This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

F.A. Hayek On "The Great Utopia"

Tyler Durden's picture


While it is hardly necessary to provide commentary to one of F.A. Hayek's timeless observations from his book, The Road To Serfdom, rereading the chapter titled The Great Utopia, in this year of what could possibly be the most important election in the history of the United States, in which the US public will be promised nothing short of utopia by virtually every candidate except the one who really knows that fixing America would require pain and sacrifice, is everyone's duty. Courtesy of the Center for Economic Liberty we recreate it below in its entirety, and urge all readers, regardless of political persuasion of economic beliefs to consider what F.A.Hayek was saying some 70 years earlier, and how very applicable it is to our current situation.

The Great Utopia

There can be no doubt that most of those in the democracies who demand a central direction of all economic activity still believe that socialism and individual freedom can be combined. Yet socialism was early recognized by many thinkers as the gravest threat to freedom.

It is rarely remembered now that socialism in its beginnings was frankly authoritarian. It began quite openly as a reaction against the liberalism of the French Revolution. The French writers who laid its foundation had no doubt that their ideas could be put into practice only by a strong dictatorial government. The first of modern planners, Saint-Simon, predicted that those who did not obey his proposed planning boards would be "treated as cattle."

Nobody saw more clearly than the great political thinker de Tocqueville that democracy stands in an irreconcilable conflict with socialism: "Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom," he said. "Democracy attaches all possible value to each man," he said in 1848, "while socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude."

To allay these suspicions and to harness to its cart the strongest of all political motives—the craving for freedom — socialists began increasingly to make use of the promise of a "new freedom." Socialism was to bring "economic freedom," without which political freedom was "not worth having."

To make this argument sound plausible, the word "freedom" was subjected to a subtle change in meaning. The word had formerly meant freedom from coercion, from the arbitrary power of other men. Now it was made to mean freedom from necessity, release from the compulsion of the circumstances which inevitably limit the range of choice of all of us. Freedom in this sense is, of course, merely another name for power or wealth. The demand for the new freedom was thus only another name for the old demand for a redistribution of wealth.

The claim that a planned economy would produce a substantially larger output than the competitive system is being progressively abandoned by most students of the problem. Yet it is this false hope as much as anything which drives us along the road to planning.

Although our modern socialists' promise of greater freedom is genuine and sincere, in recent years observer after observer has been impressed by the unforeseen consequences of socialism, the extraordinary similarity in many respects of the conditions under "communism" and "fascism." As the writer Peter Drucker expressed it in 1939, "the complete collapse of the belief in the attainability of freedom and equality through Marxism has forced Russia to travel the same road toward a totalitarian society of un-freedom and inequality which Germany has been following. Not that communism and fascism are essentially the same. Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion, and it has proved as much an illusion in Russia as in pre-Hitler Germany."

No less significant is the intellectual outlook of the rank and file in the communist and fascist movements in Germany before 1933. The relative ease with which a young communist could be converted into a Nazi or vice versa was well known, best of all to the propagandists of the two parties. The communists and Nazis clashed more frequently with each other than with other parties simply because they competed for the same type of mind and reserved for each other the hatred of the heretic. Their practice showed how closely they are related. To both, the real enemy, the man with whom they had nothing in common, was the liberal of the old type. While to the Nazi the communist and to the communist the Nazi, and to both the socialist, are potential recruits made of the right timber, they both know that there can be no compromise between them and those who really believe in individual freedom.

What is promised to us as the Road to Freedom is in fact the Highroad to Servitude. For it is not difficult to see what must be the consequences when democracy embarks upon a course of planning. The goal of the planning will be described by some such vague term as "the general welfare." There will be no real agreement as to the ends to be attained, and the effect of the people's agreeing that there must be central planning, without agreeing on the ends, will be rather as if a group of people were to commit themselves to take a journey together without agreeing where they want to go: with the result that they may all have to make a journey which most of them do not want at all.

Democratic assemblies cannot function as planning agencies. They cannot produce agreement on everything — the whole direction of the resources of the nation-for the number of possible courses of action will be legion. Even if a congress could, by proceeding step by step and compromising at each point, agree on some scheme, it would certainly in the end satisfy nobody.

To draw up an economic plan in this fashion is even less possible than, for instance, successfully to plan a military campaign by democratic procedure. As in strategy it would become inevitable to delegate the task to experts. And even if, by this expedient, a democracy should succeed in planning every sector of economic activity, it would still have to face the problem of integrating these separate plans into a unitary whole. There will be a stronger and stronger demand that some board or some single individual should be given power to act on their own responsibility. The cry for an economic dictator is a characteristic stage in the movement toward planning. Thus the legislative body will be reduced to choosing the persons who are to have practically absolute power. The whole system will tend toward that kind of dictatorship in which the head of the government is position by popular vote, but where he has all the powers at his command to make certain that the vote will go in the direction he desires.

Planning leads to dictatorship because dictatorship is the most effective instrument of coercion and, as such, essential if central planning on a large scale is to be possible. There is no justification for the widespread belief that, so long as power is conferred by democratic procedure, it cannot be arbitrary; it is not the source of power which prevents it from being arbitrary; to be free from dictatorial qualities, the power must also be limited. A true "dictatorship of the proletariat," even if democratic in form, if it undertook centrally to direct the economic system, would probably destroy personal freedom as completely as any autocracy has ever done.

Individual freedom cannot be reconciled with the supremacy of one single purpose to which the whole of society is permanently subordinated. To a limited extent we ourselves experience this fact in wartime, when subordination of almost everything to the immediate and pressing need is the price at which we preserve our freedom in the long run. The fashionable phrases about doing for the purposes of peace what we have do for the purposes of war are completely misleading, for it is sensible temporarily to sacrifice freedom in order to make it more secure in the future, but it is quite a different thing to sacrifice liberty permanently in the interests of a planned economy.

To those who have watched the transition from socialism to fascism at close quarters, the connection between the two systems is obvious. The realization of the socialist program means the destruction of freedom. Democratic socialism, the great utopia of the last few generations, is simply not achievable.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 01/28/2012 - 20:36 | 2106193 macholatte
macholatte's picture

I prefer this Hayek

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 21:26 | 2106264 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

So does Antonio Banderas.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 21:36 | 2106285 TheSilverJournal
TheSilverJournal's picture

Americans are suffering because central planning of money is destroying productivity. Mis-pricing money causes resources to flow into unproductive areas. The return of market-priced money will expose the malinvestments that have been created by artificially cheap money being pumped into the economy and cause short-term pain, but will also cause a boom in productivity because resources will once again be allocated much more efficiently.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:20 | 2106517 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Why don't we just golden shower the Marxists with the lastest Bank of International Settlements Report.

Preliminary international banking statistics, third quarter 2011

In the third quarter of 2011, after adjusting for the effects of the depreciation of most currencies against the US dollar, cross-border claims of BIS reporting banks rebounded by 2.0% following a decline of 0.6% in the previous period, and cross-border liabilities increased by 2.8%. The upsurge in assets was mainly focused on interbank business, which grew by 4.2%, while lending to non-banks contracted by 1.8%. Excepting holdings of securities, which dropped by 3.9%, all other instruments rose on the assets side, and lending in euros increased by 3.8%. Most of the increase was recorded with developed countries and offshore centres, as activity with emerging economies in aggregate was subdued.Reporting banks' international claims on an immediate borrower basis, adjusted for exchange rate movements, increased in the third quarter of 2011 (by 1.4%) after a moderate slowdown of 0.3% in the previous quarter. Local claims in local currency also rose, by 1.3%.

On an ultimate risk basis, which adjusts for net risk transfers across borrowing countries and sectors (but not for exchange rate changes), banks' consolidated foreign claims slowed down by 2.7%, in particular visà-vis the non-bank private sector (-3.9%). Due to the decrease in long term interest rates and the appreciation of the US dollar against almost all currencies during the third quarter, as well as to better liquidity in the market, other exposures resulting from derivatives contracts, excluding credit derivatives, grew by $1.2 trillion after an increase of $800 billion in guarantees in the second quarter.

Data for the third quarter of 2011 are preliminary. Final data, with a detailed analysis of recent trends, will be published in the forthcoming BIS Quarterly Review, to be released on 12 March 2012.

Hmmmmm. 1.2T seems to be the magic number. Wonder why Obama needs that specific number. Hahahahahahahaha.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:36 | 2106559 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Hayek Hayek..... tragically for all humans, the true Utopia is only to be found with-in. 

For optimal "outer" conditions, close or close enough to a utopia, think womb. And then look around.

Perfect people create perfect systems. The majority are stuck in their lowest chakra, a jumble of needs and desires. If utopia came knockling, in all it's simplicity, it would get the door slammed shut in it's face.



Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:45 | 2106575 akak
akak's picture

No libertarian theorist has EVER laid claim to being utopian, or promised or even hinted that a perfect libertarian society would in any way be a utopian one --- maybe just an optimum one in regard to human satisfaction, but nothing more than that.  No, it is the virulent statists such as Marx, Lenin, and Pol Pot who promised utopia --- and the extent of their utopian promises were always in direct relation to the dystopian Hells they produced in real life.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:48 | 2106584 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

THat is true akak. I was making the broader observation. Besides, each of those despots was set-up precisely because they were maniacal from the start. 

I've also discovered, to my dismay, that a majority of people actually like to be told what to do. To be ruled.



Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:52 | 2106593 akak
akak's picture


I've also discovered, to my dismay, that a majority of people actually like to be told what to do. To be ruled.

I discovered that fact quite early in life as well (certainly by the age of 8 or 10), and have never since failed to be astonished, sickened, depressed and outraged by it.  I want to grab them by the shoulders and shake the shit out of them while screaming in their miserable, sheeplike faces "WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU?!"

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:00 | 2106616 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Precisely akak.

Look, even now, and I'm totally serious..... for two years now here and the better part of 7 years outside, I've shown/spoken to people of every hue/level that I have the keys to what is at least close to a tech-no-logical version of Utopia (compared to what we have today).

But most are happy either ignoring or ridiculing a changemaker. ;-) I think if Tesla came and sat in their laps, most people would push him off to go invest in APPL.

Fear of change rules. 


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:07 | 2106631 akak
akak's picture

.... for two years now here and the better part of 7 years outside, I've shown/spoken to people of every hue/level that I have the keys to what is at least close to a tech-no-logical version of Utopia (compared to what we have today).

To what are you referring, ORI?  If you used to post a link in your comments (as I perhaps seem to recall), I guess I should admit that I virtually never check out such links, so I would have missed whatever it was.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:16 | 2106644 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

When you have a few, check out the link above akak. 


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:23 | 2107037 economics1996
economics1996's picture

Our economy resembles a war economy with emphasis on consumption today, and a lack of investment into productive consumer related capital resources.  The war is coming from the over leveraged elites.

Hang eh high, five at a time.  When you get a change don't fuck around and take these mother fuckers down.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:33 | 2107163 Ancona
Ancona's picture

100% right on Akak.


I work at the periphery of a large government agency as aqn outside engineer, and I witness the daily machinations of absolute hierarchy. I have working relationships with folks holding doctorates who will not make a decision without being given explicit permission. Tragic really, but true.

The removal of critical thinking from educational dockets insures a relatively compliant populace, more easily controlled than a free and open society. PC is another disease afflicting our Republic, because it stifles expression and sharing ideas in an open forum.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:50 | 2107184 economics1996
economics1996's picture

Here is a blog I did that reflect the economy today from a real growth/jobs perspective.

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 00:25 | 2108622 Milestones
Milestones's picture

Excellent, intelligent exchange between ORI and Akak. I too sadly came to much the same conclusion about mankind years  ago but still hope for a different outcome. Afraid it is not forthcoming.              Milestones

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:33 | 2106685 WonderDawg
WonderDawg's picture

I played golf with one of my usual golf buddies today, and we got paired up with another couple of guys. These guys were in their 50's, a few years older than me, but still in my peer group. Lately, whenever I meet strangers and have the opportunity to engage them in a convesation about current events, I do so. Both of them were republicans. I asked them if they knew what the NDAA was. Both shook their heads. These are pretty smart guys, one is an Oracle DBA and the other a business consultant for pharmacies, and they were not aware of the NDAA that was just signed for this year. I explained what it was. I asked them if they knew what Posse Comitatus was. Both shook their heads again. I explained the whole thing about the NDAA, the verbiage that basically repealed posse comitatus, made indefinite detention legal, the ramifications, everything. I expected some outrage, or at least some concern. One of the guys shook his head and said, "Fuckin' democrats." I said, "Dude, more republicans voted for it than democrats." They looked at me, befuddled. I said, yeah, that's right, Hopey signed it with "serious reservations", but thank the republicans for pushing it through.

My point here is, so many people still are not paying attention. Most everyone is still under the spell of the left-right paradigm, and I just can't fucking believe it. Wake the fuck up! I want to scream at them. I did my part, of course, and urged them to do some research, because our elected leaders just laid the groundwork for nationwide martial law. I asked them to think about why would they do this now, after the law had been in place for over 100 years. Just gather the information and ask yourself, why now?

People are waking up, but very very slowly, like a drunk coming off a three week bender. I'm worried about the future of this country, but most of the people around me don't seem to give a shit.


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 01:45 | 2106805 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

If you want to find people in touch with reality, stop looking for them on the links.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 01:50 | 2106813 WonderDawg
WonderDawg's picture

I'm not necessarily trying to find people in touch with reality, I'm trying to get a sense of the overall degree of awareness in the population. I talk to people at the gym, on the links, AA meetings, in restaurants, at work. Pretty much all the places I frequent. The lack of awareness is pervasive.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 02:27 | 2106830 akak
akak's picture

You are correct, but what I find profoundly depressing is not just the increasing degree of unawareness among people nowadays, but the widespread unwillingness to even be aware, or to be informed, or to acknowledge blatant facts that disrupt their cozy cocoons of denial.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 07:24 | 2106962 greensnacks
greensnacks's picture

Lets hope awareness comes before that loaf of bread reaches $1MM.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:43 | 2107172 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

No.  It never will.  Until the bread, circuses, distractions, et al, end, there will be no awakening.  Until someone is sat down, looked directly in the face, and told, "it's all over, there is no more free lunch, it's time to realistically make an effort to lead your own life," then he or she will never change.  It's kind of like an intervention, except without a loving family around...  more akin to getting pushed down stairs.  There simply has to be a break of the persistent thought process in order for another idea to form...

There is a directly correlated relationship between political apathy and standard of living...  once basic necessities have been met.  The more needs and wants that are met, the less of a need or want there is for political activism...  if our needs and wants are already met, what do we need from our government?  Why would we bother actively participating in the political process when we don't marginally stand to gain anything by doing so?  (we have football to watch, porn to pleasure ourselves to, and ice to drown).

Of course, fortunately or unfortunately, gravity always wins.  The delusion we create for ourselves (individually and collectively) comes to a screeching halt when finally met with reality...  we're getting closer.

PS, moreso than anything, an understanding of this function is the rudimentary building block for the ascension of power and breaking through the socioeconomic glass ceiling in an era of cronyism (farcism?)...  presuming you dare utilize or otherwise act upon your knowledge.  [it is the assumption from which political chicanery flows].

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:18 | 2107031 clymer
clymer's picture

Akak / WD~

My experience is exactly the same as yours. I can count on one hand the people I know who are awake (and they are not even close friends). The people I know will vote for Obama (again) come November, or whoever the non-Paul republican is depending upon their affiliation.


We need a miracle, or some extremely profound change in luck in order to facilitate a change of direction nationally / globally from the current fascist model, back to the root of the American experiment; freedom.


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 10:54 | 2107108 Sisyphus
Sisyphus's picture

Unfortunately, that change of direction is not gonna happen as long as "their" stomachs are full and they are sheltered from the elements. And even if a few of "them" aren't, the cry for change will not happen until a critical mass is reached. I don't see the PTB losing control over the plebes anytime soon. The only way they lose control of this situation is if Nature throws them a curveball. I don't want anybody to go through pain and suffering, but the only way for anybody to wake us is to hit the absolute bottom. And that will only come through pain and suffering. And the sad part is that might not happen in my life time, and I am quite young. So, find your nest and incubate your eggs.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 12:12 | 2107213 bonderøven-farm ass
bonderøven-farm ass's picture

Zeus issued the law: 'Learn through suffering.'

Sorrow enters even sleep, dripping into the heart,

Sorrow which cannot forget suffering,

And even those who are unwilling learn to be wise........

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:19 | 2107032 clymer
clymer's picture


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:21 | 2107150 GOSPLAN HERO
GOSPLAN HERO's picture

Most Americans do not possess critical thinking skills.




Sun, 01/29/2012 - 14:16 | 2107486 Woodyg
Woodyg's picture

That unawareness is By Design.......

The dictator from Nicaragua Somoza was once asked why he had no public education system in his country answered "I want Oxen Not men."

Pretty applicable to today's lack of critical thought.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 18:28 | 2108092 Mesquite
Mesquite's picture

Sad, but too true...

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 00:36 | 2108642 Milestones
Milestones's picture

Profoundly depressing is the real phrase. I have had those kind of discussions with many of the "suit and tie" crowd---It was akin to going outside and barking at a tree.                Milestones

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 06:26 | 2108932 Mitzibitzi
Mitzibitzi's picture

Ah, I see you've met my step-daughter!

Me and the wife have explained in detail that the current system is in it's death throes, and while what replaces it may well be a great improvement, getting there is going to cause pain and suffering on a scale somewhere between 'bloody awful' and 'the survivors may envy the dead'.

Intellectually, she understands this, I think. But then goes out and blows her wages (she's at college but works part time) each month on shit she doesn't need. Cos, like, you need to stay in fashion!

Drives me up the fucking wall!

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 05:42 | 2106905 tired1
tired1's picture

The 'reality' of the system is just too ugly for folks to face, call it CD. "It just cant be happening here.... And then: what are one's options? To change one's habits after a lifetime of conditiong? A, given that one finally awakens, just specifically what is the flight to safety?

In the days of the Soviet Great Terror those that suspected that they might be subject to arrest pulled up stakes and fled to the relative safety of Siberia, where they could at least retain some sense of freedom.

The cattle of the US are in for quite an awakening.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:59 | 2107192 DanDaley
DanDaley's picture

Right. Several years ago, I'd be playing golf and a little voice inside my head kept saying What in the hell are you doing out here? You should be spending this money and time on getting ready -buying the necessary stuff, getting training.  It got worse and worse until I just quit. Golf's fun, but like the Bible says, When I became a man, I put away childish things.  Or if you like a quote from the Godfather: Women and children can afford to be careless, but a man cannot afford to be careless.  Lots of women and children out there these days.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 12:05 | 2107200 DanDaley
DanDaley's picture

Put another way, you'll find an awful lot more people in touch with what is going on at a rifle range than you ever will on a golf course.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 12:13 | 2107216 WonderDawg
WonderDawg's picture

You completely missed the point. I wasn't searching for people in touch with what is going on, I'm trying to get an overall sense of the level of awareness in the community. I go to the gun range, too. Last Sunday, at the indoor range, there was a 45 minute wait for a lane. That was encouraging.

And by the way, what makes you think that since I took 4 hours out of my weekend to enjoy myself, that I don't also look after my own survival? Yeah, I'm watching what's going on and making my own plans, but we also have to try to get some pleasure where we can. I walk around doom and gloom all day and I'm no good to myself or anyone else. Don't be so fucking presumptuous.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 14:48 | 2107591 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

WonderDawg, I also think that in the world there are Golfers and ther are golfers. Perhaps you are a Golfer getting a lot of pushback by golfers. I'm a Golfer. It's a sacred sport.


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 16:48 | 2107900 WonderDawg
WonderDawg's picture

Yeah, I guess I'm a Golfer. It's one source of pleasure that I find in my life. Yesterday was not the best game I've played, but I was outdoors, getting some fresh air, enjoying the company of my friend and making the acquaintance of a couple of other Golfers. During the course of the day, I related some information and urged them to take some action. Maybe I got through to them, and maybe I didn't, but I damn sure didn't consider it a waste of time. We all need to decompress at times, and it's our own responsibility to find a way to do it. I also write fiction for a creative outlet, and this is another passion. I do a lot of research for the stories I write. So I'm learning as I create. Even if I never make a penny from my work, I'm a better man for the effort.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 16:49 | 2107903 DanDaley
DanDaley's picture

Holy cow, punkie, nobody was critizing you.  I was just talking about my own situation, talking about coming to awareness.  I guess you just wanted to get mad at somebody and use a multi-syllabic word.  

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 17:36 | 2107999 WonderDawg
WonderDawg's picture

Or if you like a quote from the Godfather: Women and children can afford to be careless, but a man cannot afford to be careless.  Lots of women and children out there these days.

Sorry if I took that the wrong way. I wasn't trying to pick a fight, it just sounded like you were challenging my manhood with that quote. Maybe with all the ignorance I see around me, I've grown overly sensitive. If so, my bad.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 19:08 | 2108147 DanDaley
DanDaley's picture

That's cool.  Actually I love golf and wish I had more time to play.  After accidentally hitting an hole-in-one in 1968 with a 5 iron over a 130-yard water hole in Salt Lake City, I took it up again in 2002 and went from 180 for 18 to an honest 84 on a 119 slope rating 5 years later.  I worked hard and do appreciate the game, it's just that after 911, it took me a while to start thinking about other things.  No harm, no foul, I think is the expression.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 05:26 | 2106895 GernB
GernB's picture

It's amazing that the Bush era did not wake up more conservatives to the idea that neither Democrats nor Republicans want more individual freedom. They both believe in a large all-powerful government. They just disagree with what that power should be used to do. This is the scary part of this election cycle. We still have the establishment Republican party trying to assert itself into the process and nominate an establishment Republican that wiill preserve the nearly absolute domination of the US Government over the individual so that once they have control that power is theirs. We the people want that power back in the hands of the individual where it belongs and there are more and more people awakening to that fact, but we litterally have to fight two parties to take back our individual freedom.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:27 | 2107043 SofaPapa
SofaPapa's picture

Having only newly awakened myself, I will say it was the exact opposite which woke me up.  From Bush, I expected what we got; if nothing else (and he was indeed nothing else that had even an ounce of good to it), he told people what he was going to do.  Then he did it.  True, it's unbelivable what they did, but he announced it all.

But what woke me up was Obama.  To see someone with the perfect opportunity (a crisis) to make genuine change, having prepared the population for exactly that with the rhetoric he had used, then turn around and pursue virtually carbon-copy policies as Bush?  That was my eye-opener.  This system is disgusting.

We need an evolution, and we need it fast.  Revolutions are bloody and lead to exactly the same results.  Pray to fate that we evolve way faster than any species ever has.  I woke up.  Maybe more are behind me?  I sure hope so.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:49 | 2107183 Rainman
Rainman's picture

Allen Simpson says a terrified Obama walked away from the deficit issue. A full retreat from hope and change.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 10:54 | 2107107 fiftybagger
fiftybagger's picture

"It's amazing that the Bush era did not wake up more conservatives"

It's really quite simple actually.  Republicans are stupid upper middle class and rich people,  Democrats are stupid lower middle class and poor people.  Their commonality?  stupidity.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:11 | 2107134 dhengineer
dhengineer's picture

Actually, there are more democrats on Wall street than you realize.  I am a private chef for a Citigroup bigshot, and he and all his buddies have Owebammy's ass-prints on their faces.  The idea that Repubs are the fatcats is so 1960's thinking.  Look at the slime oozing through the Goobermint Sacks/Fed pipeline:  rubin, summers, geithner, virtually everyone who made the leap from wall street to DC is a dumbocrap.  Owebammy got most of his campaign money last time from Wall street.  But you are correct in one thing:  whatever their party affiliation, they are all STUPID and they are really the useless eaters of the world.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 12:55 | 2107279 HD
HD's picture

Chef - now I realize you have a code of ethics as a professional and I respect that - but for all of us who will never have the golden opportunity that you do....

PLEASE sneeze in that man's food.

Thank you in advance.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 05:26 | 2106896 GernB
GernB's picture

It's amazing that the Bush era did not wake up more conservatives to the idea that neither Democrats nor Republicans want more individual freedom. They both believe in a large all-powerful government. They just disagree with what that power should be used to do. This is the scary part of this election cycle. We still have the establishment Republican party trying to assert itself into the process and nominate an establishment Republican that wiill preserve the nearly absolute domination of the US Government over the individual so that once they have control that power is theirs. We the people want that power back in the hands of the individual where it belongs and there are more and more people awakening to that fact, but we litterally have to fight two parties to take back our individual freedom.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 12:06 | 2107202 Colonel
Colonel's picture

9-11 provided alot of pretext for government expansion during the Bush administration.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 06:04 | 2106916 HD
HD's picture

Nothing will change. People live in bubbles because they are comfortable there - they will never deal with problems unless they show up on their own doorstep...and often not even then.

Intelligence is a burden. The ability to reason and comprehend beyond the superficial is a millstone around your neck. The happiest people I know are largely unaware or dismissive of anything outside their bubble - and get frightened and angry if anything disrupts it. However, to be fair, I must admit most of them are in truth "happy". They spend countless hours on facebook doing god knows what, they eat what they want, and buy a lot of crap they don't need and can't afford - but again...happy.

Ignorance is indeed bliss. There are days I wish I could switch my mind off and float through life like the rest of them...



Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:19 | 2107033 UgglyBetty
UgglyBetty's picture

Great comment HD, and cheers to the ORI/akak preceding discussion.

Who needs to know when somebody will provide for you?
Who cares where the resources come from to provide for you from the "State"? Even better... what do we care if the "State" will take other people's resources to give them to us??? "The others" don't deserve to have more than us, we are all equal, all resources belong to "we the people", so it's fair that the State take them from those who have more than us to give them to us... That's what the welfare state has taught us, right??

IMHO, those that care to know and be informed and critical are those who do something for their lives, who take risks and bear the consequences of failing but in any case don't want to be told what to do.

Libertarians are enemies of the State for central planners... and soon to be prosecuted as terrorists if you want to protect what is yours.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:44 | 2107175 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

I would argue that a great many people have had their bubbles burst through job loss, home loss, pension loss, inability to find a job with debt and college degree, etc....  The "dream" for many has become a nightmare.  The pressure cooker created by the last bubble bursting is still rising.  Some said the Rodney King decision was just the straw the broke the camel's back in LA, that the pressure had been rising for a long time.  I think that is what is happening to the Country as a whole.  At some point, with some event, the whole thing could explode and the matrix will collapse. 

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 19:31 | 2108191 UgglyBetty
UgglyBetty's picture

Hey! Thanks for the feedback. I agree with you that many people are awakening the hard way, but are those that now suffer the inconsistences of this economic model, willing to ask for more liberty or more State to satisfy their needs? I'm from Argentina, and I can tell you that the situation here is about to explode but I dont thing anyone is willing to make any sacrifices to go on with life, many people are accustomed to receiving State assistance that do not even think about working for a living, they just think they are entitled to a certain level of income and thats it, it's not about being productive to earn your living or to overcome financial difficulties...
I hope you are right, and people finally view things as they are, a great Ponzi to empoverish us all against the elites, but after soooooooo many decades of populism here I bet people will want their share of the pie instead of thinking how they can go by themselves contrary the populist speech.
Wish all of you the best though, not a great thing to be a third world country.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:32 | 2107047 The Limerick King
The Limerick King's picture



Someone please pass the blue pill

The system is breaking my will

I need to return

And try to unlearn

The things that keep giving me chills!

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 20:15 | 2108245 SillySalesmanQu...
SillySalesmanQuestion's picture


 I could'nt agree more with those words HD

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 10:50 | 2107102 Conor
Conor's picture

The people have unwittingly, insidiously, succumbed to Hobbes's Leviathan.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 16:14 | 2107839 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

We can expect this. They ("we") are prone to herd behavior. We must be fearless evangelists of Freedom.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 14:31 | 2107522 Mr. Magniloquent
Mr. Magniloquent's picture

I believe this obliviousness is due to the magnitude of the metastasis of the State. I, a mere human, do not trifle with concerns over our Sun dying and englufing our world. It lays outside the scope of my humble existence. For most, the governments of the world--particularly the U.S. Federal Government, are beyond the scope of their being. Washington D.C. might as well be a force of nature for what most can do about it. It effects you regardless of what actions you take, and any attempt to mitagate it is left wanting.

I believe the only reasonable solution left is sessesion. We shall see if that day ever comes.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 15:50 | 2107778 Conor
Conor's picture


So much of the government has now attained autonomy that the Presidential election will have little impact on our current socioeconomic trajectory. 

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 15:50 | 2107779 Conor
Conor's picture


So much of the government has now attained autonomy that the Presidential election will have little impact on our current socioeconomic trajectory. 

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 03:40 | 2108842 KCMLO
KCMLO's picture

It's certainly a compelling thought.  I would be concerned how to extract a non-geographically contiguous population with our views on liberty from a willfully ignorant mass of consumers.  I don't even mean the condescension implied by that statement, I've just run out of ways to describe those around me who either refuse to see, or refuse to care what is being done to them.

Contrary to belief, revolutions are typically incited by a vocal minority and fought against another vocal minority while the bulk of the country sits idly by and tries not to participate in any way.  Our own revolution was no exception.  This is particuarly frustrating because the "muddle-in-the-middle" viewpoint is never exposed to be inadequate or unproductive.  Say tomorrow we somehow are able to enact instant reforms that provide complete and total liberty, so long as one's personal liberty does not interfere with another's.  Not utopia by any means but the "most free" society, by definition, to ever exist in the history of the world.  We would still have a sizable (maybe even a majority?) portion of the population either aggitated by the disruption to their routine or simply not give a shit.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 07:34 | 2106966 Always Positive
Always Positive's picture

'......I want to grab them by the shoulders and shake the shit out of them while screaming in their miserable, sheeplike faces "WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU?!"....'

So, akak, after you screamed in their miserable, sheeplike faces, WHAT DID YOU DO? Seriously, what did you do to rectify the problem. What have you ever done?

I'm assuming you're a more senior individual, so if you go back to Nixon taking America off the gold standard in 1971...and you, being an intelligent person, KNEW this was bad..what did you do? Organise rallies, protests, contact politicians? Anything?

Too far back? OK. When under Clinton Glass-Stegal was repealed and you KNEW that was a bad move, what did you do? Organise rallies, protests, contact politicians? Anything?. I could go on.

See akak, the problem is that on ZH (and everywhere) there are many KEYBOARD WARRIORS like you who KNOW what the problems are and KNOW who is responsible (the Banksters, Wall Street, Zionists, Gubermint, Elites, TPTB etc etc)


You never did anything personally  about it. You never took responsibility for your own lives, your kids' futures. YOU NEVER DID ANYTHING!

And now, old mate(s), it's too late.

THEY have won because of YOUR inaction/stupidity/cowardice.

America is about to go down the drain, taking the whole world with it, because YOU DIDN'T TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN LIVES, YOUR OWN FUTURE BY TAKING APPROPRIATE ACTION.

So please, stop whining & crying like infants. You are about to get exactly what you deserve, due entirely to what you did/didn't do in the past. Suck it up.

The intro says: '....except the one who really knows that fixing America would require pain and sacrifice, is everyone's duty...'

It's was also 'everyone's duty' to act n the past. You failed in 'your duty' and now you - and the rest of us - will suffer the consequences.

What goes around...



Sun, 01/29/2012 - 10:02 | 2107040 clymer
clymer's picture

You don't know what he has done. He could have been volunteering for Ron Paul's campaign at the local level, running for selectman, etc. At least he is awake. At least his heart is in the right place and that is enough to start. Why don't you be part of the solution and prescribe exactly what we all should do in three easy steps to begin to reform the system? Or would you rather paint yourself as the generational victim of boomer laziness so you can spout off with "whoa is me" "we got fucked by the generation before us" crap which is 1.) counterproductive and 2.) an over simplification of a complex issue


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 20:21 | 2108244 Always Positive
Always Positive's picture

Exactly Clymer, I don't know what he's done that's why I was asking. And you'll notice akak doesn't want to engage and has 'moved on'. He realises he'll get his backside kicked. Again. Akak, like all cowards will slink away at the first sign of someone who will give as good as he gets.

See, what annoys me about Keyboard Warriors like akak is that he's here, every day, spouting his, views, pontificating, being the know it all loud mouth...but actually does zilch (you can bettya if he HAD done something he'd let us know quicktime...)

As a non American, all I can do is protect myself as best I can from the upheavals about to hit us all because, largely, of what America has done to screw up the entire world. "THEY" may be doing it; YOU have allowed it - by doing nothing.

Clymer, you asked me to prescribe 3 steps  - well I'll give you just one that's entirely appropriate for the circumstances & all that is needed:

Put on your best suit, silk tie, nice shoes and go to the next OWS demo near you. Take your wife & kids & friends. Join in peaceful protest. Show the World that it isn't just a pretty scruffy bunch of gutsy kids who are angry, but main-stream America.

Move the OWS  protest to the political centre and the middle classes. In large numbers. Dignified. Maybe silent protest. Just banners. If Black America could raise a million men to march a few years ago, is it too much to ask ALL Americans to do something similar to save the Nation?

That action would get their attention. Maybe then Ron Paul would have a chance.

Will you march? Will akak? Not a chance. Much easier to be a loud mouth Keyboard Warrior, blaming everyone else, than actually doing something concrete.





Sun, 01/29/2012 - 20:41 | 2108266 akak
akak's picture

AP, I did not "slink away", I merely stood back and allowed you the opportunity to blather on and discredit yourself in your unprovoked and unsubstantiated attack on me and many others.

The fact of the matter is, you know NOTHING about me, nor about what I might have or have not done to further the cause of liberty.  You have set up the classic strawman argument here, wildly assuming that merely because I participate in an online forum, that that somehow precludes me from having done ANYTHING else to fight for or advance a cause for which I also argue here.  It is quite obvious to even the dullest of thinkers what a complete logical fallacy that is, as well as an ignorant assumption and gross insult.'

How dare you ASSUME you know anything about me based solely on my participation in this forum?  Or are you trying to goad me into divulging personal information that has no relevance to the discussion at hand?

I owe you absolutely no explanation of or elaboration on my life outside this forum, and if you even try to raise that red herring once again, it will only further demonstrate the total lack of critical and logical thinking skills on your part.

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 01:30 | 2108713 Always Positive
Always Positive's picture

Nice blast akak, some worthy rhetoric & verbal flourishes.

But  just tell me, anonymously, quietly, just between you & I, whisper in my ear, what have YOU ACTUALLY DONE? EVER?

Sorry? I didn't quite catch that...

You're like a well-hooked fish akak and though you may make a run & dodge & twist & turn..there's no-where to go.

Anyway, I've finished. I only fish for sport and I'll cut the line and let you sink to the bottom, to rest a while. But next time your Keyboard Warrior persona takes hold and you're about to flame importantly away...pause for a moment and re-consider. I might be out there, waiting for you. Of course, you may choose not to respond but on this board everyone will know the real reason why.

All the best & take care.

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 02:34 | 2108724 akak
akak's picture

It is quite amusing to see somebody rhetorically get their head handed to them, only to then willingly come back to have the bloody stump of their neck severed as well.

It's astounding to read you blathering on and on, accusing me (and others) of something when you know NOTHING about me, or of what I have done in the cause of liberty.  Really, are you that much of an idiot, to run around accusing TOTAL STRANGERS of things when you have ZERO FACTS about them?  Does the concept of logic even exist in your addled mind?  Tell me, do you call the cops on your neighbors because you suspect, with NO EVIDENCE, merely based on your perverse psychological projection, that they are shooting heroin or abusing their baby?  That would be consistent with what you are doing here.

I do not owe you or any other anonymous asshole in some internet forum any personal information or history, nor would it be relevant to the discussion even if I did divulge such information.  For all you know, I am Ron Paul's campaign manager, or Ron Paul himself --- and even if I were, I have little doubt that an irrational idiot and antagonistic troll such as yourself would still find some excuse to find fault.

Among your other fallacies in logic, you inherently assume the false dichotomy that one can either act in the "real world" to further the cause of liberty, OR argue and debate about liberty in an online forum.  Has it ever crossed your hopelessly muddled mind that one may be engaged in BOTH?

Aside from the complete illogic of your "argument" (such as it is), I cannot fail to notice that despite you jumping into the fray here with guns blazing at random targets, YOU did not tell US what YOU have done to further the cause of liberty.  Since you seem to feel that posters here need to divulge private and personal information in order to justify their presence in this forum, it would logically be incumbent upon you to start out with the listing of your pro-liberty credentials before demanding them of anybody else.

Anyway, thanks for the laughs, and do come again --- while it is not very sporting, it can on occasion be fun to shoot fish in a barrel.  Now, having disposed of that unsightly bloody stump, I think I'll go fry up these fine fillets.

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 03:18 | 2108821 Max Fischer
Max Fischer's picture



So, in other words.... you've done nothing. 


He NAILED you. 

You thought you could quietly exit the conversation until, 13 hours later, he called you out for being a coward.  Then, not 20 minutes later, you had produced a neurotic response which probably took 19 minutes to write.  You frantically clicked the refresh button like a lab rat on cocaine for 10 straight hours, didn't you?  Watching from afar, knowing you got nailed..... 




Mon, 01/30/2012 - 03:33 | 2108834 akak
akak's picture

I should have expected a troll tag-team with you as the junior member.

Actually, I am happy beyond measure to see you show up and add your insane two cents to the non-debate, as it only further discredits you and points out your similarly hopeless weakness at honest and logical debate.

This AlwaysPositivelyanAsshole mindlessly jumps into the middle of a discussion blatantly accusing me of something while knowing NOTHING about me or my history.  Tell me, Max, you vile bastard, just what principle of logic is reflected by such an action?   That's right --- none.  Obviously, neither you nor he understand the elementary difference between an ASSUMPTION --- all he, and you, have --- and a fact.  It is all bluster, bullying and lies with dishonest, disingenuous, malignant trolls like you --- and clearly the standard modus operandi of both of you. 

Oh, by the way Max, I am accusing you of child molestation with your nephew.  Clearly you are guilty, as you have never even argued against child molestation here, nor fought against child molestation in the "real world".  And you can NOT defend yourself in any way, because I am merely using the exact same tactic as AlwaysPositive did above against me, and since you endorsed his method, you must endorse mine against you as well.

Thanks again, it was fun --- two fish out of that same barrel in one night; I'm on a roll!

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:26 | 2107157 dhengineer
dhengineer's picture

Hayek's whole point was that we are not responsible for everyone else.  We are responsible for ourselves, and, by so doing, we strenghten society in general, without resorting to some "utopian" bullshit system.  Doing something positive can also mean going John Galt, protecting oneself and one's loved ones from the coming storm, providing for our own lives, and staying as far beneath the radar as possible.  When the storm clears, we will be in a position to restart our little corner of the economy.

My wife and I bought a couple of acres of tillable land in a relatively remote location, we have a very small house, a large garden, PM's, food, tools, seeds, private well, septic, generator, solar, like-minded neighbors, and very little income.  We are prepared to ride out the coming storm, which we have been watching develop for about ten years.  We have taken responsibility for ourselves and have not taken anything from anyone.  We believe in individual freedom, not collectivism.


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 02:09 | 2106828 constitutionalist
constitutionalist's picture


I can't believe it but I can't agree with you more, people do want to be told what to do. I can not wrap my mind around this concept. People will openly admit it when questioned. I have nightmares about this, our grandparents weren't pussies, how did this happen?

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 04:54 | 2106883 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Consti, two great wars, since 50's almost continuous wars, Gandhi (emasculated 3 generations of Men by telling them not to fight).... over-reaching political correctness....

It's been done, so no one fights back.


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 06:09 | 2106920 akak
akak's picture

Interesting perspective on Gandhi, who is essentially universally held up in the West as a great figure of impeccable moral integrity and political accomplishment.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 06:59 | 2106945 Al Gorerhythm
Al Gorerhythm's picture

There's more than one way to skin a cat. Depending upon the size of the cat, fighting that fucker is ideally the last option.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 10:20 | 2107075 mjcOH1
mjcOH1's picture


During a prayer speech on June 16, 1947: “If we had the atom bomb, we would have used it against the British.” ~ Gandhi’s “The Last Phase,” Vol. II, p. 326

“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.” ~ Gandhi’s “Autobiography,” Part V, Chapter XXVII

“I do believe that where there is a choice between cowardice and non-violence I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me even by using violence.” ~ CWMG, Vol. XXI, p. 132.

“It is indeed necessary to be physically strong. If the Indians want to learn the use of fire-arms and swords, by all means let them do so. ?” ~ The Indian Opinion, June 18, 1908

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 08:56 | 2107013 Irish66
Irish66's picture

The herders are getting tired of watching the sheep.  The hard workers are tiring of carrying the load.

The corporations are lossing their smartest people and they don't care.

We are broken.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 17:45 | 2108011 dolly madison
dolly madison's picture

I've also discovered, to my dismay, that a majority of people actually like to be told what to do. To be ruled.

As dismaying as this may be, it is the natural order of things.  Social animals only need so many leaders.  If you look a the Meyers Briggs test, you will see that only 2 categories are listed as natural leaders, INTJ and ENTJ.  Which makes between 3% and 9% natural leaders.  The rest are natural followers.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 17:54 | 2108025 akak
akak's picture

False dichotomy.

One can be neither a follower NOR a leader.

What is wrong with being independent?

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 20:48 | 2108297 dolly madison
dolly madison's picture

What is wrong with being independent?

Nothing wrong with being independent, and actually the INTJ tends to just like to be independent, but is fully capable of leading when necessary.  Independent is leading self, so still not a follower.  Still, I think the majority are followers, and again that is the natural state for social animals.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 22:23 | 2108411 mkkby
mkkby's picture

Wrong, Akak.  An independant is a leader.  He's decided leading sheep is too much of a bother and is only leading himself.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:06 | 2106629 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

well put.  might also note that we currently get neither democratic freedom (new rules for extralegal imprisonment and execution) nor socialistic economic gain (unless we are too big to fail).

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 03:05 | 2106852 palmereldritch
palmereldritch's picture

Libertarian = you have the freedom to be the author of your own utopia and make the mistakes necessary to understand that all the other programmed opportunities have a greater price tag.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 13:54 | 2107408 Woodyg
Woodyg's picture

Which Hayek are we talking about? The free markets one or this one:

Hayek also wrote that the state has a role to play in the economy, and specifically, in creating a "safety net". He wrote, "There is no reason why, in a society which has reached the general level of wealth ours has, the first kind of security should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom; that is: some minimum of food, shelter and clothing, sufficient to preserve health. Nor is there any reason why the state should not help to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance in providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision."[68]

The problem is socialism leads to centralized planning but so does a corporate world with a few huge predators at the top........ Aka 'free markets'

Free markets are an Impossibility......

Personally I like the India model where only 3 branches of any business are allowed(at least it used to be that way) That would do a hell of a lot better job of creating a 'free market' than an 'anything goes - no regulation model many profess to want......

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:26 | 2106664 zhandax
zhandax's picture

Americans are suffering because central planning of money is destroying productivity.

Americans are suffering because FDR confiscated our money and forced us to transact business with debt exclusively.  How can you pimp a silver blog and fail see this?

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 05:07 | 2106889 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture



Americans are suffering because central planning of money is destroying productivity. Mis-pricing money causes resources to flow into unproductive areas.

No, mis-pricing money isn't destroying productivity, laziness is.

And no, money isn't mis-priced on Main Street America, just on Wall Street where they get it from the Fed without paying any interest, plus the Fed will buy their worthless bonds at full face value commission.

Americans are suffering from currency debasement more than anything else.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 05:36 | 2106901 The Alarmist
The Alarmist's picture

Americans are suffering from a massive redistribution of their wealth in a giant ponzi scheme where the only winners are and will be the ruling elite who take their vig at every step of the scheme. Everybody is entitled to a piece of everybody's wealth, and as time goes by there is less and less to take.

I take it back ... It stopped being a ponzi scheme when the rest of the world started to cut back on bond purchases; now it is more like musical chairs.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:35 | 2107049 boooyaaaah
boooyaaaah's picture

The maximum weight that a truck can carry is 20,000 lbs.

There is a movement afoot to make it 10,000 lbs.

Tho will increase teamster employment, require more
Truck, tire. And fuel production, therby increasing employment.

The cost will be spread over the entire economy.
prices and tax collection will increase.

A great socialist planner solution.

When solutions sound simple it is because the problem is over simplified

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 13:37 | 2107362 Matt
Matt's picture

In order for there to be a decentral solution, you would need all roads to be privately owned so owners can charge higher rates to heavier trucks which cause more wear on their roads, to cover the increased maintenance heavier trucks cause.

Would you prefer it if the elites directly owned all the roads?

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 23:02 | 2108476's picture

Not all private ownership is ownership by elites. In a free market ownership is more evenly distributed because wealth can only be accrued through earnings and not through redistribution by force.

Fri, 02/03/2012 - 09:27 | 2122633 Matt
Matt's picture

This is the big problem I have with advocates of libertarianism, they talk about how things would be if the world had always been run by free markets, rather than dealing with the reality of what it would be like if the world switched over to libertarianism.

The people who are really rich now would be the ones who own most of everything, since their current wealth and property ownership doesn't suddenly cease to exist.

Unless you propose we redistribute everything equally one time, then have free markets going forward, with everything privately owned.

Sat, 02/04/2012 - 09:05 | 2126281 Marco
Marco's picture

Earnings and rent ... rent means that in the absence of economic growth wealth is guaranteed to accumulate, feudalism is the steady state of capitalism.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:38 | 2107167 bonderøven-farm ass
bonderøven-farm ass's picture

Wars on 'perceived' social ills.....

~Poverty (Fuck off LBJ)

~Drugs (Fuck off Nixon/Reagan)

~Terrorism (Fuck off Bushy W.)

.....and I say fuck off to every 'leader' on the 'hill' who supports these perpetual wars on it's on citizens.  

"We are strictly confined to our men to whom we give liberty." ~ H.D.T 

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 12:35 | 2107246 Marco
Marco's picture

There is massive misallocation of resources yes, but there is artificially cheap oil as well ... and they are both a result of the fiat ponzi.

This what makes stopping the Ponzi so dangerous, will better allocation of capital be able to offset America having to pay even money (ie. trade balance) for oil?

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 23:04 | 2108480's picture

There's a huge downside to petrodollar hegemony. Lots of grief I can do without.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 13:29 | 2107344 steve from virginia
steve from virginia's picture

This is completely wrong, there is no sacred 'production' with evil 'debt' as different entities. There is nothing to rescue production nor is the state production's obstacle.

Production is a dog-and-pony show,  the means by which credit is created, there is no other purpose for so-called 'production' other than to be the instrument of credit. Facilitating credit -- technically seigniorage -- is the primary job of the state.

Credit is the essential condition for the creation of modern, creditable enterprises which are those which drive out all others. Without credit there are no 'productive' enterprises, be they businesses or sovereigns.

The purpose of the sovereign is to service private debts in perpetuity and to defend the interests of the borrowers/lenders against 'disruptions'. There is no other form within the credit enterprise itself that is able to borrow-to-lend perpetually (without going broke as is the case with firms or individuals). The state is integral to credit which is the sole product of enterprises.

There is no such thing as a boom in productivity, only a boom in the creation of credit. There is no 'efficient' allocation of anything, only a scam played upon the gullible who believe in fairies.


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 15:50 | 2107780 Marco
Marco's picture

So lets say the Solyndra plant is just as good an allocation of resources as a factory which actually produces saleable consumer goods?

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 21:32 | 2106278 Silver Bug
Silver Bug's picture

Socialism never ends well...

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:22 | 2106657 JR
JR's picture

America once had a utopia. It had created the greatest economy in the history of the world. But the utopia was destroyed when Congress, in 1913, gave prerogative over the nation’s money and credit, and thus control of all her industry and commerce and policies, to a supra-national power of private international bankers by enactment of the Federal Reserve Act.

As Carl Parton writes in an incredible article, Debt Slavery, “There is one candidate running for President of the United States that will stand for these principles, Ron Paul,” that made our country that utopia. Here are excerpts from his January 12, 2012, article:

I believe that our Nation needs to start to recognize a new immoral and destructive atrocity being committed. I call it debt slavery…

 The most egregious example of debt based slavery comes from our National Government. Our current banking system began in 1913 when Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act. This law granted a group of corporate banks called the Federal Reserve “the Fed” the power to control our Nation’s money supply and monetary policy. This was the starting point of our perpetual debt based economy. The Federal Reserve was granted the right to print money and loan it to the US government at 6% interest guaranteed by law. The more money the Federal Reserve prints, the deeper the Federal Government goes into debt to the Fed. Coincidentally, the 16th amendment of the Constitution which allowed the Federal Government to collect tax on income was ratified in the same year. The income tax collected from the American taxpayers was designed to pay off the debt to the unaccountable, private, corporate, banking system, known as the Fed, which operates under the force of compounding interest. It is only a matter of time until the servicing of our debt will account for more of our Nation’s budget than the sum total of all other government spending. Perhaps that is why, Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild, the grandfather of the Rothschild British banking family that owns major interest in the Fed, spoke these words, “Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws.”

You might ask how debt to the Federal Reserve Banks enslaves the American people. The answer is that it affects policies. Subsidies to corporations and industries by the Federal Government are controlled. Foreign policy, such as how much and to whom we give aid, is controlled. War and World policing is encouraged. Entitlement spending designed to create dependency by the people is constantly increased. All of these policy decisions are made in the best interests of the banking system rather than the American people. All of these policies also increase the spending by government and contribute to more debt.

The bonus insult by the Fed is that they do not have any loyalty or allegiance to the United States. When we hear about the World economy and our interdependence on the stability of other nations to have a good economy it is only the Fed and its ties to the international banking system that bind us to the “World’s Economy.” We would still trade with other nations even if their economies failed, we would still produce goods and services, we would still have a vibrant domestic ability to prosper. It is the banking system that suffers in the event of Europe’s debt crises and woes. We are a free Democratic Republic ruled by law and bound to a Constitution. Why do the bad spending and debt decisions of Socialist nations in Europe control our destiny and fortunes? The answer is the World banking system which is directly connected to the Fed.

I believe that the people in this country need to awaken to the new slavery. We need to come together to fight against the injustice of debt slavery. We need to audit the Federal Reserve and return to the Constitutional principle of sound money. We need to end the practices of World policing and preventative warfare which add to our National debt. We need to curtail unsustainable growth in spending on non-essential Federal government. We need to stand for the abolition movement of this millennium. End debt slavery!

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:25 | 2106669 jm
jm's picture

America once had a utopia.

Tell that to the Indians and slaves. 

There are no utopias in this world.  Literally one of the stupidest posts ever.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 01:24 | 2106773 JR
JR's picture

It's difficult to discuss that utopian characteristic called freedom with someone who has no idea what you're talking about. 

Nonetheless, what would it take to fix the Indian problem, to your satisfaction? A few hundred more tax-free casinos, maybe? More tax-free sacred land grants to add to the 55.7 million acres now reserved for native Americans, say in the nation’s most expensively developed areas--to add to those they already have in, say, downtown Palm Springs, or in Phoenix, San Diego, Santa Barbara County, or New Mexico or Georgia or Florida?  Most obtained after they were richly developed. Or say more prime, occupied land along the Oregon coast, or more quaint lighthouses such as Cape Blanco or St. Martin Island Lighthouse on land now owned by a Native American Indian tribe that allows no passage directly onto the island by tourists?

There are twelve Indian reservations that are larger than the state of Rhode Island (776,960 acres; 3,144 km²)) and nine reservations larger than Delaware (1,316,480 acres; 5,327 km.

In addition, the Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court at the behest of the gambling industry have allowed all Indians who choose to live under their own governments within their reservation lands (even for tribes down to 3 or 4 members), to build gambling casinos and resort hotels on those lands and to reap the benefits of having exclusive access to populated areas that “non-native American” businesses are not allowed to have.  

And at least D.C. compensated the Indians well for the disappearance of the buffalo herds due in large part to their involvement in the fur trade and as trappers.

“By the late seventeen hundreds, the Plains Indians were exchanging beaver pelts and horses to the Hudson’s Bay and North West fur traders for European goods. These trade fairs were held at the villages of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara on the Missouri River. The major items exchanged at these trade fairs were garden products (beans, squash, corn, etc.) raised at the Missouri River villages, horses, furs, and hides from the Plains Indians, and whiskey, guns, iron goods, trade beads, and a few beaver traps from the Northeast tradersBy the mid-eighteen hundreds buffalo hides dominated the Indian fur trade. The demise of the large buffalo herds is often blamed on the white man, but Indians contributed a great deal to it as well.” All this according to O. Ned Eddins in Mountain Man Fur Trade Exploration History.

Add to that, Indians have minority status and special privileges that other Americans do not have plus rights granted via tribal sovereignty, plus individual  right that they retain as U.S. citizens, and things don’t look so bad.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 01:27 | 2106781 jm
jm's picture

Don't fix anything regarding the Indians, no point in it.  Just stop living in fairyland about utopias.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 23:09 | 2108487's picture

Government killed the Indians and let whites enslave blacks. Government is the problem.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 01:47 | 2106809 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

A time-machine and one hell of a lot of dead white thieves.


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:52 | 2107187 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

Inherently, the fight against modernization is always lost, and always won, depending on your point in the time line...  in other words, you can make a time machine, you can defy the laws of physics, you can rewrite history, but the same result will ensue regardless of your efforts.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 13:04 | 2107295 JR
JR's picture

With the activists such as yourself representing the Indians, Blacks, Jews and Hispanics - all claiming victimhood - America, instead of the Land of the Free, has become the Land of the Victims.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 05:17 | 2106893 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture



More tax-free sacred land grants to add to the 55.7 million acres now reserved for native Americans,

ALL of America should be tax-free land.

The idea that people have to pay an annual tax on property they own, or ANYTHING they own, is blatantly unconstitutional.

The constitution allowed a head tax, not a property tax, and that head tax had to be same amount for every person, and it's paid by the states, not each individual person.

Of course that all changed after the civil war when the federal government conquered the states and the constitution was abolished.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 10:21 | 2107077 Winisk
Winisk's picture

Tis true the Natives were no darlings living in perfect balance with the land.  No Utopia then either but they got screwed by the European traders.  I imagine there were a few wise souls who would have rathered fought to the death to preserve their authority over their land, but when confronted with a superior force who dangled new technology in front of them, the tribe probably dismissed this path of resistence and happily walked into the trap.  They could not have imagined how the whiteman would swarm their land, cage them into tiny reserves, snatch their children from them, and force the wee ones into residential schools where they were abused in horrific ways destroying a once proud culture.    The more I think about it, we are beginning to resemble the Natives.  

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:18 | 2107146 roadhazard
roadhazard's picture

Apparently neither does Capitalism/Greed.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:41 | 2107169 kito
kito's picture

What type of socialism?because last I checked the nordic countries are among the happiest on the world and they are all socialist. Granted, what works for them is their small homogeneous societies, but still socialist....

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 23:11 | 2108494's picture

The Jante Law (Danish and Norwegian: Janteloven; Swedish: Jantelagen; Finnish: Janten laki; Faroese: Jantulógin) is a pattern of group behaviour towards individuals within Scandinavian communities, which negatively portrays and criticises individual success and achievement as unworthy and inappropriate.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 21:37 | 2106282 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

Sorry but Friedrich Hayek is a complete moron and lunatic whose ideas have been utterly and irremediably decredibilized.

Nobody in the academic or economic world takes him for serious, and the fact he was a known alcoholic and sexual pervert when he was alive (like most libertarians and anarcho-capitalists) can bring a clue to why. 

I laughed my ass out when this creep started to brand the French revolution as "liberal" -- in the sense of "libertarian" -- when every kid of ecole maternelle in France knows that it was already socialist, and the harbinger of a totalitarian experiment known as La Terreur. 

When the revolutionaries sacked the tombs and sarcophaguses of the Bourbon royal family in the Basilique Saint-Denis, was it a "liberal" event? Or rather the mark of a totalitarian Statist government wanting to "erase the past" in the most brutish and horrible ways?

Frankly, everytime a libertarian opens his mouth, he falls flat on his face. Even the most respected philosophers of this movement. This is starting to get tiresome. 

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 21:46 | 2106313 WolfePaq
WolfePaq's picture

The Founding Fathers were Libertarians before there was such a term.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 21:54 | 2106325 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

This is a common misconception.

Actually, if you read carefully and exhaustively the published works and private letters of the Founding Fathers -- and notably Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin or John Adams -- you will discover a whole new reality. A reality that was hided from you by the libertarian propaganda machine in the U.S.

Most were interventionist, if not Colbertist like Hamilton.

As to Jefferson and Washington, they strongly supported slavery, selective democracy and antitrust action -- hardly something compatible with the libertarian "laissez-faire" agenda.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 22:23 | 2106396 El Oregonian
El Oregonian's picture

Actually... The misconseption is by you. Quote from The founding fathers originally set up a confederacy (the Articles of Confederation), but it failed, so they made a federal republic. Many were initially afraid of such a government, so included checks and balances between the branches. The founding fathers also included the Bill of Rights to protect our freedoms. Among these was the right to bear arms, and form militias, as well as the right to religion and freedom of speech.

The Founding Fathers might be comparable to modern Libertarians, because they favored "small" government. The terms back then were Federalists and Anti-Federalists. The Anti-Federalists were libertarian, and wanted a smaller government, and rights left to the people. The Federalists wanted a government system strong enough to endure.

Today, although the split is between "left" and "right", and between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats are liberals, while Republicans are conservatives. Too many people over the years did not heed the founders' warnings, and voted for bigger government. While most people think big government is just the ideal of the Democrats, there are also "progressives" in the Republican party : a liberal-authoritarian hybrid that promotes larger government, higher taxes, and changes to our traditional government (the separation of powers and the rights of the individual).

Here's a few documented rights of old English law that were given to the people that really inspired our founding fathers to form a government based on Limited Government, Popular Sovereignty, Checks and Balances, a Representative form of government, and Limited Power, as well as a federal structure in which the national government must work together with the States:

Magna Carta- Limited rights given to the people under English rule.
Petition of Rights- More rights, for the most part it was created to limit power.
English Bill of Rights- aka "the glorious revolution". more restriction on king.
Virginia Bill of Rights- Early version of our BOR.
Bill of Rights- rights expressly given to the people and government.

Read more:


Sat, 01/28/2012 - 22:24 | 2106400 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

blah blah blah

Disconnect from the Michael Savage show you're listening to and read some serious history. 

And the Bill Of Rights is totally compatible with a communist government. 

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 22:38 | 2106434 Husk-Erzulie
Husk-Erzulie's picture

+1 for decredibilized.  Awesomelized mangulation of english :-)

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:36 | 2106556 Zero_Sum
Zero_Sum's picture

He laughed his ass out. For serious.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:20 | 2106652 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

don't we have to give non native speakers a break on such as this?  not on invalid ideas though.  to say the bill of rights is compatible with "communism" means little if it is communism in theory.  if communism in fact then it is clearly untrue because as imperfect as the liberty of the u.s. has been historically (and, for the most part, is still, relative to the sweep of human experience -- though the omens are not favorable), it is as a supernova to the black holes that were/are the ussr, china, etc.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:57 | 2106729 zhandax
zhandax's picture

Don't mistake dipshit trolls for 'non native speakers'

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:30 | 2107044 clymer
clymer's picture


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 07:20 | 2106721 Al Gorerhythm
Al Gorerhythm's picture

From various posts: "Hided from you"; "Taken for serious"; "I laughed my ass out"; "Sarcophaguses"; "decredibilized!"; ad hominum attacks on Libertarians followed up with "can bring a clue". Are you for serious?!!!

Good Lord! That's not mangled; that's a shredded, tortured, pulverised and degraded example of the "outcomes" based "Living Language" doctrine, adopted as the de facto curriculum policy in Federal and State Education Departments. Hamy's example of mangled English is not out of the ordinary and is a sad, yet horrifying indictment of central control over any issue. What an outcome. Well done educators!

That aside, I don't disagree with Hamy's rejection of Hayek's proposition of Democracy being superior to Socialism. If Hamy is attempting to equate them, then I lean toward his thinking of them as diliberately disingenuous in their intent as delivery vehicles for social justice. Both contain elements of control over the individual, employing force, either overtly, as practiced under Socialism, or insidiously via the Democratic voting system, the block with the highest majority over-ruling the minority block.

Both systems attack the Libertarian tenet; "Don't Tread On Me".

There is no denying that there has to be a collective agreement on the accepted practices of social behaviour for individuals to adopt, when living in a community. The discussion about the enforcement of those rules is usally about how big or intrusive the governors of that document should be. The debate is: Where in the spectrum of government (Totalitarianism to Anarchy), do we wish to establish ours?

As I understand it, Libertarians propose limited government that endorses the rights and liberties of the indivual, employing a judicial system that, via penalties, encourages individual responsibility in adhereing to the rules, whilst Socialists propose central control that dictates rules, no debate. I know where my ideals rest.

Hamy, thanks for sharing your thoughts as it engenders engagement but if you are proposing more of the same, from the likes of those charged with delivering your centrally planned educational outcome (if as displayed, then; "Mission Accomplished"), then I'm opposed to it.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 10:14 | 2107065 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

"Sarcophaguses" is a valid plural term for "Sarcophagus", moron

For the rest, give me a break, I am Canadian. You will notice that these are not spelling mistakes or even grammatical mistakes but mistakes pertaining to sayings or cultural differences. 

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:01 | 2107117 Husk-Erzulie
Husk-Erzulie's picture

Try sarcophagi.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:27 | 2107158 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

There are 152,000 results, including in a Reuters article, for "sarcophaguses" on Google.

But I do admit you have a point, sarcophagi is more correct. 

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:31 | 2107162 Husk-Erzulie
Husk-Erzulie's picture

Holy shit, Hamy, you're right.  It's clumsy as hell but it seems to be considered correct.  My apologies.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 16:49 | 2107902 Al Gorerhythm
Al Gorerhythm's picture

Another example of Living English in action. Soon, even decredibilized will be acceptableized and absorbulated into the language. Manglish.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 20:47 | 2108294 Al Gorerhythm
Al Gorerhythm's picture

Google hits are now the benchmark for grammatical and literary correctness in Canadia? Unmazing.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 20:55 | 2108304 akak
akak's picture

Neither of which can hold a candle to their highly-refined political correctness, which is the benchmark for intellectual hypocrisy in Canadia (even if it is not politically correct to acknowledge that fact).

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 03:21 | 2108831 Al Gorerhythm
Al Gorerhythm's picture

Reuters too, no less!

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 11:27 | 2107159 roadhazard
roadhazard's picture

You are Canadian with an American flag icon. lol, you must be a banker.

Fear not, one time George Dubya BuchCo was speaking in the Sequoia National Forest and injured himself trying to say the word Husqvarna.


Sun, 01/29/2012 - 12:00 | 2107196 hamurobby
hamurobby's picture

Funniestest thing Ive readed in awhile.

Mon, 01/30/2012 - 03:20 | 2108830 Al Gorerhythm
Al Gorerhythm's picture

You've been "irremediably decredibilized". It is usual practice is to place a punctuation mark, known as a "Period", at the conclusion of a sentence; such as after your descriptive adjective, moron.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 22:44 | 2106444 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

No private property = no bill of rights. Why would one need to bear arms, if one owns nothing? Privacy, and free expression are incompatible with the needs of the collective.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:11 | 2106497 SilverDOG
SilverDOG's picture

When majority rules , the weak inherit the Earth.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:15 | 2106503 akak
akak's picture

No, to the extent that rulers rule, instead of fostering a free society, the rulers inherit the Earth.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:38 | 2106566 Ropingdown
Ropingdown's picture

A majority doesn't 'rule' in the US.  That was never the intention.  A majority, occasionally a plurality, has to be brought round to voting for some slate or person, before that majority goes back to its work and family-raising (or TV watching).  A candidate or party has to assemble a coalition of interest groups having power, a following, money, owning newspapers, promising them cover or benefits.  With this coalition, a relatively small group, they campaign to win, playing on the prejudices, dreams, resentments, and avarice of the mass of voters.  That was the design.  The rights in the constitution were insisted upon, together with independent courts, to prevent the mass, but also any particular elite, from trampling basic rights of speech, property, self-defense, due-process, and so forth.  Only would-be demogogues want a literal unfettered representative democracy.  It would elect hyenas often as not. Direct democracy is better, if you go that route, because at least the average person gets to be his own hyena, like a Proposition 13 "we were here first so we deserve free services" hyena chewing on the bones of a once-great state, as it employs its illegal maids and gardeners with the money it saved.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:10 | 2106496 4 wheel drift
4 wheel drift's picture

the Bill Of Rights is totally compatible with a communist government.


roflmao....   what an arse.....    (or liar, which is worse, a stupid arse)


you are so full of yourself and whatever political crap you are selling.....


go fuck yourself stop spreading shit....   go spread it upon the survivors of the "costa concordia"  or

better, go become a helper for geraldo rivera....  report on puerto rico becoming the 52nd state

or some similar shit.....  

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 09:32 | 2107046 clymer
clymer's picture

Yeah - MDB comes off as a more credible troll. Hamy, can you bring out MDB?

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:28 | 2106531 GeorgeHayduke
GeorgeHayduke's picture

If I'm not mistaken, many of the Founding Fathers were influenced by the "democracy" of the Iroquois nation. I am not a scholar on the subject, but I would gather that the concept of private property was unknown to the Iroquois and was added by the FF's since all were owners of private property (only those folks could vote when all of this began). So, perhaps the merging of these two concepts is where a huge part of the rub comes for so many people. Just a thought.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 00:28 | 2106663 Oppressed In Ca...
Oppressed In California's picture

Some of the dumbest comments (HAAAMMMMYYYY) I've ever seen on ZH.  Congratulations.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 05:41 | 2106904 The Alarmist
The Alarmist's picture

Bill of Rights: Rights specifically prohibited by the People from abridgment by the Federal Government except as explicitly provided for.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 08:56 | 2107012 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

The Founding Fathers might be comparable to modern Libertarians, because they favored "small" government.


No. It is funny how naturally US citizens come to commit anachronical references.

During the course of the US history, the government state has always been as big as it could be.

On the contrary, the US of A history is the success story of the state which crushed and destroyed stateless, taxation exempted societies.

More fabled past.

Sun, 01/29/2012 - 16:03 | 2107814 akak
akak's picture

Bite the wax tadpole!

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 22:38 | 2106435 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Unfortunately, Hamy is pretty close to the mark. I suggest you read, "An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States" , by Beard.

Combined with other revisionist histories on the period, it will really change our mind on who the Founding Fathers really were.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:13 | 2106486 akak
akak's picture


Unfortunately, Hamy is pretty close to the mark

Actually, I think you meant to say that Hamy is pretty close to the Marx.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:16 | 2106508 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Nope, I'm very serious. It was a real letdown.

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:27 | 2106526 akak
akak's picture

I've read Beard as well, and while I believe he strains in many cases to make his revisionist claims against the Founding Fathers (with whom he clearly had many ideological axes to grind), one has to ask oneself which is fundamentally more important: the not infrequent and inconsequential flaws and yes, contradictions within those men, or the ideals of liberty which they promoted and to which they aspired? 

Should I go burn down my neighboring church merely because each and every member is an impure and imperfect Christian?

Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:45 | 2106578 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

The numbers and actual statements are not a strain. Their ideals were to protect themselves from the more democratic parts of the population. This is liberty for the wealthy. Much like Aristotle. 

They wanted Federal control to insure the payment of government debt, which many had acquired to a future benefit. Much like today? 


Sat, 01/28/2012 - 23:54 | 2106598 GeorgeHayduke
GeorgeHayduke's picture

Careful Sean7k, you're treading heavily on the dogmatic myths of folks who don't want to hear, consider or know what the real truth might be.

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