The American Revolution In Two Acts

Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

The American colonies were made up of people who could not accept the downward progression in Europe and said, “I’m leaving.” That took great courage, as they were leaving their few known comforts for unknown difficulties.

However, once they had made the move and overcome the difficulties of settlement, they understood that their courage had been rewarded. Such people never look back and say, “Maybe we shouldn’t have left.”

There can be little doubt that they taught their children and grandchildren the values of courage, determination, hard work, and self-reliance. And more and more immigrants were added to their numbers, each of whom was also courageous enough to abandon Europe for freedom and opportunity. They raised generations of people with a “pioneer spirit.”

Not surprisingly, then, that when the American colonists were squeezed by King George for increases in tax, it wasn’t difficult for them to refuse. They chose to go it alone, rather than allow the British king to steal the fruits of their labours.

Although the tax level at that time was a mere 2%, it was the principle that taxation is theft that angered them. Further, they had already proven to themselves that they had all the character qualities necessary to determine their own future.

And so, in a sense, the American Revolution was Act II of the quest for freedom and, of the two challenges, it may have been the easier one to face.

However, the America of the late eighteenth century is not the America of today - and the outcome will not be the same for Americans in the present era.

It’s important to remember that only a very small percentage of people actually left Europe to find freedom. The great majority remained behind, complaining about the ever-increasing loss of freedoms, but doing nothing about it. Although their governments took more and more from them, the great majority simply tolerated it, saying, “What can you do?” They became the eventual victims of that oppression, as has happened throughout history.

Those in America today are, in essence, a subjugated people, just as Europeans were prior to the American Revolution. They’re accustomed to the concept of the “nanny state”—one which taxes its people heavily and throws back a portion of what they’ve stolen in the form of “bread and circuses,” as in ancient Rome.

Americans today complain continually, either that too much is being taken from them or that the state isn’t providing them with sufficient largesse. Some even complain of both at the same time.

And yet, a very large percentage of Americans holds out “hope” that somehow, the process will reverse itself—that a new political candidate will appear—a “Freedom Fairy,” who will somehow stand in front of the runaway train, stop it, and reverse it.

Historically, this never happens. What happens is that a small number decide to set sail and escape. Whether it’s the Roman commercial class, who walked away from their shops and travelled north to live amongst the barbarians, rather than accept Rome’s increasing domination, or the German Jews who locked up their shops and homes and boarded ships to the West, just prior to the lockdown of 1939, every burgeoning new “free” society has been created by the few who took courage and made an exit from a dying society.

In every case, those who exited did so with fear in their hearts that they would fail. They left their larger possessions behind and travelled light, sewing coins and jewellery into their clothing, not knowing whether they would succeed.

However, when they arrived at the new frontier, they met other like-minded people, each of whom had also shown courage and determination. They then created a new society that was, predictably, based upon the principles described above.

Today, a similar exodus is occurring. It’s made of those who place their liberty and hope for a promising future above the comforts and freedoms that, one by one, are being taken from them by their governments.

Of course, the details are not the same. They no longer travel by ship, but by jet. No one sews valuables into their clothes, as they’d never get through the metal detectors. Instead, they convert their assets to cash and purchase precious metals, to be stored in a country where there is diminished risk of confiscation by governments.

As has happened throughout history, the exodus is being undertaken quietly. Those who emigrate do not wish to call attention to themselves, but then, neither do the governments of the countries they’re leaving. It’s never seen on the news, and the official numbers who leave are far below the number that actually departed.

But the details of the exit are unimportant. What is important is that, when people meet the challenge to exit to find freedom and self-determination, they then build an extremely strong and free society. And there are many locations in the world where this is presently taking place.

But what of those left behind? Surely, the present-day US is at a breaking point and may very well explode into civil disobedience—even revolution.

Yes, this is quite so. And again, history shows us what happens in countries where the majority feel that they’re entitled to be looked after; that the rich must “pay a little more” to provide them with largesse. Good examples of this are the Russian Revolution and the French Revolution.

Both of these are marked by a predominance of belief that “someone has to pay so that I can benefit.” In both revolutions, the aristocracy were violently removed and the rebels scrambled to grab as much of the spoils as possible. Disorder became prolonged and the new leaders that rose up were, if anything, more oppressive than those they replaced.

Today, in visiting the US and talking with Americans, it’s palpable that most Americans now have a gut feeling that this will most certainly not end well. Most hope that there might be a peaceful transition of some sort. Some vainly hope that a “Freedom Fairy” will emerge.

But, Americans, more than most people in the world, incorrectly believe that freedom only exists in their country and that, when it dies there, it will die everywhere. This is far from true, but it does mean that those who were born in the former “land of the free” are more fearful and discouraged than those elsewhere. The great majority doubt that it’s possible for them, individually, to choose freedom, rather than to go down with the ship. They, in effect, are exactly the same as the great majority in Europe in the eighteenth century.

The American colonies were built upon the courage of a few who chose to leave the dominance and stagnation in Europe. The same is true today. The USA may be a sinking ship, but the concept of “America” is not. It’s a movable concept and it can exist anywhere that people have chosen future freedom over tentative comforts.

*  *  *

A “pioneer spirit” isn’t the only thing you need if you want to leave the sinking ship and pursue freedom. You’ll find details on what else you’ll need in Doug Casey’s special report, Getting Out of Dodge. Click here to download your free PDF copy.

Comments

J S Bach Mon, 04/02/2018 - 23:26 Permalink

The "Americans" sought liberation from their collared Rothschild banking brethren in England.

The British colonies in America found true freedom and life with the debt-free colonial scrip currency which was the basis for their trade.  There was no "tribute" (interest) paid to the international usurers prior to the advent of the Revolution.  Benjamin Franklin is quoted as saying that THIS - was the main reason for the war against Rothschild-controlled England.

Always follow the trail of the usurers.  Theirs is the path of war, suffering and servitude.

cheka Dindu Nuffins Tue, 04/03/2018 - 00:00 Permalink

here's your revolution (not televised)

[url]https://tea.texas.gov/acctres/enroll_index.html[/url]

According to national figures, from 2003 to 2013, the proportion of public school enrollment ac-counted for by Hispanic students increased from 43.8 percent to 51.8 percent in Texas and from 18.5 percent to 24.8 percent nationwide. During the same period, the proportion of enrollment ac-counted for by White students decreased from 38.7 percent to 29.5 percent in Texas and from 58.7 percent to 50.3 percent nationwide.

National figures indicate the majority of students in Texas (60.1%) were eligible for free or reduced-price meals in the 2013-14 school year, 8.1 percentage points higher than the national average (52.0%). Between 2000-01 and 2013-14, the percentage of eligible students increased by 15.2 percentage points in Texas and by 13.7 percentage points nationwide.

Between 2006-07 and 2016-17, the number of students participating in Title I programs increased by 24.0 percent. In the 2016-17 school year, 65.0 percent of students were enrolled in Title I programs.

Across the five largest racial/ethnic groups in 2016-17, Hispanic students accounted for the largest percentage of total enrollment in open-enrollment charter schools (59.9%), followed by African American (18.8%), White (14.6%), Asian (4.6%), and multiracial (1.7%) students.

• In the 2016-17 school year, 68.6 percent of Texas open-enrollment charter school students were iden-tified as economically disadvantaged.

• According to national figures, public school enrollment in Texas increased by 19.0 percent between 2003 and 2013, more than six times the increase in the United States (3.1%) over the same time pe-riod. This was the second-highest percentage increase in statewide public school enrollment in the nation, behind Utah (26.1%).

Across the five largest racial/ethnic groups in 2016-17, enrollment increased from the previous year for African American, Asian, Hispanic, and multiracial students and decreased for White students.

• Across the same groups, Hispanic students accounted for the largest percentage of total enrollment in Texas public schools in 2016-17 (52.4%), followed by White (28.1%), African American (12.6%), Asian (4.2%), and multiracial (2.2%) students.

Between 1987-88 and 2016-17, the racial/ethnic composition of the student population served by Texas public schools changed. In the 2001-02 school year, the number of Hispanic students surpassed the number of White students for the first time (TEA, 2003). Between 2001-02 and 2016-17, the number of Hispanic students continued to rise, and the number of White students declined (Figure 1 on page 7 and Table 4 on page 8) (see also TEA, 2005). In addition, the percentages of total enrollment represented by Asian and multiracial students steadily increased by 0.1 to 0.2 percentage points each year between the 2009-10 and 2016-17 school years (Table 4 on page 8).

Each year between 2006-07 and 2016-17, the majority of students met the state criteria for economic disadvantage (Figure 2 and Table 7 on page 10). In the 2016-17 school year, 59.0 percent of students were identified as economically disadvantaged. Under Texas Education Agency (TEA) guidelines, stu-dents were identified as economically disadvantaged if they were eligible for free or reduced-price meals under the National School Lunch and Child Nutrition Program (TEA, 2016c).

Between 2006-07 and 2016-17, Hispanic enrollment increased by 681,739 students (32.0%). White students, whose enrollment fell by 133,216 students, or 8.1 percent, over the same period, had the only decrease in enrollment.

The percentages of individual group enrollment accounted for by students identified as economically disadvantaged were larger for Hispanic (75.6%) and African American (71.3%) students than for multiracial (42.9%), White (28.2%), and Asian (27.8%) students in 2016-17 (Table 8 on page 12).

• In 2016-17, Hispanic students accounted for the largest percentage of all students in Texas public schools and of all students identified as economically disadvantaged

Hispanic students, who made up 52.4 percent of total enrollment in the 2016-17 school year, made up 64.3 per-cent of prekindergarten students (Table 4 on page 8, Figure 6, and Table 12 on page 18). In contrast, White students, who made up 28.1 percent of total enrollment, made up 14.8 percent of prekindergar-ten students.

African American and Hispanic representation was smaller in gifted and talented programs (6.4% and 41.4%, respectively) and larger in Title I programs (13.5% and 62.9%, respectively) than in the over-all student population (12.6% and 52.4%, respectively) in 2016-17. Conversely, Asian, White, and multiracial representation was larger in gifted and talented programs (10.3%, 38.8%, and 2.7%, re-spectively) and smaller in Title I programs (2.2%, 19.2%, and 1.6%, respectively) than in the overall student population (4.2%, 28.1%, and 2.2%, respectively).

In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Voluntary Exchange Pearson365 Tue, 04/03/2018 - 03:43 Permalink

The American revolution did not end. Many Americans surrendered to the usurpers who wrote words on paper claiming they could enslave everyone else though taxes. Not even a majority of Americans went along with this criminal cabal. 

Those who did not agree did not surrender. Therefore the American revolution has not ended, it has just gone "guerilla".

Those who won there freedom from all tyrants fighting for the truth that all are equal (with regard to natural law and natural rights) - most did not agree that Congress has power to make them slaves. Who in their right mind would?

And so the American revolution has gone underground, waiting for the time when enough are able to reassert their freedoms. If humanity survives, sooner or later the truth that all have equal status in regard to natural law and what organized nature, we will win the day.  Then the lie that some can steal from others will finally be put to rest, once and for all. Then America will become what it was meant to be, a beacon of liberty for all oppressed throughout the world. The rest will then follow our example of REAL freedom, and not the sick lie concocted by psychopaths to enslave their fellow man.  Then at last our liberty bell can ring true without cracking!

Let the freedom bell ring my fellow Americans! Gather strength for the final victory!

In reply to by Pearson365

Normalcy Bias I am Groot Tue, 04/03/2018 - 06:58 Permalink

Fedgov incentivizes the "mouth breathers'" to reproduce at little to no cost to themselves. At the same time, the reproduction of more intelligent people is disincentivized as they are forced to not only pay for their own offspring, but for the little mouth breathers as well. 

We're paying for the destruction of our own country, but of course one is immediately labeled a 'racist' for even pointing out that simple fact.

It's insanity...

In reply to by I am Groot

Endgame Napoleon Dindu Nuffins Tue, 04/03/2018 - 08:56 Permalink

Most people do not object to the mass-scale immigration of today on grounds of skin pigmentation, but due to the fact that millions are not seeking refuge here in the land of the free due to freedom, but due to $$$$$.

The minute they get here—legally or illegally—they start having kids that qualify them for more free stuff than any historical group of immigrants has ever received in this country.

In the era of feminists with the freedom to be career women, never have female citizens and noncitizens been paid so much by a government to have sex and reproduce.

This is undercutting citizens in the labor market. Working parents whose bills are paid by government when they have sex and reproduce can afford to work for less pay.

When immigrants come en mass, they are not coming as brave and pioneering individuals, throwing off the shackles of oppression in the rigid system in which they were born. They are huddling in a group.

They tend to recreate their home countries within the country where they allegedly sought freedom. That, too, is undermining the respect for immigration that was a feature of America, based on the immigration from past eras. 

All of that past immigration was not pioneering in spirit, either. The mass waves of Industrial Age immigration were mostly economic in motivation. Immigrants were escaping things like the Potato Famine. 

When immigrants arrived, they lived crowded into miserable tenements, providing cheap American employers with sweatshop laborers, including child laborers. America did not have a widespread middle class. Most in crowded, impoverished areas of cities also lacked a lot of freedom in their daily lives.

But those immigrants came legally, entering the country at a time when we were not so populated and needed people to work in factories and on big farms.

Industrial Age immigrants did not come in an era when America has offshored over 2 million manufacturing jobs, when automation is reducing the number of full-time jobs and when all of the women work, increasing the competition for jobs two-fold. 

Industrial Age immigrants did not come at a time when the population has swelled to 324 million, with the underemployed Millennials being the biggest generation of Americans to date, even though “disinterested” scholars with a cause keep saying we need unfettered immigration. 

Industrial Age immigrants did not come in an era when we have 50 million working-aged citizens out of the workforce, an era when half of the employed make only $13k, and over 40 million “employed” people are so “employed” that they qualify for free EBT groceries.

Immigrants, like many citizens, are now working part time to stay below the earned-income limits for various womb-productivity-based welfare programs, unlike Industrial Age immigrants who worked so many hours that they inspired movements to limit the number of hours that employers could offer or require of employees.

Even though America needed workers much more back then, Industrial Age immigrants got $0.00 in welfare from the US government for having sex and reproducing. They did not get more free housing, free EBT food, free electricity, monthly cash assistance and refundable EITC child tax credits up to $6,431, the more kids they produced in the United State of America.

Still, the widespread middle class in the USA did not emerge until after immigration was restricted to reasonable numbers in 1924, allowing the labor of FREE INDIVIDUALS to become more valuable, rather than diluted by too much welfare-fueled competition for jobs from womb-productive GROUPS. 

In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Broner J S Bach Tue, 04/03/2018 - 00:15 Permalink

The author's lack of understanding of history is just astounding. Those who left Europe and came to American Continent were not courageous at all. On the contrary, they lacked courage to stay and fight for their nation. They left Europe for they did not feel the attachment to their nation strong enough to stay and fight. And that is exactly what we inherited from out predecessors. We allowed for the diversity to happen since we likewise do not understand the concept of a nation, a race, and a family. Why do you think we are passing all this debt to our children? Is it because we love them or because we don't give a dam what it is going to do them?.

 

The difference is that we cannot pick up our stuff and go somewhere else for there is nowhere to go. Sooner or later we will have to stand up and be counted. It is either us or our decedents but counting will be done. My bet is on the decedents for we are to cowardly to do anything about it.

In reply to by J S Bach

wafm Broner Tue, 04/03/2018 - 01:21 Permalink

You nailed it, fully agree. Without mentioning those who left Europe because they weren't given a choice but i guess they were a minority, not like for Australia's convicts... And of course no mention of the genocide of the natives as a result of the "courageous" settlers' move... glorious.

In reply to by Broner

Scanderbeg Broner Tue, 04/03/2018 - 02:04 Permalink

I disagree, the early frontiersman and pioneers were tough as nails. They clawed a life out of the land in conditions that would kill most men today. They were the English, the early Scotch/Irish, Protestant settlers from Ulster, Swedes and Huegonots from France and of course the Dutch. 

What all these people had in common was their northern European heritage and Protestant Christianity. The political and religious institutions would be dominated by the English. The other European groups would assimilate into the Anglo-centric culture and common law. 

This was the ethnic mix until the first wave of Irish Catholics. The new European immigrants would permanently change the U.S and in many ways make it much worse.  Most would eventually assimilate but in some instances it would take almost 100 years as in the case of Italians for example. As for the Jews upon arriving they soon began to dominate both finance and academia. Their influence has been to fundamentally shift much of the U.S radically leftward by promoting mass immigration, socialism, undermining the common law while pathologizing northern European, white identity and Christianity. 

However, by the mid 20th century immigration had dramatically slowed and though there were many different ethnic groups America was still fundamentally a WHITE Christian country. 

Today it no longer really is and one day whites will be a minority if these trends continue. They already are in places like California. Civil war is inevitable and will happen when the left achieves a majority faction through non white demographic change (Probably  2030's). 

On another note Casey's history is bad. The French peasantry took the Monastic lands and abolished manorial dues after the revolution. During all the turmoil this fundamental settlement never altered and was what formed the nucleus of French nationalism that would dominate Europe and give birth to the modern conception of the Nation-State. 

When the revolution started the people of France were starving and suffering under a corrupt monarchy and a decadent parasitic aristocracy. The revolution gave them land, citizenship and equality before the law. 

Meanwhile Polemecists like Casey would have you believe nothing really happened except an exchange of one group of Tyrants for another.

Beware of men who masquerade as historians while speaking in such banalities.

In reply to by Broner

Voluntary Exchange Broner Tue, 04/03/2018 - 05:50 Permalink

One of the wonderful things about people is that they can change. A person who has lived all of their life in cowardice can still rise up and win the day.

If you individually show courage, you may just find that you inspire those around you to be brave as well. The price of tyranny in the land has become so onerous as to demand action now.  We can not wait for our children! The concentration of power into the hands of evil is getting to the point that all civilization may soon be destroyed.

Decide today if you will confront "evil". There may not be a tomorrow. Also, what exactly constitutes victory against the "evil". If this cannot be agreed to then their is no organizing principle that can unite us. If you have not thought about this I wish to propose to you this idea:

It is evident that nature has organization to it. We call the way it organizes itself "natural law".  All humans and all life are subject to these "laws". Humans being a part of nature, also have this organizing principle inside them, inherent in their being. That which has caused reality to exist also sustains human and all life.

As humans we can choose actions that promote life and well-being or impede life and well-being. Since most prefer life, we can call the choices that promote this well-being  in nature, to be a "right" choice, or "natural rights".  You need not believe in "God" to agree to this, you just need to prefer life to death and have an understanding of cause and effect.

Through many years of human experience it can be clearly identified as to what these "natural rights" MUST be. For sentient beings who have the capacity to ascertain the the "laws" of nature, all of our shared understanding of human actions can be simplified into one sentence: Voluntary exchange promotes what people define for themselves as "well-being", and involuntary ones tend to disrupt that well-being.

It can be noted that this "law" is not an absolute because people are not absolutely predictable, all knowing, or rational. It is possible for people to misunderstand or be deceived. That is why intentional "fraud" is included in the category of  "involuntary exchange", and it is possible for both parties to an exchange to be both deceived. Also it is presumed that when someone takes something from another without their knowledge or consent, this "theft" is also an "involuntary exchange".

Some people lack the capacity to understand some causes and effects, especially those with poor mental capacity and children. They form an exception to the general observations of human exchanges, as they are therefore much more vulnerable to harm, even dependent upon others. They can be called "minors". Physical aggression and  threats of force are also involuntary exchanges as they attempt to force a person into actions against their will to preserve what we hold dear to: life.

Then to generalize: theft, fraud, and physical aggression violate "natural rights". It should be apparent that a forced exchange by any person or group violates the rule of "voluntary exchange". Thus taxation, conscription, forced education, really any disagreed to "demand" made upon anyone is a violation of natural rights.

We call a society that conforms to the rule of "voluntary exchange" to be a "voluntarist" or "voluntaryist" society. A "ruler" (or rulers) attempts to enforce demands against other people against their will, and thus violates the "rule" of voluntary exchange. And so there can be no rulers in a voluntarist society. It is therefore without rulers or "anarchic" in the sense of there being no "rulers" not in the sense of chaotic,  that this word is sometimes  understood as. There is rule and order in voluntarism, the rule and order is based on VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE.

I argue here that a voluntarist society is the most stable, most free, most productive, and most beneficial for human well-being. The details of this argument as to why this is so can be discussed here and now, or at another place and time.

In reply to by Broner

Casey Stengel Broner Tue, 04/03/2018 - 10:02 Permalink

Perhaps they left because being drawn and quartered was not just a catchy phrase. The crown was brutal beyond imagination. "Remember, remember the 5th of November, the gunpowder treason and plot. I know of no reason the gunpowder treason should ever be forgot". Guy Fauwks should have headed to America. Apparently his email was intercepted by the Tempora guys. 

In reply to by Broner

MEFOBILLS J S Bach Tue, 04/03/2018 - 12:35 Permalink

Some of the Colonies figured money out and had good script systems.  Bank of England, the first debt spreading bank, came into existence in 1694, so the U.S. was under monetary attack practically from the beginning. 

The U.S. has always been a petri dish of competing forces.

Also, U.S. was a host for Jewry very early on.

https://www.henrymakow.com/werner_sombart_-_the_twentieth.html

Sombart - Why America is "Steeped in Jewishness"

 

________________

 

For what we call Americanism is nothing else, if we may say so, than the Jewish spirit distilled. But how comes it that American culture is so steeped in Jewishness? 

The answer is simple -- through the early and universal admixture of Jewish elements among the first settlers. 

We may picture the process of colonizing somewhat after this fashion. A band of determined men and women --  let us say twenty families -- went forth into the wilds to begin their life anew. Nineteen were equipped with plough and scythe, ready to clear the forests and till the soil in order to earn their livelihood as husbandmen. 

The twentieth family opened a store to provide their companions with such necessaries of life as could not be obtained from the soil, often no doubt hawking them at the very doors. 

Soon this twentieth family made it its business to arrange for the distribution of the products which the other nineteen won from the soil. It was they, too, who were most likely in possession of ready cash, and in case of need could therefore be useful to the others by lending them money. 

Very often the store had a kind of agricultural loan-bank as its adjunct, perhaps also an office for the buying and selling of land. So through the activity of the twentieth family, the farmer in North America was from the first kept in touch with the money and credit system of the Old World. 

Hence the whole process of production and exchange was from its inception along modern lines. Town methods made their way at once into even the most distant villages. 

Accordingly, it may be said that American economic life was from its very start impregnated with capitalism. And who was responsible for this? The twentieth family in each village. Need we add that this twentieth family was always a Jewish one, which joined a party of settlers or soon sought them out in their homesteads?

 

 

 

In reply to by J S Bach

NoDebt wisehiney Mon, 04/02/2018 - 23:45 Permalink

True.  Even Elon Musk gave up plans of colonizing Mars.  

This is why I think the interim solution is to resist Globalization with every fiber of our being.  If it's all under one government, worldwide, where you gonna go to get away from it?  Nowhere.  

Fuck every argument they put up.  Fuck "its for the children".  Fuck it's for "world peace".  Fuck its "to save the world from xxxxx".

 

 

In reply to by wisehiney

Cash Is King wisehiney Tue, 04/03/2018 - 00:31 Permalink

No doubt!

running from ones problems is not the same as turning the other cheek.

Leaving the US for safer ground is not akin to jumping in a lifeboat off the Titanic! You may find yourself partnering up with a small Govt. that could easily be overrun if the Chinese or Russians deem it necessary.

Real men don’t flee they risk their lives, their fortunes and sacred honor to stand and fight for what’s right.

Organize the resistance here!

In reply to by wisehiney

kikrlbs Mon, 04/02/2018 - 23:30 Permalink

I thought the defining trigger of the revolution in America was the outlaw of colonial scrip, not 2% in taxation. Perhaps a combination of both?

Sid Davis kikrlbs Tue, 04/03/2018 - 00:15 Permalink

Throw in also the hated monopoly the Dutch East India Company had on trade with the Colonies.  It was their tea that was dumped in Boston Harbour and the tax on the tea was not going to the Crown, but to the company itself to bail it out for an oversupply of tea in their warehouses. The tax was small compared to the plunder of the Colonists by this monopoly corporation owned by prominent members of the British government.

And actually the first shots fired at Lexington Green to mark the outbreak of hostilities were because Colonists blocked the British Army that was marching to Concord to confiscate arms stored there by the Massachusetts Militia.  If you want to look for the straw that broke the camels back, it was this attempt to confiscate arms.  Why do you think that the 2nd amendment was high on the list of rights recognized in the Constitution after the war was won by the Colonists?

It might turn out to be a great irony in history that the currently developing civil war is finally triggered by the gun confiscation issue.

Because we are moving into a new paradigm of declining productivity because of declining net energy, it is much more likely that the US and much of the rest of the world will experience civil turmoil.  A government can get away with plunder and control when cheap energy is available to fuel economic expansion, but when the opposite is true, plunder and control becomes much less tolerable, and people get to the point where they see revolting as a better option than going along to get along.

In reply to by kikrlbs

Dumpster Elite Mon, 04/02/2018 - 23:36 Permalink

Sounds simple enough, just leave the US for somewhere "better". But, WHERE is this fairy tale land??? I've heard some on here talk about Costa Rica or Panama...I HATE hot weather and jungles. Others have talked about New Zealand. I like my guns...a lot. I know that I wouldn't be able to take them there with me. So where is this New amazing place?

August Dumpster Elite Mon, 04/02/2018 - 23:57 Permalink

As a US-born person who has lived "abroad" for 15 years (New Zealand and Germany), and who now lives in the US again, I think I can be fairly objective.

"Better" is indeed in the eye of the beholder, and nowhere can one re-create a fantasized America of Some Years Ago.

Whether leaving the USA is appropriate for you entirely depends on what you're seeking, and your age.  If you want an American lifestyle at American prices, good luck to you; probably the best you can do is Australia.  If you find Anglo culture itself unattractive, you might do very well in Latin America, developing some sort of enterprise in an under-developed region populated by people who are not really all that different from you.

In any event, I find that detaching myself from US government and culture was a worthwhile effort... and having as my primary citizenship a non-US nation is, to me, priceless.

In reply to by Dumpster Elite

iampreparedru Mon, 04/02/2018 - 23:45 Permalink

Yep. I am wrapping up and leaving. Created assets paying $800k in property taxes every year and i am treated like shit. Crime is rampent. Police dont police because judges dont punish. Everyone out for a freebie. astalavista baby. 

StheNine Mon, 04/02/2018 - 23:57 Permalink

The brits lost the war,yet set the terms of peace..odd

We are still owned by The Crown

"Special relationship"

THEY  don;t know what to do-America has to be made the example,but there are more guns than people.

 Doin' the slow burn-THEY must be shocked we have not revolted yet,,,,,,,

yarpos Tue, 04/03/2018 - 00:01 Permalink

More of the delusional "freedom" meme.  Meanwhile back in reality land, over regulated, over taxed, over policed, over incarcerated, over surveilled.  Like Californians spreading the other States ,  US citzens will go to other countries and spread their disease.

headless blogger Tue, 04/03/2018 - 00:11 Permalink

You forgot the other side of the coin: those wealthy that refuse to pay their workers a fair wage. Example is Bezos. I know people who have worked for Amazon for $10 an hour. While the share holders and Bezos get rich, someone else who is doing the labor, has to reach out to Government to cover what they cannot with their low wage.

There, I finished it for you.