice of the Italian people and I say, “None sir, and that you should be ashamed of yourself.”
I point all of this out this morning because there is change afoot on the Continent and to not take note of it may well be an expensive mistake. Business of late, business as usual, may not be the business of tomorrow as the citizens of various countries, not in open revolt or not in the streets, are beginning to wave a different banner and it is decidedly nationalistic and a potential new definition of just whom “We the People” are; in fact.
Recently, in poll after poll, the citizens of Germany, Britain and other countries in Europe are gathering around their own flags and seemingly rejecting the imposed commonality. I do not ignore the will of the people and when the politicians of various nations ignore their will then they may be replaced, not by rifles in the streets, but by peaceful votes in elections. The incessant pressures of either paying for the lifestyles of people in other nations or the demands of austerity for accepting foreign capital are driving sharp wedges in the grand scheme of Union in Europe.
I would not underestimate what is happening in Italy. It is a rejection, in my opinion, of not just corrupt practices in their own country but of having others govern them. It is a squared stance, I believe, staring directly at Brussels and Berlin telling them to mind their own business and to stop telling the Italians how to run their own country. I am not without sympathy for this position I assure you.
We have had the Arab Spring and perhaps the Italian Spring will be the wildcard of this year. When people discuss the imposed austerity measures and leave the discussion there they have not gone far enough in their thinking. I would say that the Italians, the Greeks, the Portuguese, the Spaniards do not wish to be German and may be getting tired of being told what to do by them while the British and the Dutch and others are having their patience worn thin by the demands out of Brussels and Berlin for their money. Even in Germany, as demonstrated by a recent poll, the people are getting tired of supporting other nations financially so as to exercise control. The grass grows thin upon the Continent.
The pledge of Mr. Draghi, always conditional upon the support of the European Union, may get diminished further if the nations of that Union do not give him support. Since all of the yields of European sovereign debt rely upon this promise then much could be lost if the promise cannot be kept. Southern Europe and Northern Europe may not be separated by an ocean but they are fathoms apart in tradition and mindset. Rome, whatever her inherent difficulties, has the capacity of leadership and just because there is a power vacuum for the moment in the Vatican and in their Parliament does not mean that they will not both be filled and perhaps with surprising results. The politicians of Europe may be ignoring Italy and the world’s investors are certainly ignoring Italy for the moment but the people of various nations, in my estimation, are not.
“We the People” may be in for a definitional change. The spark of the Italian elections may be the kindling for a much larger fire. I would not ignore the burning smell that is wafting through the air and I would not ignore the consequences of it.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:30 | 3321892 Mercury
Mercury's picture

Recently, in poll after poll, the citizens of Germany, Britain and other countries in Europe are gathering around their own flags and seemingly rejecting the imposed commonality.

This isn't supposed to happen. Remember, "multi-culturalism" and "identity" are good but nationalism is bad.
Get with the program people.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:32 | 3321906 Terminus C
Terminus C's picture

The problem is that all of those "isms" become religion and people put blind faith into whichever "ism" they are following without critical thought.  Each and every "movement" is headed by oligarchs or oligarch wannabes who foster this religious zeitgeist surrounding their "ism".

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:35 | 3321921 Shizzmoney
Shizzmoney's picture

TPTB have used these "isms" to control the means of production, currency control, and law for over 2000+ years. 

I think it is slowly ending, because the biggest producer of isms, religion, is dying (because ppl are starting to slowly realize its all bullshit, used to control the masses from thinking critically, to divide people against one anohter over stupid differences).

The only "ism" I acknowledge is "Assholism" - which is what we live under today.

P.S. "We The People" died a long time ago........because the "we" in the Constitution don't include us no more, thats for sure.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:44 | 3321950 GetZeeGold
GetZeeGold's picture



"We The People" died a long time ago


John McCain did his part on the Senate floor the other day when instead of referring to the Gentleman from Kentucky.....he just referred to that wacko asshole Rand Paul.


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:53 | 3321972 kill switch
kill switch's picture

John McAsshole is irrelevant.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:04 | 3322008 Stoploss
Stoploss's picture

Also a short timer.

The last ride.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:19 | 3322056 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

One would hope, but that stodgy little fuck keeps getting back into office.  I assume it's the "asshole you know" syndrom that keeps playing out.  Sherrod "I voted for TARP" Brown here is Ohio gets to enjoy his seat because of the same disease here. 

"Everyone in Congress needs to be replaced, except for my asshole here" is the battle cry of the serfs.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:35 | 3322108 SWRichmond
SWRichmond's picture

Praise for "democracy"?  Democracy is two wolves and one sheep "voting" on what to have for dinner.

Mr. Chairman, I am much obliged to the very worthy gentleman for his encomium. I wish I was possessed with talents, or possessed of any thing that might enable me to elucidate this great subject. I am not free from suspicion: I am apt to entertain doubts. I rose yesterday to ask a question which arose in my own mind. When I asked that question, I thought the meaning of my interrogation was obvious. The fate of this question and of America may depend on this. Have they said, We, the states? Have they made a proposal of a compact between states? If they had, this would be a confederation. It is otherwise most clearly a consolidated government. The question turns, sir, on that poor little thing — the expression, We, the people, instead of the states, of America. I need not take much pains to show that the principles of this system are extremely pernicious, impolitic, and dangerous. Here is a revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain. It is radical in this transition; our rights and privileges are endangered, and the sovereignty of the states will be relinquished: and cannot we plainly see that this is actually the case?


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:54 | 3322341 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

I don't think that quote alludes to what you think it does, but indeed, "We the People" is associated with republics, not democracies.


I am Chumbawamba.

Wed, 03/13/2013 - 08:38 | 3325415 SWRichmond
SWRichmond's picture

Read the entire body of Henry's speeches at the Virginia Ratification Debates and see if you feel you can make the assertion "I don't think that quote alludes to what you think it does" again.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:18 | 3322052 philipat
philipat's picture

And if what is happening in The US is the kind of freedom he spent his life fighting for.....He wasted his life.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:21 | 3322062 GetZeeGold
GetZeeGold's picture



The dark side of progressive socialism is very seductive. Even more so if you're a Republican....cause they have most of the money.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:16 | 3322232 Cloud9.5
Cloud9.5's picture

Neither party is the party of the little man both are dominated by super rich.  Both sides write themselves out of the tax code while preying on the middle class.  Projection is a common ploy.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:57 | 3322352 Anasteus
Anasteus's picture

"We The Sheeple"

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:49 | 3321952 CH1
CH1's picture

the biggest producer of isms, religion, is dying

Your first statement, that religion produces isms, is a bit backwards:

Wannabe rulers create isms. Established rulers use religions as tools of legitimacy. So, it should be the one who initiates the crime (the state) who gets more of the blame.

Secondly, religions - or rather, belief - will not go away. There are reasons to believe in a creator.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:45 | 3321954 SafelyGraze
SafelyGraze's picture

lost me at "We have had the Arab Spring "

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:13 | 3322033 petolo
petolo's picture

Assholism and Alcoholism .

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:19 | 3322059 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

Everyone is an asshole when I don't drink.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:50 | 3321966 Blazed
Blazed's picture

The multi-cult is good for perpetual conflict, antagonism and destruction of heritage and racial/ethnic identity. Let's see how effective and efficient East Asian countries will be if they ever let in a flood of third world populations. Even worse if they destroy their unique group genteic attributes through miscegenation with these other populations groups. Ta-ta.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:03 | 3322006 Stoploss
Stoploss's picture

Funny how morals are always sacrificed at the alter of " multi-culturalism "

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:06 | 3322013 Salah
Salah's picture

What is happening.....happened during the "Age of Revolution"...Pluto's now moved into Capricorn (last there 1762-63).  Aided and abetted by Uranus now in Aries: i.e. "action! action! action! or war! war! war!"--take your pick and last there 1927, and Neptune in Pisces (1848); i.e. mass propaganda, social communes, woozy new religions (i.e. LDS), "rock-oil" discoveries, and "large-scale sorrows & misery".

The elite, who've been stockpiling weapons, ammo, and the like to keep control during this period, are yet again going to answer that question, "what's killed the most people the last 200 years?"....with the correct answer: government.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:28 | 3321897 digalert
digalert's picture

"we don’t want that flag, we don’t want the anthem, we don’t want this political class, we want the whole thing confined to the dustbin of history"

Nigel Farage

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:28 | 3321899 rsnoble
rsnoble's picture

And to think our current civilization is unlike the rest in history where there's always been a crazy group of motherfuckers trying to fuck everyone over?  Only difference this time there won't be future generations. Ever.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:21 | 3321904 philipat
philipat's picture

I think it's just that Europeans don't want a Ünited States of Europe, want to retainn their National sovereignty and don't want to be told what to do by unelected bureaucrats and technocrats in Brussels and Frankfurt. In fact, it's an awakening of democracy.

Just like Nigel Farage has been telling his "Friends"in Bussels for a long time.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:31 | 3321905 max2205
max2205's picture

More like hiding behind their flag.  

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:33 | 3321911 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

"They begin the preamble to the United States Constitution as America threw off the chains of tyranny and became a country."

1789 - 1776 = 23

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:35 | 3321914 philipat
philipat's picture

And now reversing it??

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:35 | 3321918 espirit
espirit's picture

"I would not ignore the burning smell that is wafting through the air and I would not ignore the consequences of it."

Sort of the same meme George Washington was aspiring to in his blog on Fukushima.

Endgame near. 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:35 | 3321919 El
El's picture

What if the will of the people (or rather, of the majority of the people) leans towards socialism? What then, Mr. Grant?

It seems to me that the will of the people is fickle. Give me a good old constitutional republic over the will of the people any day.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:38 | 3321927 Shizzmoney
Shizzmoney's picture


What if the will of the people (or rather, of the majority of the people) leans towards socialism?

Actually, in Europe, the younger folk are leaning far right:

Under austerity, young Europeans turn to far right in unprecedented numbers:



Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:44 | 3321948 El
El's picture

I know :::sighs::: I did it again. I took the author's intent out of context in applying a particular phrase he wrote to America. It seems to me that we got where we are because of the will of the people.

Never mind me...I'm babbling. Carry on...


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:02 | 3322003 Azannoth
Azannoth's picture

Far-right in Europe = National Socialism

Far-left in Europe = Multiculti Socialism

Can you spot the difference ?

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 12:27 | 3322742 GeezerGeek
GeezerGeek's picture

 The linked article states that many (Greece, Hungary) youth are turning toward neo-fascist parties. Despite what the progressive/communist apologists say, fascism entails big government. Big government is not 'right wing'. If it were, we would have international socialism on one end (left) and national socialism on the other (right), leaving nowhere for advocates of small/limited government.

That anyone, anywhere should be leaning toward any form of fascism is frightening. 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:08 | 3322023 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

The will of the people may be fickle, but the will of the State and those that wield it is not. The will of the State must be re-imagined without the threat of coercion and violence done to the people. Constitutions are no barrier to tyranny. 

Citizen sovereignty must ALWAYS outweigh the demands of the State. Violence is abhorrent in all its' forms, but when practiced against community whose trust was placed for the benefit of all is particularly repugnant. 

While the requirements of a State are few, the ambitions of a State are without limit. We are The People, not The State. Any system that disallows private property, steals labor and wealth, practices law based on status and retains the right to kill its' people without trial is nothing more than systematic slavery. 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:41 | 3321936 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture

people should be allowed to pursue their own self interest and this can only happen with weak government structure. Down with tyranny. A government of and by the people is not compatible with DC, Brussels or any other leviathon. 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:04 | 3322007 Azannoth
Azannoth's picture

Exactly "We The People" just means a tyranny of the majority instead of this empty meaningless phrase I prefer to just say "I"

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:50 | 3322147 madcows
madcows's picture

"I heartily accept the motto, 'That government is best which governs least'; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe—'That government is best which governs not at all'; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it."

Henry David Thoreau - Civil Disobedience

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:45 | 3321957 madcows
madcows's picture

Is it really "We the People" if elections are bought or sold by the highest bidder?

In America it's "Us the Rulers".  The People are just the grist for the mill.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:05 | 3321987 Widowmaker
Widowmaker's picture

Fascist tyranny is already pervasive, "We the Incorporated."

All the money, all the protections, none of the rules.

Sandy Hook will look like a massage parlor as Fascist-Bernanke keeps stacking the social-dynamite with eyes wide shut.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:20 | 3322243 BobPaulson
BobPaulson's picture

Facsism is corporatism. It is an ism invented to seem populist, while maintaining the control by the old families, churches and banks. Even the revolutions of the 18th century were mostly window dressing. The sooner one accepts this and plans accordingly, the quicker you can focus on avoiding its ill effects.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 08:58 | 3321991 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture


Federal style governments should have no more power to regulate their states than the states should have to regulate what we do in our bedrooms. The EU or DC should only be regulating what happens between states, not within them. All government powers tend to grow and encroach upon the rights of their citizens and require a constant pushback of resistance. We have failed in America just as the Europeans have. It may be too late to reverse this as those dependent on government directed redistribution are overwhelming the willing producers. I fear anyone who stands up and tries to take away their donuts will be destroyed. Likely we will have to wait until all the donuts are gone before reforms can take place. Lots of mayhem is coming up as we face the Great Reconciliation.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:15 | 3322044 Seasmoke
Seasmoke's picture

There is a reason the lions and the zebras do not hang out together. Follow Nature.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:18 | 3322057 pods
pods's picture

If people were to ever grasp that We the People are what gave the government authority it would go a long way.

Most see The State as the ultimate authority.  And with the 14th amendment, who the hell really knows.  Information about the People vs citizen argument is very difficult to decipher.

Then you have oxymoronic sayings like "sovereign citizen" to further muddy the waters.

So the easiest way to restore individual liberty is to place that small seed in enough people's heads.

If the government is the highest authority, where did it come from?  The People?  

A long uphill battle though.  And as things get worse, more will look towards The State for security, and liberty will recede further into the recesses of their minds.


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:27 | 3322081 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture

For far too many today, the thought of freedom and liberty is almost the same as being naked and pennyless in the street. They have no, zero comprehension of self reliance.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:51 | 3322099 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

a : one possessing or held to possess supreme political power or sovereignty 

b : one that exercises supreme authority within a limitedsphere

As citizens, what is oxymoronic about this definition? What is the value of any State based on The People, if the people do not retain supreme authority within a limited sphere ( in regards to each other citizen and the State)?


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:01 | 3322178 pods
pods's picture

Here is the issue with citizen:

an inhabitant of a city or town; especially : one entitled to the rights and privileges of a freeman

A right is something you are born with.  You ask no one to exercise it.

A privilege is bestowed upon you.  If I can bestow privilege upon you, I am above you.  You are not sovereign.

It is the same issue with needing a permit, or permission to exercise a right.

The line between right and privilege has been erased.

I use this question to illustrate my point, it is simple and works on almost everyone:

Do you have a right to vote?

They always answer yes.  Voting is not a right.  If there was no state, there would be no voting.


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:34 | 3322297 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Your view of a citizen is self serving. The Constitution defines a citizen as a natural born inhabitant of a State, sovereign in his relationship towards the federal government. As a citizen, I have rights, inalieanable rights that are mine by contract and the laws of nature. The State can tell you it is bestowing a privledge upon you, but until you accept it, there is no quid pro quo. This is basic common law, which governs the Constitution. 

I haven't the "right" to vote, because it is not a right, it is a process that defines the contract between the citizen and the State. Your inability to make this distinction fails to result in the title "sovereign citizen" being oxymoronic. 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 13:02 | 3322869 pods
pods's picture

No, the oxymoronic aspect is that the term "citizen" has now morphed into something entirely different than before.  With the passing of the 14th amendment, citizen has taken on a new definition, one, if my reading is correct, makes the "citizen" a subject of the state.  Thus removing sovereignty.


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 13:53 | 3323049 falak pema
falak pema's picture

in any system the citizen has inalienable rights but corresponding responsibilities to nOT contravene laws that protect the same for others; aka he has constraints. In our current complex advance economy systems these responsibilities are increasingly mutliple; social, economic and ecological etc..

The libertarians turn a blind eye to this aspect of society; we dont live in a vacuum like the original pioneers. We have to comply to this. The level of complexity and the need for simplification of bureaucratic systems that organise them, is and stays an ongoing functional problem in society; that is legislated on, executed on and eventually litigated on.

That in essence is what state function is about. And its relevance and scope should be controlled by the people.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 14:34 | 3323198 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

You might want to re-examine that concept in light of what the 14th amendment did and whether it applied to natural born citizens of a particular state or was created to resolve the status of slaves, which had been property prior to this amendment. The 14th amendment cannot contravene existing rights guaranteed in the Constitution. 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 16:09 | 3323645 pods
pods's picture

That is my understanding, but also if any benefits are derived from the implicit contract of the 14th amendment, you waive your natural rights in lieu of the privileges of being a 14th amendment citizen.

Which for most of us, would have been at birth without our knowledge or consent with the birth certificate.

A true free man would not be subject to the contractual obligations of the 14th amendment, but for most of us we were bound to that contract (albeit it an illegal contract) shortly after we were born.

While it is true that the 14th amendment cannot contravene natural rights, those rights may be unknowlingly waived by contract.

That was my whole point, that by being a "citizen" in terms of the 14th amendment, you have waived all your natural rights for the privileges afforded by the 14th amendment.


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 18:08 | 3324041 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Actually, you cannot be held to a contract entered into prior to ther age of eighteen. Nor can you be held to  a contract without knowledge or consent. The problem may arise if we use the birth certificate, but even then, if the state requires the document and you can show harm, again, it cannot be used against you.

After reading Mercier's piece at, I still have some questions and will be beginning a larger study of contract law to clear up a few difficulties I have, but I know where you're coming from. The whole idea you create a contract everytime there is quid pro quo is tenuous for me. We would be creating contracts all the time. Do the politicians enter into a contract relationship when we vote for them? If so, are they then required to work in our favor rather than others? Or at least to insure the Constitution is followed? 

Do we really have a choice if we are required to purchase insurance for a home? Can you realistically function without a bank account? The structure of modern America and commerce in general, would seem to invalidate some of the federal claims. I know where you're coming from and I'm trying to negotiate the same path, but it is difficult.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 20:13 | 3324372 pods
pods's picture

My research stated at per Chumba and a few others here.  Many have pointed to the UCC as being the binder.  

I would say that a contract that is entered into with one side withholding information is null and void (a fraud), but the layers are many.  Every time you are in a court for instance.  A simple pleading in district court can bind you to the rules of their corporate law.

As of late, I have become frustrated as there are too many pitfalls, and I simply do not have enough time.  Work, kids, wife, now gold panning (YEAH!) and I dont have the time for trying to negoitiate the maze.

I have also calculated that there is going to be an end to this system, as it cannot continue.  In times of duress and change is when you can free yourself from bondage.  So I refuse to go into debt and save in things that are outside of the system, and prepare for the next big offering from our benevolent government to turn down.

I would love to see in writing where these contracts remain valid and what we are contracting into.  Simply using legal tender could be construed as a contract. :(

Good luck, I think a few here (Chumba and a couple others, I think JDrose who left was another) are negoitiating the system.  

It is refreshing to hear these topics though!


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:37 | 3322073 falak pema
falak pema's picture

The premises of the upcoming fight between horizontal democracy construct and Oligarchy vertical control were laid in 1980 like poisoned ivy into the ground; when the neo liberal model was moulded on both sides of the pond; under dire conditions of feared "crash of 79", avoided by Volcker's dire medecine that stopped in its tracks the Keynesian model, subsequently heralding in the deregulated Friedman inspired Oligarchy model of RR/MG.

That is now irrefutable history of first world and it laid the bedrock of NWO and outsourcing model which has taken even further the disseminated financial pollution through global dilution of the "we the people" first world meme; obliging a factory worker in Detroit to compete with a guy from Shanghai and a textile worker in Lille with his 1$/hr counter part in Bengladesh. The economic model imposed in the name of free enterprise and "avoiding the road to serfdom in good ole USA n UK", has resulted in this very opposite economic dystopia, callously planned situation; albeit in "irrational exuberant hubris" fed on paternalistic ZIRP and FIRE economy streroid pump. Welcome to Lance Armstrong's iconic USAian model of Clintonian and Squid concoction!

That is the Oligarchy in all its splendour; now gone BEYOND the world matrix of Guns n OIL of the "Dear Henry" trilateral age of the 70s, into the UNITLATERAL NWO age of the 90s and 2000s; aka GWB and resulting Irak and 2008 mayhem; the downfall of middle america and the fulgurant, rampant, unashamed and loudly proclaimed rise of hyper oligarchy world order à la Davos sauce!

So now the chickens are coming home to roost and Mike Grant gets a wake up call, as push comes to dire shove in first world. As now its a mad race to the bottom, so may the devil take the hindmost as we all scramble for the life boats.

And the ONLY two solutions left to these OLigarchs is either to inflict more social pain to their 99% fellow countryment thru austerity below and solace above via Q-infinity or to go the whole hog down that old route of behind the curtain manipulation; in Sarajevo type play and resulting Armageddon.

How do these brilliant spokesmen of the media suddenly see the light when the battle is over and the horse has bolted from the barn yard???

"Thief, thief, thief" goes up the cry before the inevitable populist outcry turns to mutual slaughter...


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:38 | 3322118 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture

YOur unending cry for regulation is no different that so many today that cry for protection under every other government mantle. Yes we need basic laws and a level playing field, but history shows us that each additional layer of law and regulation only propells us ever faster towards tyranny. Very likely some of the deregulation you lament was and still is the furthering of corruption, but how do you stop it, with more regulation? At some point we must acknowledge that ultimately the responsibility falls on us. We have been lulled by decades of government regulation and controls to protect us and look where we are now! We did business with banks, not because they had good business practices but because of free checking or high interest rates. We didn't care what they did as long as we got what we wanted. WE had FDIC to protect us. That worked out great. Banks fucked us royally and still are through the benevolence of government bailouts, ZIRP and QE. Sure, my bank account is still there but what is it worth? WE THE PEOPLE are going to have to start taking a lot more responsibility if we are to survive. A bigger government with more rules isn't going to save us. It will only lull us into complacency while they continue to exploit and enslave us.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:04 | 3322156 falak pema
falak pema's picture

there are no ideal soutions for humanity. When it went into "civilization " mode it knew it had to make compromise 'cos the lions had to cohabit with the zebras in a nation of law and order.

If there are no ideal solutions there will be continual strife; either military or social. I prefer the latter. And for that you need honest brokers of "we the people" to debate pros and cons. Yes regulation is ALWAYS necesaary as Plato so justly pointed out in any society.

THE FAULT DEAR BRUTUS LIES NOT IN OUR STARS....stays true today. That choice remains : Dictatorship, Oligarchy and democracy in each nation and competition amongst nation states. 

So regulation is the bread and butter of all civilized constructs. If you want LITTLE regulation you get lion kings : dictators...very simple social order. Live with it. Anarchy and individual liberty is "hopium" which turns to "dopium". It is an illusion in society. It paves the way to dictatorship. That's proven fact time and again. 

I don't have an answer to your query, sorry, just the trace of past history.

One thing is sure, human natue repeats, thats why the past is so important! 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:09 | 3322207 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture

You only get Lion Kings when you have centralized power, that ultimately creates dependencies. It is these dependencies that ultimately empower the dictators and create the cycle of destruction. Regulations always empower the dictators, but the more socialist trended beliefs still insist that we can somehow end up with a benevolent, loving dictator. This might happen but it never lasts long. We suffer a common malady of the human kind.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:41 | 3322316 falak pema
falak pema's picture

good luck with going back to being an Apache and living in your local wigwams...I always favoured Cochise over the US cavalry as a kid, so I'll be rooting for you!

In Fort Apache, next time they film a remake! 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:20 | 3322244 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

For someone with such an imaginative vocabulary, your dearth of ideas regarding political will is a disappointment. You do know who Plato was? A disenfranchised elite, who championed democracy because he was left out of the loop? A man who ASSUMED a large slave class to service the elites?

While we may debate the variety of options that are available to us as free people, we cannot have that debate in the face of overwhelming tyranny. Therefore, if we are to progress towards a binding resolution, it must be in an atmosphere that fosters liberty in the practice of our natural rights. 

Regulation must be voluntary. Anything else opens itself up to mischief. In America, we agree to insure life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Any government that acts in opposition to this basic assumption must be dissolved. While it is difficult to destroy the creeping intervention that seeks to steal what is not theirs, it is the duty of each American to safeguard our liberty, with violence if necessary, to secure the futures of our children.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:42 | 3322310 falak pema
falak pema's picture

forget who he was, read what he wrote...don't be such an Ayatollah...there are so many of those around. 

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:33 | 3322103 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Well, how else does one make a global government? Rising nationalism, leading to WWIII, leading to the collapse of the nation state, leading to globalism by force. Hegel would be proud.


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:44 | 3322134 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture

So to avoid global war we should surrend any and all self interest for the benefit of the collective? Nationalism can be a positive. It doesn't have to mean war. Conflicts occur because politicians use their power to fuck their neighbors causing conflict. This is what a centralized EU government has brought upon the Europeans. Individual countries pursuing their interests in accordance with some very basic international laws can create a vibrant world economy. People manipulating it through politics can bring it all to a head.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:38 | 3322122 yogibear
yogibear's picture

The US is going back to where they were before the American revolution.

Excessive government and taxation. Corruption and control held by a few.

With millions of rounds of ammunition ordered by the US Homeland Security and armored personnel vehicles  you figure out what's next.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:32 | 3322292 Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill's picture

DWTS or the Kardasians ?


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 09:56 | 3322168 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture

They are "progressively" dumbing us down, Domesticating us, so that we are dependent, like cattle who wouldn't have a prayer if set into the woods with wolves. Those who seek to live independent and free are the outliers and ultimatey represent danger to the herd.

We will continue to witness disasters, some economic and some physical like Sandy Hook, all to remind us of how unsafe we are and how much we need Big Brother. B...B, B...B, please protect our minds from the constant onslought of criminal thoughts. What we need now is Two minutes of Hate!

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 11:10 | 3322202 Lordflin
Lordflin's picture

There is this thing called human nature...ignored by social engineers who are convinced they can cross borders, culture, and thousands of years of behavioral precedence with impunity. Such arrogance arises in all great societies and signals their decline... 

The interesting thing here is that while I am a Christian, believing that man is created in the image of God, and bound within the limits of His design... I am also, by training, a biologist. On the one hand such training dictates that man is an animal chained to his genetics... And yet the same individuals who aspire to such beliefs have convinced themselves that they can dictate new terms to the human condition

A clear illustration that the hubris of mankind is without limit.

btw... so as to alleviate confusion... I absolutely believe that individuals can strive against their nature. Societies, on the other hand, invaribly revert to the mean.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 10:27 | 3322269 gdiamond22
gdiamond22's picture

Democracies everywhere are thriving, yes. What made the US different wasn't Democracy, it was our REPUBLIC. You know, when politicians followed the CONSTITUTION and the people took them out if they didn't. We The People are as every bit to blame for the tyranny that surrounds us as the crooked politicians who make it happen. Complacency kills, but hey, the stock market is making new highs, so not to worry.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 11:19 | 3322453 marathonman
marathonman's picture

The US Constitution was likely a stalking horse.  Just big enough to get in the door, but with enough power that given time and a determined pull on the reins it would replicate and surpass all the power of the British throne that the Americans had overthrown with that lowly Confederation arrangement.  It really only took seventy years for the limited government Constitution to be fully eviscerated by Lincoln.  The turn of the 20th century finished it off.  The Republic is dead.  Long live the Fascisti.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 11:43 | 3322561 Lordflin
Lordflin's picture

I have found Lincoln an inscrutable fellow... perhaps because I have spent so much time trying to understand him. On the one hand he stated that no man, having recoverd from illness (nation at war) would continue to take medication (read money printing)... On the other hand he apparently overlooked the fact that some medication is addictive. At least he circumvented central banking in the process. As to his subversion of civil rights, he also offered up what were on the surface reasonable explanations... that a society would not have within its constitution the means of its own destruction was his response to much of the centralization of power. Whatever his motives, no one can argue with the result. Our march down this road of strong central authority clearly dates to his administration...

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 12:32 | 3322760 Cloud9.5
Cloud9.5's picture

The tide ebbs and flows.  Nation states come and go.  The world is littered with the ruins of failed states and past empires.   The nobles who pushed King John to sign the Magna Carta are  long since dust but their ideas remain.  So too will remain the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Tyrants may for a time suppress these ideals but they can never destroy them because they are not pieces of crumbling parchment they are ideals imbedded in the hearts of men about the way things ought to be .  They are standards of government that any man who deems himself to be in the right must aspire to.  Anything else is chicanery and self-delusion.  Self-delusion and chicanery are denials of reality.  They are unsustainable and they will be exposed.


The status quo has two pillars of power.  One is the largess it confiscates from the productive subjects it controls.  It disperses these spoils to quell the appetites of the mob and advance the fortunes of its favorites.  The other is its perceived monopoly of violence.   That perception is a delusion. 


The nation state pales in its capacity for violence when compared to the mob.  The Civil War killed more soldiers than any other war in American history.  Comrade Molotov is once again making his presence known on the streets of Europe.  The maxim of Sam Colt is being remembered once again here across the pond as evidenced by the huge surge in gun sales.


We are in the great contraction.  Government will be forced to come to terms with shrinking tax bases and failed streams of revenue.  It can sustain neither its wars nor its dependents.   Terminate the wars and the dependents can be carried a little longer.  Terminate neither and the collapse comes that much quicker.



Tue, 03/12/2013 - 12:39 | 3322787 jack stephan
jack stephan's picture

[Sugar Ray Robinson has just battered Jake La Motta half to death, but Jake has stayed on his feet]
Jake La Motta: You didn't get me down, Ray.


Tue, 03/12/2013 - 13:12 | 3322914 C deK
C deK's picture

Leftists neeeeever have a violent revolt.  Except in the timeframe since deSade.  The Itialians are voting against ECBs puppet, but it is already too late.  Penetration, no matter how slight, still constitutes raping of the economy.

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 15:55 | 3323604 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

"gathering around their own flags and seemingly rejecting the imposed commonality"

No, rallying around the flags of nations formally established a few hundred or so years ago counts as merely substituting one imposed, totally artificial, commonality for another.

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