This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Lessons For Winning Liberty In A World Of Statism
Submitted by Dr. Richard Ebeling via The Cobden Centre blog,
Friends of freedom often become despondent when it seems that every day brings another growth and intrusion of government over people’s lives. But there is no reason to be disheartened, because there are lessons for winning liberty – from the opponents of freedom.
Beginning in the last decades of the nineteenth century, through most of the twentieth century and into our own time, all ideological, political and economic trends have been in the direction of various forms of collectivism. How did this come about, and what might friends of freedom learn from it?
Let’s take the case of socialism. On March 14, 1883, a German philosopher living in exile in London passed away. When he was buried three days later in a modest grave where his wife had been laid to rest two years earlier, fewer than ten people were present, half of them family members.
His closest friend spoke at the gravesite and said, “Soon the world will feel the void left by the passing of this Titan.” But there was, in fact, little reason to think that the deceased man or his long, turgid, and often obscure writings would leave any lasting impression on the world of ideas or on the course of human events.
That man was Karl Marx.
Socialism Did Not Always Seem “Inevitable”
Advocates of liberty often suffer bouts of despair. How can the cause of freedom ever triumph in a world so dominated by interventionist and welfare-statist ideas? Governments often give lip service to the benefits of free markets and the sanctity of personal and civil liberties. In practice, however, those same governments continue to encroach on individual freedom, restrict and regulate the world of commerce and industry, and redistribute the wealth of society to those with political power and influence. The cause of freedom seems to be a lost cause, with merely temporary rear-guard successes against the continuing growth of government.
What friends of freedom need to remember is that trends can change, that they have in the past and will again in the future. If this seems far-fetched, place yourself in the position of a socialist at the time that Karl Marx died in 1883, and imagine that you are an honest and sincere – if naïve – advocate of socialism.
As a socialist, you live in a world that is still predominately classical liberal and free market, with governments in general only intervening in relatively minimal ways in commercial affairs. Most people – including those in the “working class” – believe that it is not really the responsibility of the state to redistribute wealth or nationalize industry and agriculture, and are suspicious of most forms of government paternalism.
How could socialism ever be victorious in such a world so fully dominated by the “capitalist” mindset? Even “the workers” don’t understand the evils of capitalism and the benefits of a socialist future! Such a sincere socialist could only hope that Marx was right and that socialism would have to come – someday – due to inescapable “laws of history.”
Yet within 30 years the socialist idea came to dominate the world. By the time of the First World War the notion of paternalistic government had captured the minds of intellectuals and was gaining increasing support among the general population. Welfare-statist interventionism was replacing the earlier relatively free-market environment.
The socialist ideal of government planning was put into effect as part of the wartime policies of the belligerent powers beginning in 1914, and also lead to the communist revolution in Russia in 1917, the rise to power of fascism in Italy in 1922, the triumph of National Socialism (Nazism) in Germany in 1933, and the implementation of FDR’s New Deal policies in 1933, as well.
Collectivists Triumphed Based on Individualist Methods
Socialism triumphed during that earlier period of the last decades of the nineteenth and early decades of the twentieth centuries because while socialists advocated an ideology of collectivism, they practiced a politics of individualism. They understood that “history” would not move in their direction unless they changed popular opinion. And implicitly they understood that this meant changing the minds of millions of individual people.
So they went out and spoke and debated with their friends and neighbors. They contributed to public lectures and the publishing of pamphlets and books. They founded newspapers and magazines, and distributed them to anyone who would be willing to read them. They understood that the world ultimately changes one mind at a time – in spite of their emphasis on “social classes,” group interests, and national conflicts
They overcame the prevailing public opinion, defeated powerful special interests, and never lost sight of their long-term goal of the socialist society to come, which was the motivation and the compass for all their actions.
Lesson One: Confidence in the Moral Rightness of Liberty
What do friends of freedom have to learn from the successes of our socialist opponents? First, we must fully believe in the moral and practical superiority of freedom and the free market over all forms of collectivism. We must be neither embarrassed nor intimidated by the arguments of the collectivists, interventionists, and welfare statists. Once any compromise is made in the case for freedom, the opponents of liberty will have attained the high ground and will set the terms of the debate.
Freedom advocate, Leonard E. Read, once warned of sinking in a sea of “buts.” I believe in freedom and self-responsibility, “but” we need some minimum government social “safety net.” I believe in the free market, “but” we need some limited regulation for the “public good.” I believe in free trade, “but” we should have some form of protectionism for “essential” industries and jobs. Before you know it, Read warned, the case for freedom has been submerged in an ocean of exceptions.
Each of us, given the constraints on his time, must try to become as informed as possible about the case for freedom. Here, again, Leonard Read pointed out the importance of self-education and self-improvement. The more knowledgeable and articulate we each become in explaining the benefits of the free society and the harm from all forms of collectivism, the more we will have the ability to attract people who may want to hear what we have to say.
Lesson Two: Focusing on the Long Run, Not Short Run Turns
Another lesson to be learned from the earlier generation of socialists is not to be disheartened by the apparent continuing political climate that surrounds us. We must have confidence in the truth of what we say, to know in our minds and hearts that freedom can and will win in the battle of ideas.
We must focus on that point on the horizon that represents the ideal of individual liberty and the free society, regardless of how many twists and turns everyday political currents seem to be following. National, state, and local elections merely reflect prevailing political attitudes and beliefs. Our task is to influence the future and not allow ourselves to be distracted or discouraged by who gets elected today and on what policy platform.
As Austrian economist, F.A. Hayek, emphasized, current policy directions are the product of ideological and political trends from thirty or forty years ago. In other words government policies today are the lagged effect of political-philosophical and ideological trends of earlier decades. To change tomorrow’s policies, our focus today must be on influencing the “climate of opinion” reflected in people’s minds that, then, will determine how people in the future view issues such as the role of government in society based on their notion of the nature and rights of individuals.
Lesson Three: Knowing that Only Freedom Works
Let us remember that over the last hundred years virtually every form of collectivism has been tried—socialism, communism, fascism, Nazism, interventionism, welfare statism—and each has failed. There are very few today who wax with sincere enthusiasm that government is some great secular god that can solve all of mankind’s problems – at least not many outside of those currently employed in the White House!
Statist policies and attitudes continue to prevail because of institutional and special interest inertia; they no longer possess the political, philosophical, and ideological fervor that brought them to power in earlier times.
Political collectivism resulted in terrible and brutal tyrannies around the world. Government central planning created economic stagnation and chaos wherever tried. Interventionist-welfare statist policies have generated spider’s webs of special interest politics, intergenerational redistributive dependency, and perverse incentives and barriers to opportunity and prosperity.
There is, in fact, only one “ism” left to fill this vacuum in the face of collectivism’s failures in all its forms. It is classical liberalism, with its conception of the free man in the free society and the free market, soundly grounded in the ideas of each individual’s right to his life, liberty, and honestly acquired property in a social setting of peaceful association and voluntary cooperation and trade.
If we keep the classical liberal ideal of individual rights and laissez-faire capitalism before us, we can and will win liberty in our time – for our children and ourselves.
»
- 19082 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
True. Applicable, though perphaps a little past due.
We've already lost.
If I am China, Russia, North Korea, etc. I would Invade the Wussified U.S.A. Tomorrow
Almost half the population is hard-wired for some degree of socialism.
Almost half the population is hard-wired for some degree of fascism.
Less than 1% of population is not wired for either and desires to be free.
State of the World 2015
Less than 0.5% of us will survive what is next....
n o one should imagine this is a war of philosophy, it is not. Extremely wealthy people seek an find philosophies they can champion and use to further the consolidation of their wealth and power.
Keynes, for example, is not espoused because his theories are viable, but rather because he advocates system control by special, smart elites.
they are power mad, sociopathic predators. That is all
Rule of Market
Rule of Law
It seems that Dr. Ebeling fails to understand what socialism actually is. Truth is a country which have privatised all kinds natural resources, vital infrastructure, the healthcare system, the education system, all media outlets and even prisons is not a damn socialist society. And it never will be a socialist society no matter how many government schemes are set up to fill the infinitely deep pockets of our beloved financial elite with what used to be someone elses (i.e. taxpayers) money, because socialism is not the definition of a corrupt government run by sociopaths stealing from the people, even though that is what countries labeling themselves "socialist" often end up like.
Socialism has become one of those words that used to mean something, but neocons and libertarians has kept abusing the word the same way people have been abusing words like "terrorism" and "extremism" by simply throwing it after whoever they dont like for whatever reason they find suitable, like a simple insult.
+1 WKush
The other word that's abused by neocons and libertarians is statism which is in this article's title. I believe corporatism is far more restrictive to freedom than any State could ever dream of.
Here's a Bob Black quote that I really like:
Socialism, statism, corporatism, blahdedy blah blah.
Control. It is about control. It doesn't matter what you call it. Is it a system that controls you or is it a system where you control you? That's all you need to know.
I wonder if anyone ever asked Bob Black why anyone would keep going back to work if an environment like that. Oh right, capitalism requires forced labor and strict punishment if you don't stay with the same employer for the rest of your life. No wait, that's one of those other isms where THEY control YOU.
Of course, it is all in your mind. They can only control you if you allow it. No wait, that would mean you are responsible for yourself...
Yes, it is all about control and so what? Just because those elitist douchebags only seek power, money and controll and don't give a shit about the isms, doesn't make it irrelevant what "ism" the author of this article labels our society with. As the Minister of Bread and circuses correctly points out; by labeling our society socialist the author amongst other things seems to suggest that there isn't enough inequality and private ownership as it is, which is an absurd claim.
"They can only control you if you allow it"
Hah, that sounds just like the propaganda people are fed with from the MSM and Hollywood. Kind of like, " We are all born free", "You are in control of your own destiny", total bullshit, it makes rich elitists feel better about themselves and makes others blame themselves for their own misery instead of blaming the kleptoes in charge, which really are to blame. Either way, despising people for being too weak to control their own lives, like some closet fascist, won't help you getting rid of this rotten system.
@GeorgeWKush
Socialism is no different than fascism.
They both involve one set of true believers gaining control and forcing their beliefs on all others.
To each group of non-true believers the result is tyranny.
But you don't mind that, do you? You love controlling others like they were just objects.
People arguning about the size of the iceberg when the ship's sinking amuse me. Carry on, if you're dumb enough your comment might be worth saving in my archives.
How can you call all of that privatized when the corporations taking over the resources, infrastructure, healthcare system, education system, media, and prisons are all sucking off the government teet and get special treatment under the law (TARP and TBTJ anyone)?
Socialism isn't anything besides a philosophy. It cannot and will not ever work in real life. Therefore, in reality, socialism is what it is regardless of what you wish it were. Same can be said for Keynesianism or whatever other control-ism of which you can think.
Capitalism is THE only viable alternative as each controls his own destiny, or chooses not to and decides we should have socialism or something. Capitalism is not state empowered corporations or vice versa no matter what they tell you at Harvard.
You've been lied to. Go back to your professor and ask for your money back.
Capitalism is the one framework where you're most likely to be your own boss, work and live the way you want, and swim rather than sink.
The only real drawback is the Govt is constantly trying to kill it off to get back more control over you, as the Bankers leach the life out of what remains and then you realize the obvious, you're in fact their parasitised slave bitch, and that demoralizes and kills the host that drives capitalism forward.
WKush: well said, thanks.
It's simply loony to hear Americans complaining about socialism, at a time when their state maintains a thin verneer of social services, unsanitary public transit, filthy understaffed government offices, etc., and at a time when any policy that is not a sideshow is aimed at either accelerating record levels of income inequality internally, or sucking wealth out of other countries. The choice of socialism over something more appropriate, like fascism, really matters, because it's like a criticism that the government isn't going far enough in its efforts to amplify wealth concentration; and implies what the country really needs is to more thoroughly reward corporations and rape its middle and lower classes. After all, they're not routinely selling their blood and organs, or whoring themselves out for rent to the 1%, yet. It's like a battle cry to run deeper into the arms of your already fascist state.
"Socialism" points the finger at equality and is spoken only because it's a GOP trope that's politically useful for smearing democrats without critiquing their own philosophy or acknowledging the GOP complicity in this rush to tyranny - you're being used. The proper word "fascism" points the finger at the takeover of 100% of political control by the financial elite.
"understaffed" government offices.
O woe is me. What's ever shall we do?
We gots to get us some more folks workin' fo the guv'ment.
Then everything'll be all right!
May I suggest as an alternative, firing a few million from your domestic surveillance apparatus designed to watch people watching porn in their basements, and hire back a few to work the counters at the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
they are power mad, sociopathic predators. That is all
Then defeating them is super-simple: No need for violence - all we have to do it to stop obeying them.
Unfortunately, that requires INDIVIDUAL ACTION & RESPONSIBILITY, making it utterly unacceptable to most people.
They will complain, but they will not act.
They will not act?
I beg to differ kind sir.
The simple truth is that the pendulum will continue to swing, and depending on where you are, it can swing for you, or against you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqpV1236_Q0
Eventually, it knocks everyone down- Foucalt knew this.
That's not the important thing. The only thing that matters is whether you can get back up.
I disagree. I think that "this war" is entirely philosophical.
The only difference between myself and the most ardent Collectivist, is the thoughts which inhabit our minds. No photograph would reveal any difference.
Once the thinking "comes right", then the appropriate action will follow.
I may not survive....but I guaranfuckingtee I will be taking some Statist Bankster pigs with me on the way out.
It, unfortunately, falls to this, us, "informed 1%," to inform and teach the rest of why, and who, is responsible for what is happening to them.
If they think that it is the "niggers," "illegals," and "fags," then we have failed.
If they are made to know that it is the outside controllers that live among us, the "Amongst," and their machinations , schemes and robberies via the banks, and violence-puppets, governmnet, that has robbed, caged, and subjugated them, then we move toward victory.
If those same criminals, and their violence-puppets, come to having their heads in a basket, then we have achieved victory.
The banksters need to repay us.
Teach them, teach them again, and then teach them again, until they begin to teach you.
I have no doubt that the criminals will destroy themselves. Evil cannot create; it can only corrupt. Once these evil criminals have corrupted everyone except for those who would choose death over corruption, then they will canibalise themselves.
Nobody needs to invade. The better option for them is to quarantine us off, which is exactly what they're doing and wait till we turn the whole continent into the state of Detroit.
We are our own worst enemy.
Well said, in a negative time for all. I agree tomrrow is a difrent day; but there is a lovely song; "What dfference a Day makes" and one of the lines is
"and the difference is you." Milestones
$14.5 trillion in debt? Sad how recent that number was compared to the current $s in debt we are in. I say we since the Congress has made us responsible for the bill.
I don't feel they have our best interests in mind.
Gene Rosen
....or just stop paying for it (Statism).
I see Americans still don't know the meaning of the word Statism.
Hopeless.
And yet, as definitions are crucial to communication, let's say it once again: you're NOT, I repeat NOT talking about Statism here but about its very opposite, the (American) Corporate State.
Actually the term is dirigisme...which is actually how a State runs an economy.
This is still a free market system in the USA....trillion deficits and all.
The "State" is nothing more than a massive pile of IOU's and billion dollar "war ships."
As that dollar surges you will see folks "abandon the State" and live a quieter, warmer life.
Hiding in plain sight are many, many people who have dropped out of the system to make their own way in the world......
Wrong, without the existence of the State you can't have statism. Corporations, like unions, are in a symbiotic relationship with the state and without which, wouldn't exist.
statism
(?ste?t?z?m)
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the theory or practice of concentrating economic and political power in the state, resulting in a weak position for the individual or community with respect to the government
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/statism
state
(st?t)
n
4.
a. The supreme public power within a sovereign political entity: the state intervening in the economy.
b. The sphere of supreme civil power within a given polity: matters of state.
c. A specific kind of government: the socialist state.
d. A body politic, especially one constituting a nation: the states of Eastern Europe.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/state
But the State has to contract out its functions to corporations.
Who do you think manufactures the guns, handcuffs, tasers, squad cars and prisons to put you in?
Why are cities actually called "municipal corporations" and why do they have annual balance sheets that show "revenue" which are tax dollars collected, and "expenses" which almost always go to corporations?
This is my primary beef with right-leaning libertarians, is that they believe "the State" is so evil, when the State doesn't even actually exist. It's corporations running protection rackets through mercenaries called "law enforcement" and they comply with these bogus orders because they get a slice of the pie called a pension, which is unsustainable under said municipal corporations. These pensions encourage the enforcers to loot the public to keep this corporate borg afloat.
When the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq cost $3 trillion, where did that fiat go? It went to defense contractors.
If "no state exists" which is the pipedream of the right-libertarian, then these corporations would just magically disappear. No way! Too funny. The Fortune 500 lobbies to get more regulations on the books.
My primary beef with government lovers is with their belief that government uber alles is the correct way or the only way for a society to function.
Trying to reason with them is like trying to reason with an ant.
Why do you think you have a right to force your beliefs on all others? That God gave you that right? Government is the cruelest, most deadly, most destructive, most enslaving, and most thieving of all of man's dysfunctional behaviors.
Four hundred million deaths in the 20th century because of government. What is a reasonable estimate of its cost of destruction? A hundred trillion dollars? Of the stolen money it wasted? Another hundred trillion?
My hope is that someday government lovers will evolve into humans, but it's too improbable.
It took fifty generations of selectively breeding wild Siberian foxes for them to become domesticated. That would be about a thousand years to selectively breed the current crop of savages into humans.
Not likely.
Proggies are all about warning labels. Their beloved state should come with one, like that on a pack of cigarettes. .guv action has killed more than nicotine. Surely more of the same would improve things.
Many citizens of the USSA would likely acknowledge that a continuous state of constant conflict and warfare against other nation states is not the best foreign policy to pursue.
However, if you attempt to criticize the US military, you had better be prepared to either walk away, or engage in a fight to the death.
Criticize the US military (in public or private) at your own peril. Those are fighting words.
Most citizens of the USSA are too stupid to understand the difference between Freedom and Tyranny.
The opposite of Statism is Anarchy, which is the absence of a centralized government.
May I refer you to our own Cognitive Dissonance? http://www.zerohedge.com/blogs/cognitive-dissonance
Thanks.
CogDis and I go back a few years. I enjoy his writings and, as far as I know, we're on good terms with each other.
Yup, I'm crazy as a bedbug, but Cog has never turned his back on me, ever.
The Internet and the TCP/IP that runs through it!
The greatest gift that both the forces of "good" and "evil" ever had!
When you are contributing to a system that's killing you and everyone around you, I think the solution needs to be more drastic than that.
But short of a killem all skull crushing overthrow of that system, I'm not sure what that is. You can't pervert a government with freedom. While you can pervert it easily with statist controls. It's self-perverting, in fact.
You can hold back the tide for awhile, but government never works towards that goal of freedom. It always works toward tyranny. At this time, I choose to stay out of the way and not contribute to it killing the unborn, disabled, elderly, or myself. Just walk away.
At this time, I choose to stay out of the way and not contribute to it killing the unborn, disabled, elderly, or myself. Just walk away.
Tell that to these people that have been the recipient of American good will since 2001 and well before!...
"Je suis Americain"
And I care for no one but myself even when my money is paying for it. And even when I know and understand it will soon be me as well!
Governments should be replaced by open source software solutions. Tech is growing at too fast a rate for humans at this point.
Only chance of regaining freedom and self-government is when free market capitalism crashes down on the central planners and the 'unexpected' chaos ensues. History says the war is already on, they are winning, and that will be the final decisive battle event.
If central planners are not blamed and pitchforked straightaway for their crimes and corruption for causing the problems, they will pose themselves as white knight saviors, taking charge and remaking everything to their liking. They've already started.
The fundamental freedom here is the freedom to spend your money how you choose.
If you have no money you can do what you want but you can't afford to do anything.
Western markets reforms were introduced in Russia.
The oligarchs were created but the vast majority had almost nothing.
They could do what they wanted but couldn't afford to do anything.
They saw Putin as their saviour and the new Russia was born.
Inertia and doberhumans.
Thecommonsenseshow.com says banksters are going into hiding. They did not give specifics. Does anyone know if it's true?
Dave Hodges seems to be well-intentioned, if a little over-dramatic.
Anyone who believes in a magical, bearded white man who lives in the sky, and actually devotes their life to this belief is a little difficult to take seriously.
So, do you consider yourself an atheist? Do you say that we just 'evolved' from the primordial ooze? I ask because this world is so beautiful, and so complex that it's hard for me to imagine that it 'just happened'.
Just so you know, the idea of a sky-daddy who knows your thoughts and deeds and stands ready to judge you upon your death, seems equally disengenuous, to me, anyway.
I mean no disrespect. I'm just askin' that we get together and try to understand, for once and for all, wtf purpose we serve, if any.
Not your reddies, either.
I like the hypothesis enjoyed by some astrophysicists that "we're not that special".
It must be the arrogance of mankind to believe that, out of billions upon billions of solar systems, some divine entity chose THIS particular planet to create the ultimate likeness to itself, and declared that we must worship this particular entity forevermore....lest we be condemned to eternal damnation.
I'd probably do a better job of expressing myself if the subject matter weren't so fucking absurd.
I agree that we're not that special. In fact, most of the humanoids I encounter are simply fuggin stupid. That said, I reckon there are millions (if not more) solar systems "out there" that have some kind of life form that is in some way similar to my own (and your own).
Still, the question arises- did they propagate on their own?
Creationism aside, (it's almost certainly bullshit), to say that we're not special within the realm we inhabit is also bullshit.
The subject matter is only 'absurd' to those whose minds are closed.
Somehow, we became the dominant primate on this particular planet.
I, for one, would love to know how.
I can't see the forest, there are too many trees in the way...
If you know what I mean :)
What does a meritocracy look like where everyone suceeds through their own hard work, drive and ambition:
1) There is no un-earned wealth or power, eg. inheritence or hereditary titles
2) There is a uniform school system for everyone with no private schools
The pre-requisites for success on your own merit.
Meritocracy looks like this to me Batman.
http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/georgism_01.html
http://www.henrygeorge.org/isms.htm
https://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/top-ten-lies-and-mistake...
I like the idea and agree it has great merit, but I am not sure if it is enough on its own.
In the UK, we have for centuries had a privately educated elite (not 100%, but well on the way).
7% of the population goes to private schools and obviously they select on parental wealth through schools fees.
This ensures the children of the wealthy get to the top and is a tried and tested (in the UK) mechanism for social stratification.
Private schools have no place in a meritocracy.
In the UK our top two Universites are Cambridge and Oxford (I am sure you have heard of them).
Their output tends to flow into the top positions in the UK.
Their input is geared to the privately educated though Governments are trying to enforce a greater state educated input.
The privately educated 7%, still take 60% of the places after Government intervention.
private schools make 93% of the UK population second class citizens.
It is not on.
In the UK we have had rich families for millennia and that is just the way they stay.
Some industrious individual 1000 years ago, can set his family up forever with no controls on inheritance.
This is not a meritocracy.
Sir Ranulph Fiennes (check Wikipedia) can trace his ancestry, at the top of UK society, back to the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and possibly even further. He has told the story himself back to 1066.
He also still carries his hereditary title.
As we have formed a new super-rich global aristocracy today, if there are no controls on inheritance, these families can be bone idle forevermore thanks to one industrious individual. It is not a good idea.
As most people do like to pass something on, an inheritance cap would be in order.
The majority are not affected at all, but the bulk of the wealth is taken to cut taxes for the hard working.
(To add to your land tax).
Basically Marx', and Engels', "philosophy" was, "You, the victims, and dispossessed, of the fascist elites and their government stooges, can instead become the thieves." Replace plutocratic theft with collective theft.
The foolishness and fallaciousness of this is well evidenced by the experience of the Soviet Union, and Cuba.
The really hard truth to sell, is convincing people that they don't need the so-called elites, and their violence-puppets, governmnet, but only need rely on themselves, family, friends, and community. Individualism.
The evidence of individualism's triumph in raising mankind from nature's muck of despair and misery is the first 130 years of the American republic, sans the Civil War. And the rapid fall back into nature's muck, after the imposition of Zionism in 1913.
The banksters need to repay us.
Socialism creates a new class between producers and needy non-producers. Distributors, who take from the producers and give to to the needy, while taking their generous cut. Distributing hustlers claim the highest moral ground.
Banksters, bureaucrats, do-gooders, non-profiters, politicians and their ilk produce nothing, but hustle their cut. They're neither needy nor productive, just leeches. Charity becomes a hustle.
Restoring liberty? Thanks for the laugh! We are totally and irreversably fucked. Do you doubt me? Consider that the typical " Dancing with the stars " moron actually believes the news media. Game Fucking Over!
"Restoring liberty? Thanks for the laugh! We are totally and irreversably fucked. Do you doubt me? Consider that the typical " Dancing with the stars " moron actually believes the news media. Game Fucking Over!"
Their "game" is coming to an end. Their fight with their victims, We the People, has just begun.
Inevitably, they will bring their treason to you. They cannot be avoided. What will you do when they come?
See you on the battlefield.
The banksters need to repay us.
Agreed. The "snitch" society that we all live in will grow increasingly more prevalent. The MSM will encourage this mindset to the point where the simple act of walking into commercial establishment will become a dangerous activity. Heavily armed enforcement agents (SWAT) will be present in most all public locales.
Eventually, in the not-too-distant future, all that will be required for your IMMEDIATE arrest is a public accusation.
Much like NAZI Germany during the reign of the 3rd Reich, the simple act of walking down the street while another citizen begins screaming and pointing "JUDEN!"..."JUDE!"..."JUDEN!"....directly at your sorry ass.
Well, sucks to be you.
If not for the income tax there could never have been socialism in the USA. Once the dollar dies the cradle to grave impulses of the government will die with it as the G will not have the dough to fund it. Then they will speak of liberty and the responsibility that goes with it. Those who rely upon the state will still clamor for handouts but for a government to have stooges it must pay them. Broke government are great for freedom...my fav anyway.
Dave, the $usd isn't going anywhere. The $usd is going to be revalued.
The dollar tyranny will be replaced with the SDR enslavement, unless We the People stand and replace them with lead and gold.
The banksters need to repay us.
some people enjoy tyranny and human slavery
.
you have to be free
Another silly article, using old-fashioned magical words like "Liberty," as the solutions the alleged problems having previously been presented through misusing words like "socialism."
It is a gross abuse of the dictionary definition of "socialism" to use that term to describe anything actually happening in America today. Furthermore, in order to understand how it was possible for Marxism to become influential through the Russian and Chinese revolutions, it is IMPERATIVE to recognize the history of the international banksters funding the Russian Revolution, as well has hand-picking and promoting the eventual "leader" of the Chinese Revolution. Similarly, it is necessary to appreciate the degree to which German fascism was originally paid for by the same sorts of international banksters.
America's problems are due to the successful application of the methods of organized crime to capture control over the political processes, in order to create systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence. The fish rotted from the head, as the highest levels of subversion of the monetary and taxation systems then cascaded down to flow throughout the lower levels of American society.
Since the article above is grossly mistaken, as well as ridiculously superficial regarding its analysis the problems, all of the bogus "solutions" it proposes are similarly shallow. IF one is going to understand the problems better, then one must understand that human realities are always systems of organized lies, operating robberies, inside of which systems governments are necessarily the biggest form of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals. That basically exists because human beings operate as entropic pumps of energy flows. When one applies the basic concepts of general energy systems to human beings, one discovers that the results are the same as the principles and methods of organized crime.
However, since those who were the best organized gangs of criminals controlled civilization, the vast majority of people have been brainwashed to believe the biggest bullies' bullshit view of the world, which operates a kind of Bizarro Mirror World, where everything appears backwards, or as a kind of Wonderland Matrix, where everything appears absurd. It only makes "sense" after one comes to terms with the ways that the only connection between human laws and natural laws is ability to back up lies with violence, and those who most successfully do that do so through the maximum possible deceits and frauds.
The only genuine solutions possible are to continue to muddle through the madness of that situation, because the only things that actually exist are the dynamic equilibria of the different systems of organized lies operating robberies. Meanwhile, the old-fashioned notions promoted in the article above, such as "classical liberal ideal of individual rights and laissez-faire capitalism" are nothing but nostalgic nonsense.
+1 Radical Marijuana
I could never have said it better myself.
I wish Tyler would post your work as articles sometime, because I'd rather read your analysis than a lot of these newsletter writer gurus that they typically have on here.
You are a lot more succinct, in-depth and thought provoking than most on here.
Thanks, The9thDoctor. I can write comments that were provoked after reading some article. However, these days, I have a hard time getting motivated to write an original article, because I no longer have the slightest shred of belief that anything I say or do will make any significant difference.
It seems to me that the ONLY intellectuals who become publicly significant are those who the ruling classes approve of, and therefore, have some ulterior reason to promote, in ways which end up perverting the application of whatever ideas that intellectual originally may have thought of. As far as I can tell, that ALWAYS happens.
E.g., while early Marxism was relatively scientific, given the general limits of science at that time, the kind of Marxism promoted by the groups that the banksters and their buddies approved of became Messianic madness. Hence, both the Russian and Chinese revolutions resulted in savagely murdering millions and millions of their own people, only to eventually be abandoned, which made those mass murders end up looking senseless. Similarly, some economist like Keynes only had some of what he suggested applied, in very selected ways, whereby the better ideas were ignored, while those which the banksters approved of were promoted. I.e., every excuse to make more money out of nothing was agreed with.
Zero Hedge has a relatively large number of readers that appreciate what I write. However, overall that is such a tiny minority of a tiny minority, of a tiny minority, that there never seems to be any practical point in bothering do to so, EXCEPT as writing for its own sake, when I am sort of thinking out loud by articulating whatever some article provoked me to think about.
Of course, I have been doing this kind of stuff for several decades. However, the main overarching result continues to be that the more I learned, the worse it got. I can not get motivated to write original articles, because I can not persuade myself that those could really matter. I can only articulate what I happen to think after reading some other article. Of course, I WISH things were not that bad. However, I cannot persuade myself that things are overall not automatically getting worse, faster, in which context I can not provide anything I would regard as useful, actionable intelligence.
I'm with KChrisc. I think these overarching gangsters, with lies and violence have two major challenges to their long running scheme. First (and please correct me, kind Sir, if I am wrong on this), the top heavy, money vacuuming beast is running out of people and resources to rape and pillage from. America is a former, rusted out battered shell of what it used to be. They can print, regulate and control all they want, but cracks are appearing everywhere. Small cracks, yes, but even small cracks grow and interconnect, until they take on a life of their own. I'm starting to see it. You can see it, increasingly in the comments section of many of the MSM websites. You can see it in the approval ratings of Obama, by his troops. Take my word RM, the dissatisfaction is growing by the day. It is a prevalent discussion at the taverns now, as it was back then. Look at the ratings of CNBC. Nobody believes the Guv Statistics and the small percentage of us, laugh at pronouncements by the Fed, because we know magic words of excrement coming from Yellen and the other members, mean absolutely nothing to 99.9% of the population , so do not despair, there is an awakening going on and there are an increasingly large number of the people 'waking up'.
Secondly, I think the Dollah is a dead man walking. The rest of the world, views us an out of control, psychopath country and want to distant themselves from us. Someone here a few weeks ago linked to an article, written, by the former Prime Minister of Australia, titled "America: Australia's Dangerous Ally?". Even the Europeans are stating to chafe at being just vassal states of the US. The big moves by China, Russia and the rest of the world, currency wise are coming, count on it.
This is how Empires collapse. From their own weight. Like a star, that grows and grows, until it's a Red Giant and then, when it runs out of elements to burn and it gets to Iron, there is a collapse and it goes two ways. There is either a super nova, or becomes a dwarf...
I agreed with your view, STP!
The main problem the empire has IS: "the top heavy, money vacuuming beast is running out of people and resources to rape and pillage from."
The main thing that I worry about IS "a collapse ... [then] a super nova."
Given that the established systems have become electronic frauds, backed by atomic bombs, the end of such an empire could go "super nova!"
Of course, since there was nothing remotely like that in previously known human history, NOBODY KNOWS!
I know and you know. So do most the honest folks. The rest are in denile. But they know it too. What most dont know is it can be changed. For proof it can be changed look back over your life time. It has gotten worse. Therefore change is a proven. The question is what form does it take.
The solution is to recognize that differing political beliefs are no more accurate nor more important than differing religious beliefs and therefore should be kept personal.
You can live by your private beliefs. I prefer something else.
Yeah, Anusocracy, most arguing over religious beliefs is arguing about things which could never be proven to be correct. Similarly, most political ideologies appear to have no way to argue in any relatively scientific ways. The deeper paradoxes of both religions and politics are that social controls were actually being done through the application of the methods of organized crime, so that people were NOT able to work through an overall frame of reference of more rational evidence and logical arguments, but only to use such evidence in order to become better at being dishonest, and backing that up with violence.
In my view, the deep problem with respect to endeavouring to develop a more scientific politics is that would require facing the central fact that the death controls are necessarily central. Most of the history of politics was based on the history of warfare, which often supported some kind of controlled opposition in the forms of State Religions.
The past predicament was that warfare was organized crime on a larger scale, in which context success was based on deceits, and spies were the most important soldiers. Therefore, almost all so-called debates about religions and politics take place inside the context where the basic realities of organized crime are deliberately ignored and/or denied as much as possible. Hence, it is practically impossible to have any more genuinely scientific discussions, because the real point was to make or maintain systems of social success based on backing up lies with violence.
That is why an article like the one above is so totally out to lunch, and not coming back. It is overflowing with "magical words." Almost all religions and politics are disguised organized crime, promoted by professional liars and immaculate hypocrites. There are no ways to avoid that unless the death controls could be directly addressed and debated. Theoretically, after the development of weapons of mass destruction, it is imperative that we should be doing that better. However, at present, the standing situation continues to be that our actual death controls are being done through the maximum possible deceits, while our debt controls are being done through the maximum possible frauds.
A genuinely more scientific society is perhaps impossibly paradoxical. While I think it is theoretically possible to create a better combination of religion and politics that is more scientificm, we are rushing faster and faster in the opposite directions, due to the triumph of propaganda, being more scientifically done, in order to be able to become better at backing up dishonesty with violence. Like I said, the basic paradoxes are that there MUST be some systems of death controls, while the actual ones were selected to be most successfully done through the maximum possible deceits ...
P.S.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/bill-maher-its-not-okay-make-d...
Bill Maher: 'It’s Not Okay to Make Decisions Based on Myth'Of course, it my view such "secularism" is sadly deficient unless it goes through a creative synthesis of ancient mysticism with post-modernizing science: ENERGY IS SPIRIT.
The political process is inherent in the social process. The social process is an innate behavior of almost everyone except those of us HFA/Aspergers who view social interaction as a voluntary behavior. The enemy to us is the government, the organizing and controlling force of mankind, since we look at all interactions with others as voluntary.
The social process developed as an efficient survival mechanism in the animal world and ended up as the main impetus for the development of higher intelligences. Currently, as used in man's world, and because of his high intelligence, the social process is rapidly reaching a terminal point where the innately mandated political process is wholly destructive to survival.
Basically, high intelligence and the political process are contrary to survival, whereas if the social processes were voluntary, survival would be enhanced.
By the way: It is not really about "socialism," "fascism, or "communism." Those are just visible forms of Zionism that they utilize to divide us, and keep us divided, while they plunder our labor, wealth, souls, and blood.
Their method of operation is this: Your money for them. Your power for them. Division to distract you from the first two. The answer is: Don't let them take it. Don' let them have it. And don't believe them.
The banksters need to repay us.
There is a really great book called, "Compromised," that among other things, shows the Coldwar KGB, and CIA, competing, and cooperating, with each other for wealth, and power, over their foreign victims. Never about "ideology," only, always, about money, power, and division.
Maybe you're younger than me Dr. Richard, but I don't see all those freedom-loving individuals who are willing and able to accept that freedom and responsibilty go hand-in-hand.
I don't expect to see it, and I'm 57. Maybe you can show me where I'm wrong? I'd love it.
Besides, you completely ignored that all our currencies are debt. Under such a system, it doesn't matter at all which -ism is practiced.
No one can be free until they realize, and reject, the debt-money paradigm.
Long way to go. Maybe my kids figure it out- more likely the system fails and they muck about for a generation or two and wind up right back where we are now.
Especially if they ascribe to -isms's.
"Friends of Freedom" has an interesting ring to its name, similar to the "Friends Society of Quakers" which Voltaire respected and was fascinated by, so I read the article (twice) hoping to learn some wisdom within. Sadly there are no similarities except the stolen name. I can't say I am impressed by the article nor by the other articles in the main Richard Cobden Centre website. While the ideas of PEACE, FREE TRADE and NON-INTERVENTIONIST government espoused by Cobden are all very well, the rest about the evils of collectivism conveniently OMITS the most pernicous collectivists of all: The Corporations and its oligarchs that control the world today. How the hell do you miss something as big as capitalism's ultimate evolution, which the Italian fascists called Corporatism? Is that not the ultimate, evil, all-powerful collectivist entity of all? Are we not the living embodiments of its folly and power today?
While the article paints a rosy picture of 1883 for the general population, look at the books of the 19th century by authors like Charles Dickens, and you will see the true horrors of that time described by the conditions for ordinary people living in filth and bondage to the owner-capitalists. There were no laws preventing factory owners and landlords from treating children and adults like animals to be used and abused. The only enlightened exceptions were the Quakers. That was why Marx became so revered because he addressed these burning issues for the working people. The new socialist pigs later became the same as the old capitalist pigs they replaced, but that's another story in another era.
The article attacks any and all forms of collectivist thinking, espousing freedom and liberty, yet advocates laissez-faire capitalism with no notions of how to prevent oligarchy. It appears to have no opinions at all on allowing infinite power and wealth in the hands of the few - Cartels, Monopolies and Multinationals are the natural consequence of non-intervention coupled with laissez-faire captalism. To me, it is just idiotic how simplistic and selective the author is in offering his thoughts on freedom and liberty. Let me put this as clearly as I can: It is democracy that gives individuals the power to change the policies of state, not capitalism. It is the civil liberty laws from the Magna Carta to the Constitution that prevent collective bodies (including the state) from violating our individual freedom and liberty, not capitalism. The author clearly seems to be confused by these simple facts, as well as missing the point that multinational corporations in the form of banks have grown so powerful, they now control democracy itself through the narratives forced down our throats in the mainstream media and by buying their political whores.
The most dangerous kind of snakeoil salesman is one who promises the big cures and happiness without telling you how it will be done or the ingredients of his cures. This article offers nothing but "Freedom and Liberty" with attacks on "Collectivism" without telling us just how. Without mentioning that this "Friends of Freedom"'s goal of being in government is itself a collectivist goal.
I have always refused to define myself by a single political ideal. While I lean towards libertarian, I see the merits and faults in all of the political spectrum without exception. I think it is folly to encourage others to be so inflexible and narrow. In order to be a free man, in a free market, living in a free society, he must surely be living in a land of laws that encourage freedom of expression, not in a land of laws that prevent it selectively. He must surely be working in a free market, not in a market that is dominated and manipulated by a select few with barriers to entry. He must surely be living for himself and his pleasures, not for the parasites of government who prey on him from birth to death. For all its gestures, this article does not seem to understand these simple facts at all.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I'll leave my over-long post with Davy Crockett's feelings on government:
http://hushmoney.org/Davy_Crockett_Farmer_Bunce.htm (I have nothing to do with this site, it's just the first one on google that came up on the search for this story)
The reason why communism and socialism gained so much support during the 20th century was that it was an attractive idea to people with small or no assets and low wages who also had to work long hours in unpleasant environments to distribute assets from the upper and middle classes to themselves.
People in other classes have a similar mindset. The upper middle classes think that it is great if maids earn less so that they also can afford maids just like the upper classes. The upper classes think that is great if middle class engineers make less money so that their companies can increase dividends.
The reason why communism became so successful in Russia is probably due to the fact that Jacob Schiff and other people on Wall Street strongly disapproved of some aspects of Czarist rule. Books like “Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution” by Antony Sutton and “Ryska Posten” (Russian Mail) by the Swedish district attorney Hans Björkegren cover this topic pretty well. Both of these books were published by mainstream publishers but do not cover the topic why Jacob Schiff and others so strongly disliked Czarist rule. Schiff and his buddies bankrolled the Bolsheviks and also persuaded Western governments to withdraw their support for the anti-communist forces that fought the Bolshevik government in 1917-20. They also seem to have persuaded Western governments to give land which the Germans had to leave (because of the Versailles peace treaty) to the Bolsheviks rather than the anti-communist forces.
Another important component of the communist movement seems to have been to redistribute the assets of the upper classes and property owned by the government to a new upper class (with a different ethnic composition). My impression is that Karl Marx was inspired by the French revolution in 1789 in this respect. The leaders of the French revolution, and well-connected people, could after the revolution buy estates owned by executed members of the aristocracy for a paltry sum. Something similar happened in the Soviet Union in the 1990s. Toppling the Czar and redistribute the wealth to a new upper class seems to have been the objectives of Mr Schiff. Leon Trotsky wished to begin the redistribution of wealth almost instantly after the revolution while the former bank robber Stalin thought that was too dangerous and that it was still hot money. Therefore, they waited 75 years before loot was passed on to new owners and assassinated Trotsky and many of his followers. If they had begun the redistribution in the 1930s or 40s while the aristocrats still were alive and they had called attention to that in Western media, I guess that some people would might have begun to understand what communism really was about. But since most people don´t think for themselves, I assume that the Bolsheviks probably would have got away with the Trotskyite, early redistribution of wealth strategy.
As the living standard in Western Europe improved, the support for communism decreased. When working class people also could have cars, TV-sets, bathrooms with showers, and only had to work 8 hours a day and the upper middle classes only had a slightly higher living standard (bigger cars, bigger houses, nicer apartments and so on) and no maids any longer, communism did not seem to offer the same advantages as in the past.
TV series like Dallas and Dynasty which meant that the lower classes could fantasize about what it would be like to be rich may also have contributed to decreased hostility among the lower classes against the upper classes.
The reason why the support for radical socialism has increased in Greece recently is probably due to the deteriorating living standard for many people in Greece. In South America, where the living standard for the lower classes is lower than in Western Europe, the support for communism and radical socialism is also stronger.
In the US, which has a strong capitalist tradition and the word “communist” is an insult, it seems possible to increase the poverty among the lower classes without increasing support for radical socialism. But perhaps the support for left liberals will increase in the future if the number of poor people continues to increase and more people will depend on subsidies from the government.
Europe drifted towards socialism and communism first because of the inflow of the hunter-gatherer mindset from the Eurocolonies reached a critical mass much earlier than in America.
But don't despair. The last century or two of foragers washing up on America's shores has almost caught us up.
Western Europe was significantly poorer than the US in the past. That is one explanation to why socialism and communism got more support in Western Europe. And the reason Europe was poorer was that there was almost free land for everybody in the US up to the late 19th century. So factory owners had to pay people more and be more efficient if they wanted people to remain factory workers rather than become farmers. And then wages started to rise in the US because of rapid industrialization and better economies of scale than in Europe. In early 1914 Henry Ford introduced $5 a day for his automobile workers. The pay for 88 days of work equalled to the price of the cheapest version of the Model T.
It took some time for Western Europe to catch up. And then support for radical socialism was reduced. This is probably why the once large communist parties in France and Italy shrank in the 1970s and 80s.
Although there is no free land any longer in the US and there is little demand for factory workers and the number of working poor people therefore increases in the US it seems as if support for socialism has not increased substantially in the US. The American culture probably prevents that to a substantial extent. But if you don´t label government subsidies and welfare as “communism” and “socialism” I guess that the increased number of working poor people in the US constitute a strong, potential voting bloc for left liberal politicians. Left liberal politicians that can raise enough funds for their campaigns may therefore be more successful in future US elections. An increased number of poor people in the US may therefore be a problem for people who want low capital gains taxes and no death tax. Therefore, it may become tempting for some people in the future to require a certain income level for people eligible to vote.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/10/the-new-poll-tax/381791/
http://www.democracyjournal.org/28/the-missing-right-a-constitutional-right-to-vote.php?page=all
My impression is that the American constitution and case law prohibit imposition of poll tax or property requirements in U.S. Elections. But I have not found any restrictions related to income. There may also be ways by which amendments to the Constitution and the case law can be eluded.
One thing that people who hold enough assets to be able choose which country they live in probably should consider is which countries the real rulers seem to have singled out as future safe-heavens for the rich. Or rather which countries they may have singled out to be the opposite. I´m not so sure which countries they may have been singled out for one of the aforementioned purposes. But sometimes my impression has been that Sweden has been singled out for destabilization. In any case it seems as if the intention now is to depreciate the Swedish krona. That will hit upper middle-class Swedish senior citizens whose assets in many cases primarily consist of cash denominated in SEK since they feel that they are too old to hold substantial amounts of stock or mutual funds. Of course the euro may tumble because of another crisis in Greece. The USD may loose its reserve currency status. But to me its seems likely that the Swedish krona will not bounce back to the exchange rates one year ago. Maybe temporarily, but not in terms of average exchange rates over an extended period of time. The large continuous Swedish trade surpluses of the past will not continue if Sweden has to increase imports of food, clothes and consumer electronics due to a rapid population growth while almost no new export industries are created.
Western Europe suffered from a brain drain to America and a huge influx of colonial immigrants.
I knew a guy that was right there when the wall came down in Germany. The gaurds were all that kept that wall up all those years. The guards not some poll. The guards. Get them on your side and you can set the table.
Liberty has the truth on its side, but the end game of every form of utopian experiment, from fascism to socialism, is power, and the tools of power are getting better all the time. Used to, you had to shout the loudest, but now you can broadcast NPR style propaganda via tracking software to the home of every person using the Internet. And, when has anyone trumpeting the politics of racism and class warfare cared about logic? Emotion, jealousy, anger, hope and change - that's what matters to the "moral" outcome, not any rule of law.
No is a very powerful word if you mean it.
Damn! I like concise! Wanna trade messages?
Sure!
If we keep the classical liberal ideal of individual rights and laissez-faire capitalism before us, we can and will win liberty in our time – for our children and ourselves.
-----
What complete feel-good nonsense!
The predators were able to impose slavery upon humans because... because... come on, you know the answer.
Because they were willing to take action... or more commonly, pay others (thugs) to take action for them. Because they were willing to back up their thoughts and words with actions.
This article imagines a world in which people who want liberty persuade enough people to value liberty, that... ??? WHAT ??? The predators will voluntarily "stand down", resign, fire all government employees, give up the monumentally enormous advantages they have over everyone else? Seriously?
Be clear. Like predators of other species, human predators have zero scruples, and their only restrain occurs when they fear being killed themselves (their hired thugs, on the other hand, are of no concern).
The only way humans will EVER have liberty again is... to take it, and exterminate any and every human predator and paid thug who attempts to control them, prohibit them, steal from them, enslave them.
NOTHING else will work. NOTHING. All the wishful thinking in the world will do nothing but delude liberty-advocates, and waste any time and effort they invest in liberty.
But liberty-advocates will NOT take the actions required. They will not "just say no". They will not exterminate the predators who prey upon them.
Why not?
Because they will not say what needs to be said. And for most of them, they do not know what needs to be said, because they just can't accept the facts of reality are as they are. They simply cannot and will not admit how simple the issue is, and how lame they have been for thousands of years.
They cannot admit...
That all forms of "authority" are pure fiction, a delusion composed of nothing, not even thin air. That "government" is pure fiction, another delusion composed of nothing, not even thin air. The the entirety of modern man is one gigantic fraudulant fictional made-up game of Simon sez... where the predators are Simon, and everyone else obeys whatever Simon sez --- like complete freaking morons!
My life is not a game, and I know that. Unfortunately, only a very few humans on this planet take their life as something important (to themselves), and refuse to pretend Simon has any basis whatsoever to claim I must obey what he sez.
The issue is as simple as that.
That is almost the entire issue (though it can be stated differently).
#1: Simon is a human. Simon came to exist by being born.
#2: I am a human. I came to exist by being born.
Since I'm a bit awake and alert, I can see the symmetry of the reality stated by those two simple sentences. The mere symmetry demonstrates that Simon cannot possibly have any more basis to claim I must obey him, than I have to claim he must obey me. Namely ZERO. Simon is an animal on a planet orbiting a star in a galaxy. I am an animal on a planet orbiting a star in a galaxy. No matter how many billions of hours you stare at this situation (for Simon and me, or for any other humans on his planet... or elsewhere), you cannot find any basis whatsoever for me to obey Simon, or for Simon to obey me.
That's ALL there is to the fundamental issue. Once any liberty advocate FACES and comprehends the significance of this fundamental fact, he or she is faced with exactly what they must face in order to become free.
JUST SAY NO.
THEN DO NOT COMPLY.
AND EVADE OR EXTERMINATE ANYONE WHO ATTEMPTS TO MAKE YOU.
Whatever an honest liberty advocate does, he or she does not pretend that ANY of the dozens or hundreds or thousands of utterly bogus, fraudulent, made-up delusions promoted by the predators IS REAL. They are NOT REAL, but the moment you accept ANY of them, YOU ARE TOAST.
YOU ARE TOAST because... you have begun to play Simon sez again, and you are not Simon. You are his slave. And you are his slave because... you are playing his totally bogus invented fraudulent game... for which no basis exists, and no basis could possibly exist.
If you value liberty, you must be willing to refuse to play Simon sez with human predators. You must stop playing their game. You must stop accepting their absurd presumptuous insanity that somehow, magically, you must obey Simon, and turn over your life and wealth to Simon.
Now, given that humans have played this game for so long (thousands of years, and likely tens of thousands in various forms), those who came before us have put Simon in a very strong position. They have given Simon hundreds of trillions of dollars, which Simon has spent to buy lots of weapons, make endless preparations, and attempt to enact "full spectrum dominance" upon everyone (especially human producers, who create everything Simon needs to survive and dominate).
And so, Simon is in a very strong position in some ways. Which means, only those who value liberty significantly AND take wise, prudent, efficient, well considered steps have a chance to evade and/or defeat any Simon they encounter. Because this is not a game, certainly not from the perspective of Simon anyway.
BUT... Simon is only strong because... people obey him. PERIOD.
You may thing I understate the power Simon has. No, I don't. Simon is a royal flaming chicken-hawk. Simon NEVER goes out and gets his hands dirty, much less knocks down doors, knocks people down on their floors, throws flash bangs into cribs, and generally destroys homes and lives.
Nope, Simon pays other human predators to do their dirty work... dirty work that is too gross and slightly risky. No, Simon does not get his hands dirty, and Simon does not take existential risk.
Not that the predators who knock your door down, and knock you down, and then steal and destroy your property aren't predators too. They most certainly are. And they play a derivative game of Simon sez too --- do what they say, and instantly so, or they will kill you on the spot.
But... is any Simon from top to bottom so secure?
The answer is no. But you must be wise, prudent, diligent and thoughtful to figure out how to deal with every Simon you encounter. First, you never do anything on their terms... when they want or how they want.
Notice how every Simon gets you to jump through hoops on their terms, when they want, and how they want. You can be AT LEAST as wise as they... can't you? Answer: You better, or you're toast.
You almost never need to deal with any Simon the way he or she wants or expects or demands. So don't.
One approach is to... vanish. Evade his plans, evade his gaze, evade his demands, evade him as completely as you can. As the saying goes, "out of sight, out of mind". Simon has a lot of cattle to herd, so wander off in some obscure place, and stay out of sight. That's one strategy, just one part of a total strategy.
Don't register. Don't sign up. Don't walk right into his arms (school, hospital, conventional employment, etc). If you want to do something in life, do so, but keep your actions to yourself, and do not attach your name or face to those actions.
Move! One of the most amazingly simple strategies is... to never live or work in the fictitious nation you are claimed as slave (citizen) by some pack of Simon. Amazing how effective this one step is! Just amazing! To be sure, this doesn't evade you from every annoying aspect of every Simon on the planet, but this one step probably reduces your burdens by 50% in one swoop. Rather than live where you are considered "the official slave of every Simon at every level"... you are instead "a welcomed and valued guest" who most every local Simon considers you someone who will spend valued [foreign] money into their economy. Let them see you that way! Let them assume "this slave belongs to someone else"... someone thousands of miles away, who doesn't even know where you are!
That's a start. That's a practical step towards liberty. No utopia of course, and no panacea. Just one big improvement.
Unless you "just can't", run your own business. A cash business. Hopefully I need say no more. There is other major step. No W2s, no with-holdings, and no tax because you never quite make a profit. Maybe someday. Maybe not.
But these are all just temporary measures. Because 99% of people interested in liberty are not willing to take actions to free themselves [and everyone else] from the legions of Simon and his "sezing", these are pretty much the only kinds of actions that serious liberty lovers can take. And as long as 99% of liberty lovers are not willing to eliminate human predators like Simon and his hired thugs, that's the best most liberty-lovers can do.
But... just as speculation... could liberty lovers stop this insane world-wide game of Simon sez? Absolutely! While Simon and his thugs have absolutely monumental resources compared to "regular folks" including "regular liberty lovers", their situation is utterly and completely non-viable if even 1% of the population decided to shut down this insane world-wide game of self-destruction.
How? Well, whatever group of liberty-lovers would take on this mission needs to carefully and diligently work out every detail before they begin. And they must be 100% dedicated to seeing their mission through. But just as speculation, consider some of the inherent disadvantages of being Simon, or one of his paid thugs.
First of all, if you are Simon, you totally depend on your paid thugs. You aren't willing to do anything yourself, and so, without willing paid thugs... you are out of business. Nobody to steal for you. Nobody to collect protection money. Nobody to intimidate the entire population of a planet. Nobody to do the dirty work.
But, of course, probably 90% of the population of earth is willing to work for Simon, and be his paid thug. Why? Because it pays well, and is safe. But, how can the job of being a royally nasty, utterly unjust piece of human trash... be safe? Why don't the people they attack gun these disgusting creeps down left and right? The answer, of course, lots more predator-thugs will come after you when they learn you took out their fellow predator. And so, it simply is not practical to resist when these thug predators come to your door demanding your money, or your compliance with their demands. That is true. They got you there, alright.
Which is where those forms of evade come in. But... wait a second... aren't we forgetting something here? The reason the thugs "have you" is because... they know exactly who is resisting them, they know exactly who is trying to defend themselves against their predatory attacks. But... wait a second. Why would any prey with more than 100 functioning neurons wait for predators to come after them, at their own time, place and convenience? They sure don't have to! The prey could organize, identify places and situations where they (the prey) are invisible and unidentifiable (for all practical purposes), and then take actions at their time, place and convenience instead. And furthermore, to make their basic scheme work, virtually all these thugs wear targets! Seriously! Those targets are called "uniforms", which clearly and unambiguously identify them as human predators working for Simon. In other words, they are easy pickings for any prey who turns on his 100 neurons, and brainstorms with other prey who turn on their 100 neurons, and figure out ways to eliminate the predators at near zero risk to themselves. To hell with responding when you are in their crosshairs! Enough of that!
Anyway, I've gotten a ways off the original topic, and a ways down the line. What I've described will not happen, because human prey are morons, and worse, they do not understand the situation (predator-Simon and prey-you), they do not take the situation seriously or realistically, and so humans will never enjoy even a modest degree of liberty ever again on planet earth. That's my conclusion... a conclusion that I hope is badly and overwhelmingly mistaken. Nonetheless, that is what all the evidence implies. Like this article, that is pure wishful thinking, that imagines "if we want liberty, we will have liberty". What nonsense! These human predators have the greatest freaking game in the universe going, and no way, no how will they "stand down". Not for any reason, most certainly not because "you want them to", or "liberty becomes popular". Give me a break! The fact that liberty folks are this delusional seals the deal. Humans are finished, starting with the liberty crowd. That is, unless they're willing to get real, get serious, get wise, prudent and creative, and finally make plans and take actions. But they won't. Which is why "hide" is an infinitely better option than "fight" at this point. At least that's still nominally practical... for another decade or three.
Add this to that. I, Pencil.
So you think we need to move away from our homes and set up somewhere else?
Sorry, not me.
Deys a'pushed yo buttons in fo sho, Ann. Dats de firs' trick: makes you spen' yo limited resources, yo energy, chasin dey phantoms. Best focus on y'own work, chile. Sumptin dem pollytishuns never done lernt. Don't say nuffin. You go be an example chile, an' see what dat brings.
I like the idea of a global stall of the honest work. But yea it prolly wont go that way. Polland was shut down pretty quick as I recal. Once the regular honest folks found thier power. Poof government just folded up camp.
PS great post Ann.
Ann, mucho love. Stay safe always. A night watching a sky full of stars, free on this rock, is a night worth staying. Anything else is... "meh".
Knowing Simon exists is the first step.
p.s. the hallmarks of sapience are appreciation and gratefulness, on a mental and/or spiritual level. Simons will never understand the mastery of a skill, the love of an art, the bliss of immersion...
Something I'm grateful for. Hope you'll appreciate it. ;-)
Blut Aus Nord - Memoria Vetusta II: Dialogue With the Stars
Too bad, but YouTube says that music video is "no longer available."
Try this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB0nvFgSKqc
Timeless, transcendent music.
Great, great stuff Ann. Thanks so much for your contributions.
I really like your rants! Man, when you get rolling, it just gets better and better as you encircle the subject and further your line of thinking. There are more and more of us, who are hating on Simon and his grubby minions and see them for what they are.
It doesn't work that way. History's ratchet only allows leftward movement, until the system collapses and is replaced with something more right-wing:
http://blog.jim.com/culture/history-interpreted-as-left-singularities/
http://blog.jim.com/politics/left-political-singularity/
By any metric, people are very unequal, that's just a fact of nature. Right-wing societies try to maintain a social hierarchy with the best people on top, but the best people tend to die without leaving the best offspring. Left-wing societies go to ever more ridiculous extremes to make everyone equal, only succeeding when everyone has been killed.
Reading the posts I find that most have a good handle on what they would like to happen, it's just we differ on how to do it.
We really need to set aside our petty differences and settle on a solid platform we can all agree to.
I would wager most here would agree to freedom and liberty as expressed in our Declaration of Independence,,, sound money, and the rule of law that applies to all.
I know that when I try something and it doesn't work, I always return to what did work. I wonder, Is it possible to find a particular time in our Republic where most things seemed to work?
Collectivism has one up on Individualism in that collectivists will easily work as a group being that is how they think.
Individuals however have a difficult time because they are used to being self reliant so it's very hard for them to operate as a large group without infighting and the collectivists know it... and use it.
We need to find a way of working together at least long enough to get the job done, as our founders did.
Speaking as a non-American, I think the best example of a free, fiscally sound, democratic, technologically advanced system, is what exists in Scandinavia. The reason I point to that, and not America's history, is because I don't know how much of America's progress can be attributed to resource-grabbing from other places, whereas Scandinavia's progress is largely self-sustained. In America's case, maybe Germany and Japan should be a better example of how to demilitarize, decolonialize, and actually create a wealth boom and a free society, never before seen in the country's history. Instead of looking back, America should do something new, in my opinion. But honestly, I don't see how it will happen the same way, because Germany and Japan had to lose a World war in order to wake up.
Laissez-faire people ignore the fact that this is a world of oligarchy, where corporations and the state intermingle. The Fed is a prime example of that. You wish it were just the state doing this.
Yes, and after more than a Century of runaway, triumphantly enforced frauds by the Federal Reserve Board, and the rest of the oligarchs being able to manipulate the political economy, with the maximum insider information, the result is that almost everything that could be robbed has ALREADY been robbed, through the prolonged successes of enforced frauds being the foundation of that kind of political economy.
Therefore, turning back on the lights of freedom and the rule of law NOW is to turn the lights back onto a situation which was created in the dark, by the destruction of freedom and the rule of law, due to the oligarchs being able to apply the methods of organized crime to dominate the political processes. Therefore, any theoretical solutions should address the degree to which the existing situation became so extremely unbalanced! The practical impossibility of doing that is the BIG PROBLEM, which has no realistic solutions that I am aware of.
Any system that aims to replace human labor with fossil fueled labor (machines) is guaranteed to gradually become socialist.
Before you defeat statism you'll have to learn to defeat Oligarchy.
But NOBODY talks about that !
Cart before horse
Oligarchy requires the state to exist / thrive
ha ha ha; dream on!
You will create the new apache tribe as new geronimo.
OK, but get it right this time!
Take a walk in Afghan and you'll see what 3000 years of feudalism and every tribe for itself can do to a land.
Why must every counter argument against anarchy end with Afghanistan or Somalia?
When Afghanis or Somalis can show each other the slightest amount of respect, then I may give them a second thought, until then they are bipedal mammals that make an interesting case study in arrested development.
"Chicken and Egg"
The unitary mechanism throughout was the application of the methods of organized crime. There are no theoretical solutions which can make sense outside of that context. The ONLY better government would have to be better organized crime, which would require enough people understanding that enough in order for that to become possible.
Most people have become members of organized crime gangs that they do NOT understand, because they have been conditioned to NOT WANT to understand, and thus, they behave like incompetent political idiots that allow the best organized gangs of criminals, the oligarchs, to control the government, without providing any effective, realistic resistance.
One of the main reasons for that are the kinds of articles featured above, which are presented by reactionary revolutionaries, with their superficial analysis, followed by correspondeing bullshit "solutions."
CONTROLLED OPPOSITION TO THE OLIGARCHS MAKES IMPROVEMENTS PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
Theoretically, only IF enough people understood that enough might it be possible to move past the problems of the apparent opposition to the oligarchs ending up being controlled by the oligarchs.
Good luck with that, since the majority of people have already been reduced to being Zombie Sheeple, whom the Black Sheeple, like the writer of the article above, attempt to lead backwards, as their bullshit "solutions" to their bullshit presentation of the nature of the problems.
I actually agree with most of your argument. And yes a majority of men along with almost all women will go along with any system as long as they get their piece of the action, and, they don't have to stare at the gruesome parts too long.
America is like the mob boss's wife that overlooks the blood stains on the carpeting as she drives the new Caddy her abusive husband gave her.
So this generation is lost. And so is the next. Which is why Dr. Paul has put his entire energies towards homeschooling. A single generation, brought up with an emphasis on respect, will be allergic to the state. And ten percent of the population, if determined, is hard to stop. Keep in mind also that after 40 years of collapse, the moochers will have mostly died off.
America needs to go through the desert, and two generations pass, before reaching the promised land.
Think about this for a bit. The oligarchy is protected by being surrounded by layers of gov/corp tools. Regulators,teachers,judges,cops,polls,media,corperations and the system itself. All with one goal. To take by any means the fruits of labor. The system is dependant on that labors efforts. It is fueled by old fashion labor. The thing is the system cannot afford to pay an honest wage. They cheat thru force to avoid having to pay the true costs.
That said. The system like the wall in Germany is kept standing by guards. They can and will simply take whatever the system needs to stay standing. So if the honest folks cant stop the theft of the fruits of our labor. We should stop producing that basket of fruits. The stall. This system is a pig in that it wastes on a massive scale. I suspect it would grind to a halt so fast one would be amazed without that honest labor. Everything comes from honest productivity. Sure they like to say you did not build that or this but they sure as hell did not build it. Well not anything good anyway.
So we stop. Then they run out of fruit and the system stalls. Then we settle up. Not with thier tools but with the oligarchs dirrectly. We must first set a level field. They are a slippery bunch for sure. They can and will run out of range. Thats the real trick we need to overcome. For this to work there can be no place for them to hide. Thus the need for it to be a global thing.
Yep its a tall order. But we never had the internet before. So lets split this pig along lines of our choosing. The honest and the not. Then we will see who has the real power. I say its the skilled honest labor.