This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: What Democracy?

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by James Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada

What Democracy?

A sacred cow is usually defined as that which is regarded as far too valuable or prestigious to even think about altering.  Any proposition that comes close to complete abolition is met with astounding ridicule.  In the realm of legalized harlotry (politics), careers are made out of defending sacred cows no matter how expensive, socially corroding, or intentionally dishonest they are.  Compulsory public education is one of the first to come to mind.  The various vote buying schemes that masquerade as a welfare safety net are another.  Whenever the political class or its apologists in the media find themselves in a bind trying to validate the government’s latest plot to fill its coffers or grind already-undermined liberties further into the curb, they often resort to evoking the greatest sacred cow of all: democracy.

Starting from the earliest years of basic comprehension, children in the Western world are propagandized into believing that without democracy, society would descend into unlivable chaos.  Schools, both public and private, perpetuate the fantasy to millions of forced attendees every year.  They are told that the government which has a hand in practically anything they encounter was formed with only the best intentions.  In America especially, the representative democracy constructed out of the collective genius of the country’s founding fathers is lauded as a gift to humanity.  And though its influence is waning in recent years, the Constitution served as a model for developing nation-states around the globe.  Back in 1987, Time magazine estimated that of the 170 countries that existed at the time, “more than 160 have written charters modeled directly or indirectly on the U.S. version.”

The Constitution is presented as the miraculous creation of divine individuals when, in fact, it was nothing of the sort.  Like any attempt to centralize state power, the Constitution was formed out of the economic desires of its framers.  Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Thomas Paine, and Henry Adams weren’t even present at the Philadelphia Convention as it was drafted.  Many Americans at the time were suspicious at what ended up being a coup to toss out the decentralized Articles of Confederation in return for an institution powerful enough to be co-opted for the purposes of rent seeking.  As Albert Jay Nock noted:

The Constitution had been laid down under unacceptable auspices; its history had been that of a coup d’état.

It had been drafted, in the first place, by men representing special economic interests. Four-fifths of them were public creditors, one-third were land speculators, and one-fifth represented interests in shipping, manufacturing, and merchandising. Most of them were lawyers. Not one of them represented the interest of production

when the Constitution was promulgated, similar economic interests in the several states had laid hold of it and pushed it through to ratification in the state conventions as a minority measure, often — indeed, in the majority of cases — by methods that had obvious intent to defeat the popular will. Moreover, and most disturbing fact of all, the administration of government under the Constitution remained wholly in the hands of the men who had devised the document, or who had been leaders in the movement for ratification in the several states.

Unvarnished history like this is never taught in public schools and is hardly known by the public at large.  There is a reason for this of course.  When the rose tinted glasses are removed, the state appears as the organized criminal racket it really is.  Those entrusted as “representatives of the people” are really looking out for themselves and their financial well-being.  As government grows and regulatory bureaucracies flourish in size and scope, law formation becomes not just a job for the elected legislature but also of the executive enforcers.  In other words, the same people tasked with enforcing the law are also given discretion over what rules they wish to impose.  These unelected bureaucrats, in a constant effort to validate their positions of authority, will never seek to cut the tax money that is their lifeblood.  Instead, they will spend the whole of their budget every year as they live out their desire to have meaningful employment through crushing freedom.  The people’s will is sold off to ensure a new bloc of state-privileged voters.

Leviathan’s growth by bureaucracy has been occurring all over the Western world but it is accelerating at a worrisome rate in the United States and Europe.  In the 2012 edition of the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s 10,000 Commandments which provides a type of snapshot of the American regulatory state, it is documented that federal agencies were responsible for the implementation of 3,807 rules.  These economically destructive regulations were set in stone despite only 81 bills passing Congress and being signed by the President.  Representative democracy has been replaced by the rule of the unaccountable.  In an environment where the power players are shielded from public backlash, the opportunity for cronyism, corruption, and back room deals increases tenfold.  Revolving door politics becomes the norm as the regulators who write the laws end up being employed at the same firms that avoid their punitive nature.

Across the pond in Europe, unelected technocrats continue to try and save the floundering currency union.  Austerity measures, which amount to more tax increases than cuts in government spending, have been imposed by bureaucrats who have little to no identification with the people they are levied against.  It is centralized planning on continent-wide scale.  The person with the most sway in the crisis has been European Central Bank President Mario Draghi.  Though Draghi only has one vote in the body that controls the printing press, he is seen as its mouthpiece.  Last week as the Olympic Games kicked off, he infamously made the off-the-cuff remark on doing “whatever it takes to preserve the euro”.  The remark, whether Draghi admits it or not, carried with it the bought-and-sold notion that the printing presses would soon be put on overdrive in an effort to quell the crisis by buying sovereign debt.  Stocks in both the U.S. and Europe rallied on the news but sunk soon after the plan was revealed as a farce.  There was no trick up his sleeve; Draghi’s remark was pure posturing.

However the event was highly revealing of the reliance the global economy has on a constant injection of cheap, fiduciary currency.  Under central banking, consumer preferences which normally guide the free market’s structure of production take a backseat to the whims of the operators of the printing press.  Financial markets begin centering their operations around fresh batches of newly created digital currency.  Fractional reserve banking becomes even more emboldened.  Because money isn’t neutral and always enters the economy at specific points, the first receivers are able to spend and invest before overall prices are affected.  The last receivers must deal with prices rising prices as their wages stagnate; thus lowering their real income.

The free market economy is analogous to democracy because consumers vote with their wallets on who produces the best product.  Under central banking, few individuals are granted the monopolistic license to produce that which facilitates all transactions.   There is nothing democratic about central banking in practice; it is a system of top-down governance based on the fantastical idea that there exists an ideal amount of money that only a few intellectually gifted economists can determine.  With one hundred years of operation under its belt, all the central banker profession has learned through the various recessions which plagued the 20th century is that money printing appears to solve everything.

From the beginning of the Eurozone crisis, anyone not quenching their thirst with the Kool-Aid of good, honest government recognized that the large banks were the true beneficiaries of the various bailout schemes.  Because commercial banks in Northern Europe are exposed to sovereign debt, it is in their best interest for default to be avoided even if it means receiving interest payments in a devaluing currency.  The people of the PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain) are told their governments are being bailed out as a benefit to them.  What’s really happening is the bankers are pulling the reigns of an unscrupulous political class looking to ultimately cash out by helping their friends in high places.  The rhetoric of preserving democracy by EU officials amounts to nothing but a childish ploy when contrasted with the brazen, systematic exploitation the state embodies.

To the ruling establishment, the approval of “we the people” matters insomuch that they don’t recognize their oppressors.  Democracy is a charade to convince the masses that they are in charge of their future when they are servants to authoritarianism.  Economist and philosopher Hans-Herman Hoppe was spot on when he recognized that

Democracy has nothing to do with freedom. Democracy is a soft variant of communism, and rarely in the history of ideas has it been taken for anything else.

Rather than give the people a voice, democracy allows for the choking of life by men and women of state authority.  When Occupy protestors were chanting “this is what democracy looks like” last fall, they wrongly saw the power of government as the best means to alleviate poverty.  What modern day democracy really looks like is endless bailouts, special privileges, and imperial warfare all paid for on the back of the common man.

None of this is to suggest that a transition to real democracy is the answer.  The popular adage of democracy being “two wolves and lamb voting on what’s for lunch” is undeniably accurate.  A system where one group of people can vote its hands into another’s pockets is not economically sustainable.  Democracy’s pitting of individuals against each other leads to moral degeneration and impairs capital accumulation.  It is no panacea for the rottenness that follows from centers of power.  True human liberty with respect to property rights is the only foundation from which civilization can grow and thrive.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:37 | 2679535 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Time to return to the Articles of Confederation?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:51 | 2679569 bankruptcylawyer
bankruptcylawyer's picture

oh yea, you know there's another sacred cow---the federal reserve. yea, i think you forgot that one. which basically means, the entire american system built up over the past 60 years. 

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:25 | 2679817 Vampyroteuthis ...
Vampyroteuthis infernalis's picture

We don't have real democracy or capitalism in the US. We have oligarchical, authoritarian leaders. This article is tripe at best.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:54 | 2679880 engineertheeconomy
engineertheeconomy's picture

The current political regime in the United States is actually a Military Dictatorship parading as a Free Democracy.

What goes up inevitably comes down on its own accord.

Physics Bitchez

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:57 | 2680030 0z
0z's picture

Most of the commentators here argue over shades of grey.

Here is the real question; State or no State?

There is an answer, some people call it natural order. 

The rest is endless and pointless jaw/tongue stretching.

Anyone who wants to hold interesting conversations on the question of "social order" should read Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 16:53 | 2680101 TheGardener
TheGardener's picture

Aristocracy, before its dilution , claimed divine natural order and had the roots and genes to prove it.

Some are still around, filling up gas or getting dirty
for a living and not talking about fight club...

HHH is talk club and unlike shorting democracy with PM and thus zero hedge , he talks the book about insurance companies replacing basic risk taking off THE STATE , instead of living unhedged . He is a good libertarian read though for starters, or thought crime democrazy doubters, but he wears the warning label for the real thing.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:27 | 2680189 gmrpeabody
gmrpeabody's picture

When there are more votes by people with NO SKIN in the game..., this is what you get!

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 01:03 | 2680915 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

“two wolves and lamb voting on what’s for lunch” is undeniably accurate"

I deny it....It's absolute bullshit. 

It's more like "10,000 wolves and 300,000,000 sheep voting"

This is some more of that Objectivist crap isn't it?


Author fucks up the animal metaphors right outa the gate.

"Wolves" run crony capitalist societies....not "sheep"!.....WOLVES!

AKA: rule-benders, bribers, kickback artists, the self-exalted, scam artists, bullshitters and sociopaths...godless sons of Mammon

everybody else? ya toss the sheeples a hay bale in the pen now and then, and the next time lunch rolls around, you take another one out and eat it. (and i include 99% of the truly "self-made" in there)

You see, you don't need all this Objectivist bullshit....and yes, you're welcome Alan Greenspan!

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:07 | 2681117 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

You're a moron.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 08:11 | 2681211 rsh00
rsh00's picture

No State! I vote for No State! I want natural order!

Now let the endless, pointless jaw/tongue stretching begin on who will dismantle the state and how.

...You're welcome!

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:01 | 2679896 Taku
Taku's picture

Have to post this. 1 Canadian and 1 American died mysteriously in Vietnam recently. Canadian government at first would not provde any details citing 'privacy concerns'. US government statement unknown. Cause of death blamed on alcohol.



Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:26 | 2679951 Taku
Taku's picture

Oregon man sentenced to jail for collecting rain water

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 18:16 | 2680269 Pumpkin
Pumpkin's picture

This man does not know the law. He probably got a lawyer.  Getting a lawyer is the most common mistake anyone makes concerning the law.  There are many different ways he could have stopped this action in its tracks.  A lawyer will not do any of them.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:14 | 2679620 AurorusBorealus
AurorusBorealus's picture

The most important element of the U.S. constitution should be preserved... the first five amendments, known as the Bill of Rights, which Jefferson wrote after the constitution had been drafted and ratified.  Beyond this, you must ask yourself the question... "what type of government can there be?"... government by the one, the few, or the many... monarchy, aristocracy, or republic.  These are your only 3 options.  However government is formed, however, I think it functions best when run like a personal estate: with a fixed source of income, mandated by law, and expenses that come directly from the pocket of those in power.  No way would someone pay, from their own pocket, for the outrageous salaries and pensions government employees in the Western world receive.  When it is the "public purse," no one is responsible.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:43 | 2679688 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

They only caved because they feared ratification would fail otherwise; the Federalists have been trying to claw those rights back for 225 years.


a) charles pinckney, not jefferson

b) they were written before, not after, and only included as amendments after because the Federalists rejected them orior to ratification

Sometimes you look back on the unholy bargains that occured to get things off the ground, bicameral legislature, the bill of rights, the 3/5ths compromise...and you wonder how we've lasted this long.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:44 | 2679857 engineertheeconomy
engineertheeconomy's picture

Where Hitler failed, Obummer has successfully engineered a slave labor death prison ponzi planet

You know what they say, paybacks are a real mother fucker

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:11 | 2679914 tlnzz
tlnzz's picture

 Justifiable righteousness. No one can stop an idea whose time has come.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:24 | 2679950 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

He didn't do it alone; there's 42*535 other helpers that need a plaque too.


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 16:38 | 2680086 engineertheeconomy
engineertheeconomy's picture

Direct Democracy, Transparency, Accountability, Consequences for Crimes Committed, Honest & Just Economic System. It's already been Engineered and although it is not to the Bankers liking, the numbers work out. Now the goal is to raise the consciousness of the average person so that the information can get out. Maybe 1 out of every 100 Zerohedgers are ready to see the truth. The rest can't handle the truth yet. Think you're ready? Here's an old book that will test your comprehension level 

let me know if any of you are ready yet 


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 23:21 | 2680856 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

This sounds more like Still and less like the anti-democracy drivel of the thread's piece and of the hardcore Libertarians who support a "republic" over democracy.

This, I think, is the biggest problem (or one of them): debt-based fiat. Sovereign fiat would work much better. Then we could fight about the gold standard or whatever, but how much money is in circulation is important. We need sovereign money and the popular control of our own, sovereign currency.


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:01 | 2679762 smlbizman
smlbizman's picture

until mankind becomes the real definition of honorable, instead of the honorable that defines corzine...their will never be a proper govt.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:44 | 2680215 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

I prefer panarchism.

You can choose your own government and how much your daily dose of arsenic is.

I prefer no government and no arsenic.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:51 | 2680224's picture


I'm a voluntaryist with a personal preference for anarchy. So if someone else wants to be beaten about the head and shoulders by the likes of Obama and Romney it's no skin off my nose as long as I can steer clear.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 18:05 | 2680247 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture


All those loser housewives, who get free cosmetic surgery once a week from their drunken, abusive husbands, deserve all they get.

I don't want to share in their personality flaws.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:20 | 2679637 lesterbegood
lesterbegood's picture

In international law (The Law of Nations; Vattel) the Articles of Confederation were superceded by the Constitution for the united States of America c. 1787. The Articles of Confederation is a dead document. It was also flawed, especially in regulation of monies and commerce.

A side note: there are two constitutions; the one referenced above and the corporate charter known as THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNTED STATES which was created by a 3 man commission in 1868. It was adopted unlawfully by CONGRESS in 1871 with the Organic Act.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:43 | 2679853 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

It wasn't unlawful.  Now, that isn't to say it wasn't in accordance with the original Constitution for the United States of America, but that document became a dead letter once the Union dissolved in the 1860s as a result of the southern States walking out of Congress.

What then took the place of the de jure Congress then acted under their plenary power to re-draft a Constitution for the District of Columbia and all its territories, possessions and instrumentalities.  Of the latter, they include the "STATES", as in the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF NEW YORK, STATE OF TEXAS, etc.  Note: the capitalization is intentional and specific, as is the "STATE OF" prefix.  California and STATE OF CALIFORNIA are two entirely different political entities.  If you are domiciled on the former then you are in the Republic.  If you are resident of the latter then you are subject to the Democracy.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:23 | 2679946 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

"STATES OF" are political subcorporations of the United States (a federal corporation - 28 USC 3002).  They are included in the jurisdiction of the District of Columbia.  If you are resident in any STATE or other territory, possession or instrumentality of the United States (a federal corporation - 28 USC 3002) then you are subject to all the statutes of the Democracy.

Your Social Security Number is evidence of your citizenship in the Democracy of the United States.

I am Chumbawamba.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:42 | 2681154 Disenchanted
Disenchanted's picture



It's too bad that all that wasn't explained to someone when they first applied for and received their SS #/card.

I was 14 when I got mine and didn't know my ass from a hole in the ground. I was in my mid thirties before I even got a breath of what you're talking about.

So then what? How do you fix it when you've already, albeit unknowingly, voluntarily entered into that contract twenty some years previous?


edit: Nowadays young parents are required to apply for their child's SS# immediately after their birth to be able to take the per child exemption when filing their taxes. Again both of my children were born prior to me having the knowledge you're trying to impart here.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:22 | 2679642 midtowng
midtowng's picture

The solutions to the current problems of our democracy is MORE democracy, not less.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:26 | 2679654 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

In a way, yes, because more democracy is a sure-fire way to hasten the end of democracy, which is in fact the problem. Gold star for you!

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:00 | 2679877 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Democracy -"A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of direct expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic – negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy." [Soldier's Training Manual TM2000-25, United States War Department, 1928]

"Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%." - Thomas Jefferson

"For tyranny is a kind of monarchy which has in view the interest of the monarch only; oligarchy has in view the interest of the wealthy; democracy, of the needy: none of them the common good of all. Tyranny, as I was saying, is monarchy exercising the rule of a master over the political society; oligarchy is when men of property have the government in their hands; democracy, the opposite, when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers."- Aristotle


Democracy - Two Wolves and One Sheep Deciding What's for Dinner


I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 23:41 | 2680871 midtowng
midtowng's picture

I guess its cool to be against everything that might possible help people. But then I'm not cool.

When you find about another form of government superior to democracy, you let me know. Because history hasn't revealed one yet.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:12 | 2681122 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

Nope, you're just a moron to think that the masses want to help each other rather than steal rape and pillage people from the other groups that have collectivized.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 11:02 | 2681685 Inibo E. Exibo
Inibo E. Exibo's picture

There's no government like no government.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:34 | 2679669 whoisjohngalt11
whoisjohngalt11's picture

When the Pigs can change the writing on the barn wall (i watched Animal farm yesterday) then we no longer have a democratic republic ,but instead a living (ever changing) constitution, which can be changed as the pigs ( leaders in charge) see fit..

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:45 | 2679719 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

So you're for or against the amendment ratification process, Herr dimwit?


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:53 | 2680230's picture

I'm all for Orwell but as an interesting aside please note that the Animal Farm cartoon was funded by the CIA.


The cartoon that came in from the cold

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 11:13 | 2681720 Imminent Collapse
Imminent Collapse's picture

Democracy, while an ideal, is a product of civilization, not of evolution. Go slowly! select carefully! for the dangers of democracy are:

1. Glorification of mediocrity.
2. Choice of base and ignorant rulers.
3. Failure to recognize the basic facts of social evolution.
4. Danger of universal suffrage in the hands of uneducated and indolent majorities.
5. Slavery to public opinion; the majority is not always right.

The Urantia Book, Paper 71

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:38 | 2679536 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

There are two systems of government in the United States, both existing simultaneously in the same space: a Republic and a Democracy.

Depending on your status as either a creditor or debtor, you either exist in the Republic or the Democracy, respectively.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:40 | 2679542 Race Car Driver
Race Car Driver's picture

Sheep. It's what's for dinner.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:57 | 2679556 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Those in the Republic have God-given rights as guaranteed and warrantied by the Constitution.

Those in the Democracy are chattle property.  They are livestock.  They have no rights, only privileges granted by their keepers.

Those chanting for Democracy are literally as bleating sheep.  They are saying, "Feed me! Shear me! And when I no longer produce, slaughter me!"

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:01 | 2679594 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Those in the Republic have God-given rights as guaranteed and warranted by the Constitution.

Which constitution is that? The Constitution that states that slavery shall be protected?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:02 | 2679631 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Arguing gets you nowhere.  A sheep could win a debate against Socrates, but in the end you'd still be a sheep.

You should be asking yourself how you can get out of the pen.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:41 | 2679698 Abitdodgie
Abitdodgie's picture

There are two Constitutions . The First is the Republic one " Constitution for the United States of America " and the Corporations Constitution " Constitution of the United States of America " if you are a citizen of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA then the Corporation Constitution applys to you . 

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:13 | 2679784 aerojet
aerojet's picture

I get so tired of hearing thes bulshit Internet legal theories!  The Corporate Constitution and becoming "sovereign" citizens--all this shit has been tried and tried again and none of it has amounted to a hill of beans in any court of law.  The government we have is arbirary, it adheres to no principles whatsoever, and the last vestiges of the Constitutional Republic continue to disappear because the whole thing relies on people who have to uphold their own high standards, which they don't (and never did).  If honest, thoughtful people would run the system and not be gamed or subverted, we would have a system with long-term stability, but we don't have that and never will.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:15 | 2679911 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

You're right, and wrong.  There has been a lot of misinformation put out there over the years as people felt around in the dark looking for the escape hatch.  What do you expect when the object of the Game is to figure out not only that there is a Game and what it is but its rules as well?

This government, flawed though it is, does abide the rule of law.  It is heartless and cruel and has zero tolerance, but it does adhere to the law when properly applied.

The fact is, you run the system already, but you haven't figured out the rules.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:20 | 2679937 engineertheeconomy
engineertheeconomy's picture

Our Criminal Military Dictatorship Government makes up the rules as they go, that is the rules that apply to us. They don't even pretend to be subject to rules any more. They have one general unspoken rule amongst themselves, which is that they all have to stick together as a united front so that they can preserve their stolen wealth and keep us enslaved in their evil system.

Tue, 08/07/2012 - 03:28 | 2683959 Precious
Precious's picture

then fucking leave, dickwad

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 05:52 | 2681090 Pseudolus
Pseudolus's picture


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:39 | 2679843 LULZBank
LULZBank's picture


Which constitution is that? The Constitution that states that slavery shall be protected?

US Constitution gives rights to everyone, including slaves.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:33 | 2679970 engineertheeconomy
engineertheeconomy's picture

Does the Constitution not simply recognize our rights? I thought they were basically saying that there was never any justification for infringing on our basic rights, or making any laws that took away from those rights.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 16:56 | 2680141 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Basically.  But things got complicated when the bar tab came due and everybody started looking at everybody else to settle up.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:47 | 2679726 ISEEIT
ISEEIT's picture

'I' still believe you are either Marla or an acquaintance. I'll give that you don't express like her (who does?) but were she to troll (God forbid and protect us from such malicious activity:) I suggest that she might be Chumba too.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:12 | 2679917 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

I don't speak for Marla but I would be willing to bet some gold (bitches) that she would be deeply offended by that conjecture.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:13 | 2679919 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Besides that, she would also probably disagree with everything I'm saying here.


Mon, 08/06/2012 - 06:58 | 2681111 lewy14
lewy14's picture

It's not so much the semantics as the modality.

You use spray-paint where a pen is more appropriate.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:09 | 2681119 i-dog
i-dog's picture

Indeed. But thank you for dropping in and saying them, again, Chumba. I didn't learn these things from you, but you did strengthen my resolve to apply them more resolutely, and successfully, over the past few years.

I can also attest that: If one acts like a sovereign citizen when dealing with government, at all levels, then one is treated as a sovereign citizen. As you say, they do try to follow the rules (the greatest fear of any civil servant is that they might lose their job - ie. cushy career and retirement benefits - if found to be breaking a rule).

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:16 | 2681128 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

+1 "If one acts like a sovereign citizen when dealing with government, at all levels, then one is treated as a sovereign citizen"

wherever I go on this globe, if any civil servant even looks at me in a funny way I take out my notepad and pen down something, usually their names. works wonders. it also works with this other kind of civil servants, the employees of big corporations living off the public milk

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:54 | 2681174 i-dog
i-dog's picture

LOL ... we finally agree on something, Ghordie!

I can't tell you how many times, over the decades, that: I've entered countries without a visa (Immigration Officer [scanning in vain through passport]: "You need a visa!"; me: "OK, then give me one!"); made governments change "guidelines" and "policies" to match the "law" (as far back as the 1970s and as recently as last year); worked as a consultant to governments without needing a "work permit"; had residency extended without filling out any paperwork, etc, etc. But I've never had to go so far as to take out a notepad ... yet.... :-)

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:09 | 2679974 delacroix
delacroix's picture


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 23:45 | 2680873 midtowng
midtowng's picture

Your original republic only had voting rights for the white, male, landholders.

Is this the protection of rights you were talking about?

Who was it that said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for every other type"

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 05:50 | 2681086 Pseudolus
Pseudolus's picture

Why would God given rights need a Constitution? To do so means we have then left the world of status (God) for a world of contract (Man)...Sure the Constitution references the idea: didn't safeguard them at all though did it.

Why would God-given rights only apply to those living in a Republic? As Carlin so pertinently put it - either everyone has god-given rights - or no one has them and they don't exist

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:11 | 2679604 lesterbegood
lesterbegood's picture

Yep! In 1871 the Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia (The Organic Act) was unlawfully passed. Since the republican form of government was vacated when the southern states seceded prior to the American Civil War, the American government went from a republic to martial law to a democracy. I can find no evidence that the State of Emergency and martial law declared by Pres. Abe Lincoln has ever been rescinded.

A democracy is an oligarchal socialist system; rule of the majority, mob rule, the law of rules. The STATE is sovereign and in charge and the people serve the STATE.

In a republic, the People are sovereign (Chisolm v. Georgia), and the government merely a servant.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 23:31 | 2680862 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

On your link, Lester, the incorrect punctuation of it's (should be its) on the first page. Not a good sign.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:44 | 2679549 Neethgie
Neethgie's picture

i hate mises institute and circle bastiat, they post such rubbish, police arresting someone is "state sponsored terror"

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:53 | 2679572 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

We know what you mean.. Those guys are a bushel of bad apples. LOL


Inflation and the Fall of the Roman Empire - 1984

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:05 | 2679603 AurorusBorealus
AurorusBorealus's picture

Yeah... I hate ideas that involve sound money and the preservation of liberty as well.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:18 | 2679633 Neethgie
Neethgie's picture

I see neither just criticisms of what we have

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:47 | 2679558 Ima anal sphincter
Ima anal sphincter's picture

Leviathan’s growth by bureaucracy has been occurring all over the Western world but it is accelerating at a worrisome rate in the United States and Europe.

Sever the head of the beast (the bankers). Remove their traitor minions.

Take the world back "for the people." Make sure it NEVER happens again.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:39 | 2679689 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

The financial system is only one head of the beast, the other is overpowered centralized government. This is where Occupy went off the rails- their contention that one can kill a two headed monster by feeding one head and starving the other is at best naive. They are symbionts, not separate organisms and this is where our political system has broken down in recent decades. Team Elephant aruges that by feeding one head they can reduce the danger of the other and Team Donkey reverses this by supporting the other head.

The reality is that after decades of one group being supposedly against the encroachment of government and the other being supposedly against the encroachment of corporatism we have both entities with more power than ever. One can only assume now that both groups are either stupid, incompetent, or purposeful liars and that it was never their true aim to reduce the power of either.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:55 | 2679745 ISEEIT
ISEEIT's picture

Oh please...........It will happen again but let us be free of it for a time?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 22:08 | 2680748 Moon Pie
Moon Pie's picture

Perfect!  All that has to happen is:

1.  Abolish the Fed.

2.  Revoke the charters of the TBTF (numerous causes).  Issue new ones with strict guidelines.

3.  Print and post online every penny of Government expenditure, foreign or domestic.


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:48 | 2679561 Meremortal
Meremortal's picture

It is strange that the more govt fails, the more some demand that govt solve problems. Govt hasn't demonstrated the ability to solve anything, and now it's too late. We are playing out the string until the collapse.

Which reminds me, I need more jerry I can get to my farmland retreat without depending on gas stations. 

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:48 | 2679729 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

1st world problems.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:48 | 2679562 q99x2
q99x2's picture

When you have Carl Rove's ballot trucks and a rigged voting system how the hell do you know what you have.

I say get the people hungry. Get them mad. And, lets have a revolution and see what is left over to work with. Anyhow, its the human way of doing things.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:28 | 2679658 Sophist Economicus
Sophist Economicus's picture

Paging q99x2, Paging q99x2 - You're wanted in DNC conference room 1....

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:52 | 2679736 Harbanger
Harbanger's picture

The plan of the Statist is to destroy a Nations wealth so the people go hungry while getting them mad by using class and race warfare. They advocate rioting and revolution to create chaos and fear. In the aftermath, they hope the people will run to them for safety, the same people who created the problem. They then rush in to save the people and create a new form of total Govt.  It’s too bad for them that more and more people are learning the game and won’t play along.


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:31 | 2680190 Marco
Marco's picture

Why? What's in it for them?

Government as it exists allows them to increase their share of the pie, but that won't always be the case ... at some point wealth will be as concentrated as it gets, what do TPTB get out of a statist government at that point? I can see why in the end game TPTB want a government which is large enough to protect their property (which is everything) but why would they be interested in a government which tells them what to do on their land (which is all the land)?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 18:14 | 2680261 Harbanger
Harbanger's picture

True, the post Constitutional Govt. we have in the US allows TPTB to increase their share of the pie. Being wealthy however, does not make you a Statist, unfortunately some wealthy people think that they will be given a “pass” from the statists if they side with them. (not true) Statists don’t want a government which is large enough to protect their property, they absolutely don’t believe in property rights. They want power so they can deny individual property rights, the individual owns nothing, they “own” everything and dole out “rights” and property as they see fit.  So what's in it for them?  Everything.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 19:26 | 2680398 Marco
Marco's picture

If it's not the rich you are talking about, then who are these statists ... they are certainly not TPTB at the moment, because those are the wealthy.

Also how will these statists possibly triumph over the monied elite? An elite which is made more economically powerful (and in this day and age thus altogether) with every passing moment ...

The far more likely future in my opinion is harsh austerity and a renter's society with nearly zero social mobility.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 20:12 | 2680494 Harbanger
Harbanger's picture

TPTB are central planners and money changers, they rob wealth and take protection money for political favors, they never have and never will create anything of lasting value.  Do not confuse the "rich" with the tptb or individal success (personal wealth from hard work).   TPTB (Statists) gained (or hope to gain) their wealth and power through deception and thievery of the population.  They destroy the host population, when there are no "makers" left to feed on.  History repeats once again.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:21 | 2681137 i-dog
i-dog's picture

+1. Very clear description.

I would only add that they are ideologues, rather than wealth collectors (though, like us, many of them find collecting wealth quite handy - particularly for the purpose of removing wealth from those who might oppose their ideology).

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 23:32 | 2680864 HardAssets
HardAssets's picture

 TPTB/statist govt

2 sides of the same coin. They aren't separate things.

It is the merging of corporate and government criminal gangs to rob & rule the populace - many whom switch freely from one gang to the other, and back again (ex. - - US treasury secretaries)

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:16 | 2679563 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

  When Occupy protestors were chanting “this is what democracy looks like” last fall, they wrongly saw the power of government as the best means to alleviate poverty

Thank you James Miller, I have been waiting for a journalist to say that for over a year.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:34 | 2679668's picture

They should have been chanting "this is what democracy looks like" as that fat assed cop doused them with pepper spray.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:50 | 2679735 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

They'll get the last laugh when his pension turns out to be little more than an exercise in poor estimation.


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:04 | 2679768's picture

He was fired last week after being on a nine month paid vacation.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:49 | 2679566 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

True human liberty with respect to property rights is the only foundation from which civilization can grow and thrive.


True in opposition to false or fake. Very 'American'

Ah, the big lie one has to swallow to go along with 'Americans': the US of A has been very respectful of property rights. Or not. And it has not grown accordingly or not.

Theft is a good way to thrive.As shown by 'Americans' all over the world. Their obsessive efforts to dismiss that very obvious fact, considering their own 'American' history, a full display of the principles, are growing duller and duller by the day.

But, hey, as long as the money making is on time, dont give up...

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:38 | 2679683 Sophist Economicus
Sophist Economicus's picture

Can I ask you an off-topic question.   Do you enjoy Lou Mei?   It was one of the few things I just couldn't get myself to try....

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:52 | 2679739 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

You've been hanging out with the kleptocrats in the party again haven't you AnAnananana?

Put that iPad back on the assembly-line and get crackin'

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 18:49 | 2680315 Poor Grogman
Poor Grogman's picture

Theft is a good way to say.
Does that include theft of entire countries such as Tibet?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:55 | 2679567 Intelligence_In...
Intelligence_Insulter's picture


The illusions of choice.  Here in the U.S. there is no democracy but the 2 parties do play their roles.

The republicans at least are more senseable when it comes to taxes. They know that taxing the job creators like myself will only piss me off and make me want to go john galt and just let the little plebes suck dick for their morgage payments.

The Democrats act like raising taxes will help fix the budget.  WRONG.  It's class warfare drummed up by the pathetic democrats are their braindead base. No ammount of tax increases will fix this obamination, but yet they incist taxing the upper middle class will make a damn bit of difference.


Romney has my vote but like the last election it's already been decided.  The Osama slaying socialist get's the nod.

Theater of the fucking absurd.  Democracy is a shit show, just stop taxing me. It is theft, plain and simple.





Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:14 | 2679618 FrankIvy
FrankIvy's picture



Intelligence-In wrote: The illusions of choice . . .  Romney has my vote.

Illusion of wisdom in your post.  Confused has my vote.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:39 | 2679693 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

Romney would have my vote - if I voted, which I don't - his entertainment value - "I'll be a Mormon Trotskyite (neocon, if you prefer) tyrant" - would make a nice change of pace from Obama's tired "I'm an Alinskyite Marxian (neolib, if you prefer) tyrant" schtick. We need to shake things up a bit, why settle for the same-old same-old? Plus, the nuclear hypocrisy bomb the Dems plan to detonate the instant they lose the presidency would be quite a holler, like it was with the Reps when McCain got shot down in '08.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:19 | 2679634 WTFx10
WTFx10's picture

Boy u are ignorant

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 18:26 | 2680284 Harbanger
Harbanger's picture

Michael Jackson said: No, that's ignorant.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:56 | 2679749 Meesohaawnee
Meesohaawnee's picture

of all the times i have read posts over and over on ZH and have learned the financial/reality level of intelligence is quite high unlike msg boards for children and dreamers like seeking alpha and yahoo. One way i can tell is very very rarely when the subject of american gov comes up theres rarely mentioned the discussion of democrat vs republican. Anyone with IQ above 2 knows thats the most foolish waste of time discussion on the planet. If you dont theres no difference between the criminals all i can say is you have lots of homework to do in the class of reality.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:17 | 2679796 aerojet
aerojet's picture

I was expressing the same idea back in 98-03 while in graduate school.  Here I am, working on a doctorate with some of the smartest people the US has to offer, and I never did convince a single person of that point--I gave up on academia after I finished my degree because I just could no longer stomach the leftist mindset--how they even do objective science is beyond me, it is all about validating foregone conclusions, not challenging assumptions.  You don't make new discoveries by looking at the world in the same comfortable way everyone else has always looked at it.  And yet, not a single open mind was encountered!

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:30 | 2679831 Meesohaawnee
Meesohaawnee's picture

with that being said ive voiced many times here how does a economics professor look his students in the face right now ??? how do you explain to a student of economics or finance that the market that they are spending 10s of thousands of dollars studying is just a rigged gamed theatric fraud????  (theatre was thurs and friday since it was clearly staged and premeditated)

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:57 | 2679888 Seer
Seer's picture

Sorry to break the news to you, but the fraud is far more entrenched than just economics.  Economics is just the measure of things; granted, it's distorted, but one has to look at WHY it is so severely distorted.  I'd argue that the distortion occurs because the underlying physical realities cannot support the paradigm that it is all riding on.  Once upon a time you could make up BS stories about the need to undertake some war to hide the real reasons for war- the need for obtaining more resources to support the continual path of perpetual growth.

When we pretend that we can have perpetual growth then ALL systems that ride on top of this premise can be distorted in any way that we wish.  And, in order to hide the realities we HAVE to distort shit.

“Men argue…nature acts”

- Voltaire

All the fraud is no more than men arguing... nature has already set the course (and there's no arguing over how to set any other "path").

Tue, 08/07/2012 - 03:31 | 2683961 Precious
Precious's picture

What took you so long to find out everthing that mattered to you was bullshit.  Are you dense?  How much money did you waste on school, you unqualified, stupid slut.   You probably went to Columbia too.  Jackass.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:53 | 2679573 loveyajimbo
loveyajimbo's picture

So what is he recommending instead?  Communal farms, LSD and unshaved beaver?  Why not publiclly crucify any elite convicted by citizen tribunals of fraud of any kind?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:33 | 2679665 Sophist Economicus
Sophist Economicus's picture

"So what is he recommending instead? "


the word REPUBLIC comes to mind.....

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:54 | 2679742 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

Afraid they might get the right man are ya?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:54 | 2679575 kilroy
kilroy's picture

"Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV

And you think you're so clever and classless and free

But you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see

A working class hero is something to be"


- John Lennon

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:58 | 2679583 AurorusBorealus
AurorusBorealus's picture

"Democracy is a soft variant of communism, and rarely in the history of ideas has it been taken for anything else."


This is correct.  Most serious thinkers have viewed democracy as mob-rule and with some horror-- indeed even the American founding fathers viewed democracy with trepidation.  Also, you are correct, most of those who drafted the U.S. constitution held large amounts of public debt and needed a more powerful central state than that created by the Articles of Confederation to be made whole in currency that had any value.  This is why the Ron-Paul-libertarian crowd is a quite confused lot.  They refer back to a document with religious reverence that was nothing but a series of bizarre compromises to maintain the wealth of government bond-holders and plantation owners.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:45 | 2679858 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

That may be, but it is still the best that mankind has accomplished to date and given the reversion to centralized power likely will be for the forseeable future. What you term confusion I see as a realistic assessment that there has been nothing better to date and probably isn't going to be.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:08 | 2679909 Seer
Seer's picture

"Democracy" is, like nearly all other [buzz] "words" tossed around, NOT what most believe.  Democracy has been proven only to work up to some scale around 120 or so (can't recall the exact number), after which it breaks down because of the complexity of getting all participants together and to come to some consensus.  For small-ish tribes it would work; for large State bodies, not.

A "Republic[an]" form of social governance is also incapable of scaling up, when, as is the case with nearly all, premised on perpetual growth: as there becomes greater numbers of people physical reality takes over and tightening of "laws" is a certainty.

So, in ALL cases, BIG = FAIL.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:58 | 2679584 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

plato would eat this douchebag for lunch

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:54 | 2679743 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

He did swing that way.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:58 | 2679585 Silvertrader
Silvertrader's picture

"True human liberty with respect to property rights is the only foundation from which civilization can grow and thrive."

I agree! But the problem is of course how to create a system that ensures these rights. As long as corruption, egoïsm and hunger for power lives in humanity, we will always see these qualities in every form of government we invent for ourselves.



Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:38 | 2679682's picture

Only a voluntary system can secure such rights as it makes no sense to submit to violence in order to live freely.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:57 | 2679750 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

And what do you end up with, but violence, when even a minority decides against participating in the "voluntary" system?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:15 | 2679790 Seer
Seer's picture

Violence will ALWAYS exist, that's nature!  BUT... centralized (State) violence is a sure-fire way to end ALL violence once and for all, in one big violent event that wipes us all out.  Take yer pick I suppose...

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:27 | 2679954 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

But they keep telling me the private sector could've invented thermonuclear warheads. ;)   (trick question: the engineers do the work, regardless of who signs the paychecks)

A very good argument for limiting the power of government, I agree, but remove the baby from the proverbial bathwater please.


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:44 | 2680156's picture

Please give an example of a current abuse of government power and what you are actively doing within the system in order to curtail it. What is your time frame for a significant reduction of the abuse in question?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:34 | 2679792's picture

A voluntary society would have a far more efficient system of security and adjudication than any government could offer. Perhaps you hadn't noticed but government officials and their cronies are the most criminally oriented folks in the world.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:30 | 2679962 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

No, I'd say the private sector does an amazing job of giving them a run for their money; cross-training has been exceedingly popular though.

You're on the right track with consent being an essential ingredient of good government, but the part of the proof between "the status quo is corrupt" and "all government is corrupt" could really use some refinement.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 16:04 | 2680043's picture


You're on the right track with consent being an essential ingredient of good government, but the part of the proof between "the status quo is corrupt" and "all government is corrupt" could really use some refinement.


1. A just government must operate by consent of the governed.

2. Government exerts power by application of a monopoly on violence which is used to compel the governed to do that which they would not have done by consent.

3. Just government is an oxymoron.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:13 | 2679782 Seer
Seer's picture

Exactly!  "Property Rights!" the simple demand is ONLY backed by STATE power!  One canNOT have cake and eat it too.  Those who wish to profit from a turning of the tide don't care what the consequences are, just that the tide turns (and they can make their quick buck): they won't [likely- based on the slow turning of the social gears] be around to really suffer the consequences.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:35 | 2679840's picture



"Property Rights!" the simple demand is ONLY backed by STATE power!


Mr. Mossberg says otherwise. Would you care to question him?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:13 | 2679921 Seer
Seer's picture

"Mr. Mossberg" is attached to your arm.  Let's quit with using puppets to do the talking through.

I interpret the term "property rights" to be an argument FOR the State.

But, yes, it's up to the individual to do the "protecting."  I find that my dog does a better job of being quick to respond than I (or my wife): plus, my dog can't be used against me.  I will THEN back up my dog with the necessary tools...

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:30 | 2679957's picture



I interpret the term "property rights" to be an argument FOR the State.


The state operates a monopoly on violence and obtains funding only through the involuntary extraction of property from others. So apparently you believe that property can be protected by abdicating one's right to determine the disposition of one's property.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:32 | 2679969 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture


Who said it was your "property" (white man)?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 16:06 | 2680049's picture

Isn't this the part where a little birdie pops out of your forehead and says, "Cuckoo! Cuckoo!?"

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:09 | 2679773 Seer
Seer's picture

That's a cliche line that you picked, one that is without any meaningful description (a buzz phrase meant to illicit emotions).  Refer to my posting

You are, however, totally correct in saying:

"As long as corruption, egoïsm and hunger for power lives in humanity, we will always see these qualities in every form of government we invent for ourselves."

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 22:27 | 2680773 Moon Pie
Moon Pie's picture

"A Republic, if you can keep it." - Benjamin Franklin

We (our leaders) haven't kept it.  We have in its place socialized democracy, which hates property rights, individual freedoms and private wealth.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:48 | 2681172 Haager
Haager's picture

I disagree on the term socialized democracy, its misleading,  Its more like corporate socialism.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:59 | 2679586 Blopper
Blopper's picture

Can democracy includes me running around naked and yelling "Fuck you!!!" at everyone I meet?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:40 | 2679691's picture

That's the first step on the path to eating people's faces. It would be better to avoid such practices.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:11 | 2679779 Lucius Corneliu...
Lucius Cornelius Sulla's picture

As long as it also includes the right for the person you insulted to punch you in the face.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 08:22 | 2681225 Haager
Haager's picture

Thats the more anarchy-like approach...

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:33 | 2679972 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

As long as you are able to outrun the cops, yes.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 07:49 | 2681164 Haager
Haager's picture

A serious answer is yes, it can. You just need to maintain a majority to support a draft allowing people to do so.

Anarchy usually wouldn't allow you to do so generally.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:59 | 2679588 Duke of Con Dao
Duke of Con Dao's picture

50 years ago Marilyn Monroe checked out. Should we care? Obviously, some do like Dowd at the Times.

The Kennedy Monroe nexus will outlive me I'm afraid. 

last call for vid mashups:

"You didn't build that monster Frankenstein. Some else re-animated that flesh for you. "

"You didn't build that Nazi Party Adolf. Some else Koch-ed that thing up for you."

"You didn't build that gusher well James Dean. Some else drilled that oil for you."

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:00 | 2679590 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

As for Albert Jay Nock - I bet he wouldn't be the least bit surprised to learn that the Emancipation Proclamation was written by the largest slave owner in Maryland, and it shockingly did not emancipate all slaves.

Another interesting tidbit of knowledge your high school history failed to teach you.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 15:22 | 2679944 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

Oh great, now it's Kansas all over again.


Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:00 | 2679591 FrankIvy
FrankIvy's picture



I know there has been a growing amount of bitching about ZH's content choice over the last year or so, but I have assiduously refrained from bashing ZH, as it has been the best source, for me, of information that I find useful.  Even prepper posts and swimming posts.

This post, however, is unadulterated slop.

Start with this:  "Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Thomas Paine, and Henry Adams."  Who the hell is Henry Adams?  Frankly, if you can't even review your own 1600 word piece to flag such an obvious error, how can you be taken seriously?

The quoted "Nock" section is embarrassingly poorly written.  The mark of great writing is clarity of communication.  Reading Nock's writing is like listening to a garbled audio recording in a busy train station.  What?

Regarding the folks who "drafted" the Constitution - "men representing special economic interests. Four-fifths of them were public creditors, one-third were land speculators, and one-fifth represented interests in shipping, manufacturing, and merchandising."

"Public creditor."  What is that?  Somebody who owns treasuries?

"Land Speculators."  Huh?  You mean men who owned land other than their primary residence that they intended to sell for a profit?

"Interests in shipping, manufactur . . . "  Huh?  Sounds like merchants and the business class. 

Why is this interesting?  Who should have "draftned" it?  Professors?  Cotton pickers? 

Most were lawyers?  Is it surprising that those with legal training would draft the law?

The folks who wrote it are the folks who administered it?  Is that surprising?  Again, what would have been better?  Hand it off to Joe 6 Pack.

Quite a jarringly bad article with a fundamental lack of support for most of the contentions (the Const. was passed in states using methods that were meant to defeat the popular will.  Huh?).

I'm willing to consider anything, but at least throw some physical scraps of support in with the etherially abstract conjecture.

Mon, 08/06/2012 - 00:54 | 2680914 sadmamapatriot
sadmamapatriot's picture

I don't know why you got so many downvotes. I thought it was pretty crappy, too.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:03 | 2679596 kgw
kgw's picture

"True human liberty with respect to property rights is the only foundation from which civilization can grow and thrive."

Where has this fool been all his life? If he had actually been present in this life, there is no way he could have come up with that homily. . .

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:46 | 2679720's picture

Right. Because civilized people rob and ensalve each other.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 13:52 | 2679738 spooz
spooz's picture

Do banksters count as civilized people? 

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:20 | 2679803's picture

That depends. Are they operating a government backed cartel while promulgating an unsound currency or are they operating a business which depends on the voluntary interaction of customers?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:47 | 2679864 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

I dunno Crockett, even a cursory scan of history would seem to prove that they most certainly do.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 14:58 | 2679884's picture

I would contend that those who engage in criminal activity do not exhibit the qualities associated with being civilized.



adj : characteristic of a state of civilization <civilized society>; especially : characterized by taste, refinement, or restraint

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