Did you watch the show? It was the latest reality show, complete with drama, unexpected twists and all kinds of different personalities clashing with one another. Like all reality shows, it was not really an improvised and unplanned series of events, but was mostly scripted and had a predictable outcome. In fact, the outcome was predicted by many who were paying attention. I am talking, of course, about the show that congress was putting on to try to make the public believe they care about shrinking government and convince the masses they are doing something to alleviate the debt. The saddest part of this reality show is that it actually affects each and every one of us with very real consequences for their actions.
What has occurred was so predictable, it's laughable. I knew months ago what was going to happen. I heard from several sources this exact scenario. Congress would try to frighten us by saying default and collapse was inevitable, would result in unprecedented catastrophe, and would bring about chaos and mayhem unless we bowed to the will of the central banks and raised the debt ceiling. They would then pretend to be at an impasse, that the two parties were actually different and battling each other for the principles they believe in. It would look like the deadline would be reached and the nation would go into (gasp) default and then, suddenly, at the last moment, a compromise would be reached and the world would be saved! Hurray for the heroic politicians!
I even saw little Timmy Geithner come out and say something similar just a few days ago. He was talking about how congress had no choice but to reach a compromise and raise the debt ceiling. I don't know how it happened, but somehow these people have come to believe that the only way to get out of debt is to pile on more debt. They have even convinced many of the common folk of this. That makes about as much sense as believing the only way to lose weight is add even more fattening foods to your diet. The way to get out of debt is to quit buying anything that isn't absolutely necessary, to pay down any debt you may have already accumulated, and to try to get back to basics. Raising the debt ceiling only means going into more debt.
This outcome was predictable because it has been going on for a very long time. Banks have been manipulating governments and currencies for their benefit and to the detriment of society and the masses of humanity in general for centuries. The latest iteration of this parasitic monstrosity is known as the Federal Reserve, attached itself to productive humanity in 1913 with the help of the United States congress, and has been happily sustaining itself through our hard labor ever since. It is using the same fraudulent techniques that central banks have used for ages to enrich itself only with a modern twist. It uses the popular mass media to generate propaganda, spread fear of economic failure and convince the masses that without it there would be no economic growth.
So, in 1913 the Federal Reserve began to siphon off the wealth of the lower classes and funnel it to the extremely wealthy elite banking class. It began to spread its tentacles into all areas of the financial world. It began its manipulations that would lead to the ruination of millions. It began to create the corporations that would one day become too big to fail. It began to put into motion its plans to control and dominate a new world order with a new world big centralized bank. But this really didn't begin in 1913, it began long before then. The families involved in this scam have been around for centuries and are simply modernizing their old tricks. They are simply doing what the masses have allowed them to do for ages. Perhaps their ancestors can't be held accountable, but those who continue to help perpetuate this fraud need to be exposed and held accountable if we are ever to realize a truly free society.
Contrary to what many would have you believe, there are many ways the economy could have been helped without raising the debt ceiling, without hurting the poor or those dependent upon the state for their survival, and without growing government. The number one way I can think of is to end the occupations and aggressions the United States military is engaging in. How many billions would that cut from the budget and then how much head room would we have? We could stop policing the world and bring all troops home from all foreign shores. How much room would that leave? We could get rid of the department of education and let local interests and parents handle the education of the children. We could get rid of the TSA and let airlines handle their own security. Oh, and billions could be saved if our government stopped paying interest on the debt and paid back only the principle.
This congress, these politicians and the bankers that control them don't want to eliminate the debt. They don't want to shrink government or give up any power. They want it all, and they want you to just sit back and accept their dictates. They will keep growing the government until everyone is working for or dependent upon them in one form or another. They want you and your progeny as their livestock so that they can do with you as they please. That seems to be their ultimate goal, to completely control the lives of everyone on this planet so that they can live out their sick delusions of becoming gods.
At the same time, they want you to believe that they are making spending cuts. I keep reading about them cutting two trillion in spending, but they raised the debt ceiling. Huh? If they raised the debt ceiling, that means that they are increasing spending. If they were to cut spending by two trillion, then the ceiling should be falling by two trillion. What they've really done is stretched out their ability to waste more money and continue to benefit themselves and their friends for the next ten years. What they've done is to defer the burden of paying off the debt to the next few generations, just like they deferred the burden of paying off debt to this generation when they printed all that money to pay for the social programs and the wars fought in the twentieth century. They are hoping to divert your attention so that in ten years we'll forget their folly of 2011 and they can continue to increase the debt unabated.
I think the buck should stop here, so to speak, with this generation, and we should start paring down all government. Forget about a balanced budget amendment. That allows for the federal government to be far too large, to be able to borrow far too much money, to have far too much power, and to maintain the ability to intrude upon your life and violate your rights. The first thing I'd like to see is a full audit of not only the Federal Reserve, but of all central banks. While all this drama about the budget was taking place, an important report about the Government Accountability Office's (GAO) one time audit of the Fed came out. It shows over 16 trillion in emergency loans going out to financial institutions worldwide and other disturbing facts. Exactly how much is the deficit? Exactly who has benefited from these funds? I have the feeling a full audit would reveal much that many of the elite would not want you to know.
The next thing that we should do is go back to constitutional money or allow for competition in the currency market. Neither of those ideas are perfect and certain people will find fault in each one, but in my opinion both are better than the system currently in place. I think competition in currency would be best and the marketplace would be able to figure out the best way to hold accountable those who would commit fraud. I think that a society based on cash where the need for credit is limited would be liberating. Remember, debt means you do not own the things you think you own. The debtor is beholding to the lender who can lay claim to his things if conditions warrant. A cash based society free from central banking interests would lead to greater ownership opportunities, more self reliance and more freedom for all. This is what humanity should be striving for.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
A Tyrant Judge and his Florida Fiefdom
I do not advocate violence. I believe it to be counterproductive. There are times, however, when it seems that one must exercise some form of force to restrain those who think they are superior to the rest of us and deserve special privileges in order to prevent them from doing harm. This can be called self defense or intervention in the defense of another peaceful person who may be harmed. I also consider myself to be a reasonable person, so I am willing to consider all sides of a story. What I have come to discover as I have aged is that the common folk have become too willing to simply bow to authority and obey authority figures without question while those same authority figures overstep their bounds time and again and are almost never held accountable for their actions and/or bad decisions.
Recently, Chief Judge Belvin Perry signed an order prohibiting the distribution of jury nullification literature outside the Orange County courthouse in Florida. There are many things wrong with this order on the surface. It extends the power that a judge is supposed to exercise in a reasonable manner to outside the purview of his courtroom. It violates the individual's right to free speech on public property where it is most necessary and effective. It violates the principle of separation of power by allowing a single individual to write the law, as well as judge it, and bypasses the power and processes of the legislative branch. Perhaps most important, yet less obvious, it takes away an important tool used for centuries by humans to inform their fellow human beings of the power they have to determine their own destiny. This is, in my opinion, the real reason why this order was written. Chief Judge Belvin Perry does not want individuals well educated about their power when it comes to law polluting the pool of potential jurors with people who will judge the law itself. He wants sheeple who will respect his authority and mindlessly follow without question his instructions.
Chief Judge Belvin Perry cares not for the law. He cares not for the rights of individuals. He cares not for principle or preserving the foundations upon which our nation was based. He cares not what you or I or any of the common folk think or feel. He cares only for his own ego. He cares only for his own power. He thinks he is superior to the rest of us and knows best what we can and can't do, and he's willing to throw people in jail in order to prove it. It seems to me that he feels he is supreme in his own fiefdom and his word is law, not that he is a servant of the people sitting in judgment of government agents who may violate individual rights.
As evidence of the above statement I cite the arrest and conviction of one Mark Schmidter. It wasn't enough that he was arrested for handing out pamphlets, a victimless crime that harms no one but merely offers knowledge to others, he was convicted and sentenced to 151 days in jail. In my opinion, the judge committed multiple crimes that harmed someone by throwing a man in jail when he did nothing wrong. Chief Judge Belvin Perry found Mark Schmidter guilty of "indirect criminal contempt," whatever that means. What it amounts to is a system where a tin pot judicial lord can use some poorly worded law that can be broadly interpreted to throw anyone who challenges his authority in a jail cell, in some cases indefinitely. What it amounts to is creating political prisoners from people who have a difference of opinion and are exercising their natural right to speak out against injustice. This is not what America was supposed to be about. This is what every tyrannical government in human history is about.
As I said above, I do not advocate violence, but in this case I think it is Chief Judge Belvin Perry who should be thrown in a jail cell. I think he should have been charged with treason for violating his oath to uphold the Constitution. I think the bailiffs and court police who also take oaths to uphold the Constitution should have refused to follow the judge's order to throw Mr. Schmidter and jail and should have arrested the judge instead. But the ranks of officials who are supposed to protect individuals from having their rights violated by the leviathan state are no longer filled with courageous men and women who understand the principles of liberty, they are filled by vacant eyed, salivating, power crazed bureaucrats waiting for the order to bust heads and engage in the very behaviors they are supposed to protect against.
Unfortunately, Chief Judge Belvin Perry will likely never be held accountable for his action. Like his brethren in the law enforcement community, he is treated differently within the justice system than the rest of us. He has the privilege of being able to break the law and harm individuals with impunity. The best that we can hope for at this moment is that Mr. Schmidter is vindicated on appeal and that Chief Judge Belvin Perry is unseated as a judge, or relieved of his post, or at the very least giving a slap on the wrist for this obvious violation of Constitutional law. I doubt very much even that will happen.
It is my hope that even more people will now show up to support Mr. Schmidter and his efforts. It is my hope that even more activists will now show up at the Orange County courthouse in Florida and pass out jury nullification pamphlets to prospective jurors. It is my hope that the common folk will demand the release of Mr. Mark Schmidter and the resignation of Chief Judge Belvin Perry. I would like to see so many people demanding the restoration of respect for their rights that these bureaucratic officials are forced to yield.
It has become obvious that the officials care not to follow their own rules. They constantly violate not only their oaths, but their own regulations they supposedly set up to ensure accountability. If they can violate the rules governing their behavior with impunity, then the common folk ought to be able to do the same. It remains to be seen how far the common folk will allow the bureaucrats to push the envelope. It remains to be seen how long the common folk will allow these violations to continue to take place. I have seen evidence, however, that the masses are awakening to their plight and more and more action is being taken to correct the usurpation that has occurred. It is my hope that even the bureaucrats will one day be able to see the flaws inherent in the system as it is and help to peacefully create an open, free, taxless, voluntary society.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Recently, Chief Judge Belvin Perry signed an order prohibiting the distribution of jury nullification literature outside the Orange County courthouse in Florida. There are many things wrong with this order on the surface. It extends the power that a judge is supposed to exercise in a reasonable manner to outside the purview of his courtroom. It violates the individual's right to free speech on public property where it is most necessary and effective. It violates the principle of separation of power by allowing a single individual to write the law, as well as judge it, and bypasses the power and processes of the legislative branch. Perhaps most important, yet less obvious, it takes away an important tool used for centuries by humans to inform their fellow human beings of the power they have to determine their own destiny. This is, in my opinion, the real reason why this order was written. Chief Judge Belvin Perry does not want individuals well educated about their power when it comes to law polluting the pool of potential jurors with people who will judge the law itself. He wants sheeple who will respect his authority and mindlessly follow without question his instructions.
Chief Judge Belvin Perry cares not for the law. He cares not for the rights of individuals. He cares not for principle or preserving the foundations upon which our nation was based. He cares not what you or I or any of the common folk think or feel. He cares only for his own ego. He cares only for his own power. He thinks he is superior to the rest of us and knows best what we can and can't do, and he's willing to throw people in jail in order to prove it. It seems to me that he feels he is supreme in his own fiefdom and his word is law, not that he is a servant of the people sitting in judgment of government agents who may violate individual rights.
As evidence of the above statement I cite the arrest and conviction of one Mark Schmidter. It wasn't enough that he was arrested for handing out pamphlets, a victimless crime that harms no one but merely offers knowledge to others, he was convicted and sentenced to 151 days in jail. In my opinion, the judge committed multiple crimes that harmed someone by throwing a man in jail when he did nothing wrong. Chief Judge Belvin Perry found Mark Schmidter guilty of "indirect criminal contempt," whatever that means. What it amounts to is a system where a tin pot judicial lord can use some poorly worded law that can be broadly interpreted to throw anyone who challenges his authority in a jail cell, in some cases indefinitely. What it amounts to is creating political prisoners from people who have a difference of opinion and are exercising their natural right to speak out against injustice. This is not what America was supposed to be about. This is what every tyrannical government in human history is about.
As I said above, I do not advocate violence, but in this case I think it is Chief Judge Belvin Perry who should be thrown in a jail cell. I think he should have been charged with treason for violating his oath to uphold the Constitution. I think the bailiffs and court police who also take oaths to uphold the Constitution should have refused to follow the judge's order to throw Mr. Schmidter and jail and should have arrested the judge instead. But the ranks of officials who are supposed to protect individuals from having their rights violated by the leviathan state are no longer filled with courageous men and women who understand the principles of liberty, they are filled by vacant eyed, salivating, power crazed bureaucrats waiting for the order to bust heads and engage in the very behaviors they are supposed to protect against.
Unfortunately, Chief Judge Belvin Perry will likely never be held accountable for his action. Like his brethren in the law enforcement community, he is treated differently within the justice system than the rest of us. He has the privilege of being able to break the law and harm individuals with impunity. The best that we can hope for at this moment is that Mr. Schmidter is vindicated on appeal and that Chief Judge Belvin Perry is unseated as a judge, or relieved of his post, or at the very least giving a slap on the wrist for this obvious violation of Constitutional law. I doubt very much even that will happen.
It is my hope that even more people will now show up to support Mr. Schmidter and his efforts. It is my hope that even more activists will now show up at the Orange County courthouse in Florida and pass out jury nullification pamphlets to prospective jurors. It is my hope that the common folk will demand the release of Mr. Mark Schmidter and the resignation of Chief Judge Belvin Perry. I would like to see so many people demanding the restoration of respect for their rights that these bureaucratic officials are forced to yield.
It has become obvious that the officials care not to follow their own rules. They constantly violate not only their oaths, but their own regulations they supposedly set up to ensure accountability. If they can violate the rules governing their behavior with impunity, then the common folk ought to be able to do the same. It remains to be seen how far the common folk will allow the bureaucrats to push the envelope. It remains to be seen how long the common folk will allow these violations to continue to take place. I have seen evidence, however, that the masses are awakening to their plight and more and more action is being taken to correct the usurpation that has occurred. It is my hope that even the bureaucrats will one day be able to see the flaws inherent in the system as it is and help to peacefully create an open, free, taxless, voluntary society.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Pirates of Savannah, A Book Review
I must admit, I am a tad bit jealous of Tarrin Lupo. He is a man of many talents, not the least of which is his ability to tell a story. His book, "Pirates of Savannah," is a well crafted historical fiction that recounts a time nearly forgotten and hardly ever mentioned in the study of United States history. Through the eyes of Patrick Willis, a man condemned to live out his years in the king's debt prison, we experience the new world of the colonies a few decades before the Americans declared their independence from the English crown. It is an exciting and sometimes disturbing tale, an interesting mix of fact and fiction that will keep the reader turning the page to learn the fate of the main characters.
We often forget that history, as life, is the day to day mundane interspersed with exciting events every so often. It is the mundane that is most important to most people and the excitement is usually not such a good thing. This is especially true if one lives under the rule of a tyrannical despot and the excitement involves his henchmen exercising the king's power to steal and punish. As Americans we might forget the blood, sweat and tears our forefathers had to suffer in order to establish this nation. We have almost certainly forgotten that they withstood decades of oppression before they finally screamed "enough!" and became independent of sovereign kings. It was a shout that the whole world heard.
Mr. Lupo's novel concentrates on the exciting events that change the hearts and minds of men. He does an excellent job of inserting the message of freedom into his story. The reader is reminded of what freedom is and why it is so important. I think that too many people have forgotten the trials and tribulations our forefathers struggled through to get to the point we're at today, and too many people are willing to take steps backward and allow the tyranny to once again take hold in the body politic. While "Pirates of Savannah" may be a work of historical fiction, the principles upon which it was based remain true and relevant to this day.
"Pirates of Savannah" is a quick and exciting read. The characters are likable and believable. The historic facts are interesting and engrossing. All and all, it was quite an enjoyable book. I highly recommend it.
We often forget that history, as life, is the day to day mundane interspersed with exciting events every so often. It is the mundane that is most important to most people and the excitement is usually not such a good thing. This is especially true if one lives under the rule of a tyrannical despot and the excitement involves his henchmen exercising the king's power to steal and punish. As Americans we might forget the blood, sweat and tears our forefathers had to suffer in order to establish this nation. We have almost certainly forgotten that they withstood decades of oppression before they finally screamed "enough!" and became independent of sovereign kings. It was a shout that the whole world heard.
Mr. Lupo's novel concentrates on the exciting events that change the hearts and minds of men. He does an excellent job of inserting the message of freedom into his story. The reader is reminded of what freedom is and why it is so important. I think that too many people have forgotten the trials and tribulations our forefathers struggled through to get to the point we're at today, and too many people are willing to take steps backward and allow the tyranny to once again take hold in the body politic. While "Pirates of Savannah" may be a work of historical fiction, the principles upon which it was based remain true and relevant to this day.
"Pirates of Savannah" is a quick and exciting read. The characters are likable and believable. The historic facts are interesting and engrossing. All and all, it was quite an enjoyable book. I highly recommend it.
Monday, July 25, 2011
Norway and Violent Lessons of the State
A terrible, terrible tragedy struck Norway on July 22nd, 2011. My heartfelt condolences go out to all that lost someone in those terrorist attacks. It is a horrible thing to lose a loved one in such a violent manner. I cannot express enough my dismay when I heard the news. Norway is perhaps one of the last places on earth one would expect such a tragedy to strike. Of course when one hears about such tragedy, it is only natural to scratch one's head and wonder why.
That said, it may be important to remember that tragedies occur on nearly a daily basis in other parts of the world. How many innocent children have been killed in Iraq since the United States and their allies began hostilities in that nation? How many innocents have died in Afghanistan? How many innocents have died in Pakistan? Libya? Is it somehow better because they have died at the hands of generals and the soldiers who obey their orders rather than at the hands of a lone gunman? Is it somehow less shocking? Is it any less terrible? Does the loss of a loved one hurt less because it happened as the result of a military operation? My heartfelt condolences go out to those who have lost loved ones in those terrorist attacks, for what is a full scale military attack if not terrifying?
It seems that we as a species have a strange need to excuse behaviors in supposed authoritarian figures that we find abhorrent, frightening and inhuman in individuals that hold no air of authority. It's almost as if such excuses are psychological bandages or salves applied to the karmic wounds suffered when one somehow identifies himself with another who is obviously engaging in evil doings. I think it would be better if we endeavor to prevent such psychic injury from occurring rather than trying to treat it after the fact.
Why do such tragedies occur? Perhaps it has to do with the lessons such violent people have learned in their lives. Perhaps they have learned that violence works when it comes to solving problems. I'm not talking about overt lessons where one sits and listens to a teacher who tells them violence is the way. I'm talking about more subtle lessons. After all, what is life but an inundation of lessons day in and day out from birth until death? People are constantly and consistently learning and evolving. Perhaps they've seen from childhood that violent means are the means most often utilized when it comes to bringing about social change one wishes to see in the world, or at least that's what they believe they've learned. Perhaps they think that if they truly wish to change the world, the only option they have is through violence. For them, violence works.
I agree that this point of view is misguided, but let's look through history and see why someone might come to think this way. Ancient empires like the Egyptians, the Phoenicians, the Greeks, the Romans, and even the Chinese profited greatly from violence. Even the Bible tells stories of genocide committed by those who are supposedly God's favorite people. They stole natural resources and made slaves from the other human beings they conquered. In more modern times, the British empire rose and it's people became very prosperous through violence. The American nation was birthed in violence and won its independence through violent means. It grew and morphed into an empire the likes of which the world has never seen. It continues to use violence to maintain its empire and though it has its problems and its standard of living has fallen precipitously over the last couple of decades, it is still viewed as a prosperous and successful nation.
Closer to home, governments have shown how successful people and organizations can be through violence. The tax system proves this. Though nearly everyone complains about taxes and how their money is spent by government, people still tend to defend the system and fail to see the violence inherent in it. Simply put, the only reason people pay taxes is because of the threat of violence hanging over their heads should they refuse. That's extortion. Taxes are theft. Even if you are one of those who claim that they don't believe this to be true and use mental gymnastics to make excuses for the government, I believe that the vast majority of people understand this in their emotional heart and moral spirit if not in their logical mind.
Even though government constantly fails, it is quite successful at stealing money and convincing the masses that such theft is a necessity to societal well being. Central banks are also very adept at this. They steal money in the form of government bailouts and they steal purchasing power in the form of inflation. It's difficult to say who learned from whom, the central banks from government or government from central banks, but it is clear to see the collusion between the two types of institutions. Even today we can see subtle threats of violence coming out of the central banking institutions who claim that we will all suffer great economic calamity if we don't continue to feed the central banking monster.
Take a look at politicians, especially in Washington DC, but likely worldwide, and you will see wealth and success. Most likely don't know what it's like to actually work and be productive for a living, they only know how to finagle and play the system. They know how to lie and manipulate. They know how to be coercive and use enforcers, violence and threats of violence to get what they want. There are none who are more financially successful than the central bankers and they have consistently been the driving force behind most of the violence and wars for centuries. Their fraud and manipulations have caused more harm, death and violence than any measure of good they may have accidentally or incidentally caused. The long and short of it is, whether one knows it or not, one learns the lesson that violence works in the system as it is set up. Is it really any wonder when some so called nutcase decides to act on such knowledge, even when those lessons may be subconscious in nature?
I'm afraid that tragedies like the one that occurred in Norway will continue to occur even in places one would not expect until we start to teach people that peace and non violence work. When the masses begin to learn the lesson that peaceful means of change lead to peace and prosperity, then peace and prosperity will be rewarded and our society will become more peaceful and prosperous. When violence becomes shunned by the masses and more and more people refuse to take part in the violence of the state, there will be fewer incidents of violence. Unfortunately, I don't believe that time has yet arrived, but I do believe the path to that time is open and has been revealed to more people and they are deciding to tread upon it.
I'm fairly certain that the mainstream mass media is not going to look at this incident in the same way. I'm fairly certain they are not going to talk about the violence of the state and how its wars are leading to more people deciding to act out in ways abhorrent to the nature of mankind. Instead, they are going to try to demonize certain political groups and views that they want to squelch. They are going to try to divide and conquer rather than pointing to the root cause of the violence. They want to analyze the problem in a way that will increase the power of centralized government (and its centralized banking cartel) rather than pointing out the huge faults in the system. Watch out for that. Keep your eye out for the propaganda which will seek to perpetuate the violence through violating individual rights rather than alleviate the problem through decentralization.
We have had socialistic systems in place for quite some time now. It just seems to get worse. It just seems to consistently reward failure. It just seems to consistently punish those who seek a better way. Perhaps the time has come to try a better, more voluntary societal model. Make taxes voluntary and allow those who wish to withhold taxes do so with impunity when government funds projects with which they disagree. Allow competition in currency and other services government currently monopolizes. Allow those who use such services to pay for them so that a fair price can be established for such services. Make sure that people engaging in the economy need to be productive to succeed and have something of their own to lose should they fail. In this way, perhaps those who currently believe that violence is their only choice will see other, more positive options.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe this man should be excused for his actions. He has harmed others and should be held accountable. I am simply making suggestions for how to avoid such tragedies in the future. I am simply suggesting that we examine with great vigor the true nature of how our governments work. I don't believe that any society will ever be a perfect utopia, but I do believe that the only way to become a less violent society is to build less violent governmental systems. The socialists seem to believe that a utopia can be built by violence, but I don't buy that. Fear is the poison that causes hatred. Hatred leads to anger and violence. Violence achieves only death and destruction for both the physical and the spiritual. Because these things are part of humanity, there can never be a utopia, but we can get close if we learn to recognize how concentrating power over others causes human emotion and morality to become corrupt. When we reach that point, perhaps war and such tragedies will be but nightmares remembered upon the wakening of humanity.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
That said, it may be important to remember that tragedies occur on nearly a daily basis in other parts of the world. How many innocent children have been killed in Iraq since the United States and their allies began hostilities in that nation? How many innocents have died in Afghanistan? How many innocents have died in Pakistan? Libya? Is it somehow better because they have died at the hands of generals and the soldiers who obey their orders rather than at the hands of a lone gunman? Is it somehow less shocking? Is it any less terrible? Does the loss of a loved one hurt less because it happened as the result of a military operation? My heartfelt condolences go out to those who have lost loved ones in those terrorist attacks, for what is a full scale military attack if not terrifying?
It seems that we as a species have a strange need to excuse behaviors in supposed authoritarian figures that we find abhorrent, frightening and inhuman in individuals that hold no air of authority. It's almost as if such excuses are psychological bandages or salves applied to the karmic wounds suffered when one somehow identifies himself with another who is obviously engaging in evil doings. I think it would be better if we endeavor to prevent such psychic injury from occurring rather than trying to treat it after the fact.
Why do such tragedies occur? Perhaps it has to do with the lessons such violent people have learned in their lives. Perhaps they have learned that violence works when it comes to solving problems. I'm not talking about overt lessons where one sits and listens to a teacher who tells them violence is the way. I'm talking about more subtle lessons. After all, what is life but an inundation of lessons day in and day out from birth until death? People are constantly and consistently learning and evolving. Perhaps they've seen from childhood that violent means are the means most often utilized when it comes to bringing about social change one wishes to see in the world, or at least that's what they believe they've learned. Perhaps they think that if they truly wish to change the world, the only option they have is through violence. For them, violence works.
I agree that this point of view is misguided, but let's look through history and see why someone might come to think this way. Ancient empires like the Egyptians, the Phoenicians, the Greeks, the Romans, and even the Chinese profited greatly from violence. Even the Bible tells stories of genocide committed by those who are supposedly God's favorite people. They stole natural resources and made slaves from the other human beings they conquered. In more modern times, the British empire rose and it's people became very prosperous through violence. The American nation was birthed in violence and won its independence through violent means. It grew and morphed into an empire the likes of which the world has never seen. It continues to use violence to maintain its empire and though it has its problems and its standard of living has fallen precipitously over the last couple of decades, it is still viewed as a prosperous and successful nation.
Closer to home, governments have shown how successful people and organizations can be through violence. The tax system proves this. Though nearly everyone complains about taxes and how their money is spent by government, people still tend to defend the system and fail to see the violence inherent in it. Simply put, the only reason people pay taxes is because of the threat of violence hanging over their heads should they refuse. That's extortion. Taxes are theft. Even if you are one of those who claim that they don't believe this to be true and use mental gymnastics to make excuses for the government, I believe that the vast majority of people understand this in their emotional heart and moral spirit if not in their logical mind.
Even though government constantly fails, it is quite successful at stealing money and convincing the masses that such theft is a necessity to societal well being. Central banks are also very adept at this. They steal money in the form of government bailouts and they steal purchasing power in the form of inflation. It's difficult to say who learned from whom, the central banks from government or government from central banks, but it is clear to see the collusion between the two types of institutions. Even today we can see subtle threats of violence coming out of the central banking institutions who claim that we will all suffer great economic calamity if we don't continue to feed the central banking monster.
Take a look at politicians, especially in Washington DC, but likely worldwide, and you will see wealth and success. Most likely don't know what it's like to actually work and be productive for a living, they only know how to finagle and play the system. They know how to lie and manipulate. They know how to be coercive and use enforcers, violence and threats of violence to get what they want. There are none who are more financially successful than the central bankers and they have consistently been the driving force behind most of the violence and wars for centuries. Their fraud and manipulations have caused more harm, death and violence than any measure of good they may have accidentally or incidentally caused. The long and short of it is, whether one knows it or not, one learns the lesson that violence works in the system as it is set up. Is it really any wonder when some so called nutcase decides to act on such knowledge, even when those lessons may be subconscious in nature?
I'm afraid that tragedies like the one that occurred in Norway will continue to occur even in places one would not expect until we start to teach people that peace and non violence work. When the masses begin to learn the lesson that peaceful means of change lead to peace and prosperity, then peace and prosperity will be rewarded and our society will become more peaceful and prosperous. When violence becomes shunned by the masses and more and more people refuse to take part in the violence of the state, there will be fewer incidents of violence. Unfortunately, I don't believe that time has yet arrived, but I do believe the path to that time is open and has been revealed to more people and they are deciding to tread upon it.
I'm fairly certain that the mainstream mass media is not going to look at this incident in the same way. I'm fairly certain they are not going to talk about the violence of the state and how its wars are leading to more people deciding to act out in ways abhorrent to the nature of mankind. Instead, they are going to try to demonize certain political groups and views that they want to squelch. They are going to try to divide and conquer rather than pointing to the root cause of the violence. They want to analyze the problem in a way that will increase the power of centralized government (and its centralized banking cartel) rather than pointing out the huge faults in the system. Watch out for that. Keep your eye out for the propaganda which will seek to perpetuate the violence through violating individual rights rather than alleviate the problem through decentralization.
We have had socialistic systems in place for quite some time now. It just seems to get worse. It just seems to consistently reward failure. It just seems to consistently punish those who seek a better way. Perhaps the time has come to try a better, more voluntary societal model. Make taxes voluntary and allow those who wish to withhold taxes do so with impunity when government funds projects with which they disagree. Allow competition in currency and other services government currently monopolizes. Allow those who use such services to pay for them so that a fair price can be established for such services. Make sure that people engaging in the economy need to be productive to succeed and have something of their own to lose should they fail. In this way, perhaps those who currently believe that violence is their only choice will see other, more positive options.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe this man should be excused for his actions. He has harmed others and should be held accountable. I am simply making suggestions for how to avoid such tragedies in the future. I am simply suggesting that we examine with great vigor the true nature of how our governments work. I don't believe that any society will ever be a perfect utopia, but I do believe that the only way to become a less violent society is to build less violent governmental systems. The socialists seem to believe that a utopia can be built by violence, but I don't buy that. Fear is the poison that causes hatred. Hatred leads to anger and violence. Violence achieves only death and destruction for both the physical and the spiritual. Because these things are part of humanity, there can never be a utopia, but we can get close if we learn to recognize how concentrating power over others causes human emotion and morality to become corrupt. When we reach that point, perhaps war and such tragedies will be but nightmares remembered upon the wakening of humanity.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Food, Control and the Growing Police State
Food has always been a tool the elite have used to control the masses. When you control the food supply, you control everything, even life and death. A starving man is more likely to sell his soul for a potato then someone with a full tummy. The relatively free market of food production and distribution that has been in place in this nation for a few centuries now has led to unrivaled prosperity. Food can, in fact, be grown for practically nothing if you have the land, the time and can afford to buy just a few heirloom seeds to grow the organic vegetables necessary for good health. This will save you money, is better for you than grocery store vegetables which may be genetically modified or may contain unwanted chemicals, and helps you to become less dependent on the state for your survival.
It is the last part of the above statement that frightens government officials. They want you dependent on them. For some, it makes them feel important. Others may just want to feel needed or helpful. Still others may just want the paycheck. Whatever the case, they don't seem to just want to leave you alone to your own devices. Perhaps that's why they're attempting to pass laws making it illegal to grow your own garden. Perhaps that's why they want to make sure you're a compliant grass farmer just like your neighbors. Perhaps that's why they're trying to control the food necessary for life.
There was much reporting done on the story of Julie Bass from Oak Park, Michigan, who was arrested for growing a garden in her (gasp) front lawn. There was so much reporting on this story, in fact, that the city of Oak Park decided to drop the charges. They had claimed that the citizens of Oak Park were in favor of such ordinances that made it a crime to have anything but nicely manicured, inedible, Kentucky bluegrass lawns (an exaggeration, but you get the idea). I think they were rather surprised when the Bass's neighbors came out decidedly against the arrest. Rather than apologizing and admitting they were wrong like normal people would do, however, they did what you would expect of government control freaks who think they're perfect. They found something else to charge poor Julie Bass with. Things get tough for you once you're on the government's shit list.
As Julie Bass's further adventures in the world of government abuse unfold, I hope she continues to receive the support of her neighbors and things turn out well for her. There are others who are not quite as fortunate as her, however, when it comes to the government's longing for complete control over food. There are other victims of inane policies of local government gangs. The homeless in Orlando are a good example.
Now, you'd think that government officials would want to help the disadvantaged such as people who have lost everything due to the economic downturn. That's what government officials would have us believe in many cases, that they are there to help when one is down and out. Why, then, would they want to make sure the homeless are hungry? Why would they want to arrest people for feeding other people who can't afford to buy a sandwich? Why would they wish to appear so callous about those who they are supposed to be helping? Perhaps they don't like the thought that they aren't the only ones who care about the plight of less fortunate people. Perhaps they simply don't like someone trying to muscle in on their charity monopoly. I'm not sure, but there is something terribly wrong with a system that decides to arrest people for helping.
There is a man, a super activist so to speak, who is trying to rectify this situation. His name is Julian Heicklen. He is a 79 year old activist who is trying to show us all what it means to truly fight tyranny and become free. He is going to Lake Eola Park in Orlando Florida on August 18th to help the "Food not Bombs" people distribute food to anyone who's hungry, including homeless people. Many have already been arrested by the not overly compassionate Orlando police for such acts of kindness. He also plans on engaging in other non violent illegal activities such as distributing Fully Informed Jury Association literature to people at the Orange County Court Complex and taking pictures of police officers doing their work to point out the ridiculousness of tyrannical laws, but it is the distributing of food down there that has really piqued my interest. The other activism is important as it sheds light on practices the controllers would like to keep secret, but one must truly wonder what on earth was going through their heads when they decided to make it illegal to help others who are less fortunate.
So, some local tyrants have decided not to allow the local serfs to grow vegetables in their front yards. They've decided that only they are allowed to help the needy, and they're doing a real poor job of it. If that's not enough to convince you of the immorality of many local governments that the common folk are supposed to be protected against, then I would point out the slew of kids' lemonade stands that have been shut down recently. Many stories of this occurring have been circulating lately and all I've heard about is people shaking their heads and complaining. Recently, however, someone has decided to do something about it.
Robert Fernandes has decided to create a website that promotes an event called Lemonade Freedom Day on August 20th, 2011. The idea is to spread the word that selling lemonade is not a crime and should not be treated as such. Don't you remember being a kid and setting up a lemonade stand? I remember doing so, only I sold Kool-Aid. I'm fairly certain that millions of children across this nation have fond memories of similar experiences. Why would someone want to steal such a valuable activity from modern youth? Why would anyone want to criminalize such a delightful piece of summertime Americana? Could it be that perhaps they wish to suppress the entrepreneurial spirit that helped build America? Could it be that their lust for control is so overwhelming to them that they couldn't care less about the children affected? Could it be that they are simply trying to drill into the heads of our youth the idea of obedience to law, no matter how onerous, bad, or immoral the law is? As I see it, authority has grown so far out of control that it has made itself illegitimate.
There are a couple of things that tie all these news stories together. The first is that none of these laws would matter if it wasn't for the enforcers, the police. All of these so called crimes would not have made the news if the police had simply said "no" when asked to arrest the perpetrators or shut down their operations. But the police in this nation seem to no longer be able to think for themselves. They have become the automatons of the state, excusing their actions because they are "just doing their jobs" just like the German Nazis excused their actions during World War II. I would point out that their job includes upholding the Constitution of the United States of America. I would point out that their job includes saying "no" to enforcing bad laws when ordered to. If things were running properly and the system wasn't so corrupt, perhaps that's what would be happening. In a perfect world, the brave peace officer who stands up to the corrupt government official would become a hero and be rewarded while the corrupt government official would get his comeuppance. Instead, we have a world where any "law enforcement officer" is punished for standing up to the system and lives in fear of losing his job or worse if he does what's right.
The other thing that ties these stories together is the common folk. It is their apathy that has allowed the system to deteriorate to this point. It is their going along to get along and simply not saying anything that has allowed the system to become so corrupt. It is their shrugging their shoulders and keeping their heads down that has allowed evil to win as much as it has, as the proverbial saying goes. Those in government have come to believe they can simply do as they please. They have come to believe that whatever they say is law and the people will grumble and moan, but simply obey and not do anything else about it. Well, that seems to be changing. The people spoke up about the Julie Bass situation and they're taking action to correct the other injustices mentioned above. Methinks that perhaps the government officials have pushed the envelope just a little too far and more than enough people can now see just how much the tyranny has grown. Next month should be an interesting one as the people attempt to trim it back.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
It is the last part of the above statement that frightens government officials. They want you dependent on them. For some, it makes them feel important. Others may just want to feel needed or helpful. Still others may just want the paycheck. Whatever the case, they don't seem to just want to leave you alone to your own devices. Perhaps that's why they're attempting to pass laws making it illegal to grow your own garden. Perhaps that's why they want to make sure you're a compliant grass farmer just like your neighbors. Perhaps that's why they're trying to control the food necessary for life.
There was much reporting done on the story of Julie Bass from Oak Park, Michigan, who was arrested for growing a garden in her (gasp) front lawn. There was so much reporting on this story, in fact, that the city of Oak Park decided to drop the charges. They had claimed that the citizens of Oak Park were in favor of such ordinances that made it a crime to have anything but nicely manicured, inedible, Kentucky bluegrass lawns (an exaggeration, but you get the idea). I think they were rather surprised when the Bass's neighbors came out decidedly against the arrest. Rather than apologizing and admitting they were wrong like normal people would do, however, they did what you would expect of government control freaks who think they're perfect. They found something else to charge poor Julie Bass with. Things get tough for you once you're on the government's shit list.
As Julie Bass's further adventures in the world of government abuse unfold, I hope she continues to receive the support of her neighbors and things turn out well for her. There are others who are not quite as fortunate as her, however, when it comes to the government's longing for complete control over food. There are other victims of inane policies of local government gangs. The homeless in Orlando are a good example.
Now, you'd think that government officials would want to help the disadvantaged such as people who have lost everything due to the economic downturn. That's what government officials would have us believe in many cases, that they are there to help when one is down and out. Why, then, would they want to make sure the homeless are hungry? Why would they want to arrest people for feeding other people who can't afford to buy a sandwich? Why would they wish to appear so callous about those who they are supposed to be helping? Perhaps they don't like the thought that they aren't the only ones who care about the plight of less fortunate people. Perhaps they simply don't like someone trying to muscle in on their charity monopoly. I'm not sure, but there is something terribly wrong with a system that decides to arrest people for helping.
There is a man, a super activist so to speak, who is trying to rectify this situation. His name is Julian Heicklen. He is a 79 year old activist who is trying to show us all what it means to truly fight tyranny and become free. He is going to Lake Eola Park in Orlando Florida on August 18th to help the "Food not Bombs" people distribute food to anyone who's hungry, including homeless people. Many have already been arrested by the not overly compassionate Orlando police for such acts of kindness. He also plans on engaging in other non violent illegal activities such as distributing Fully Informed Jury Association literature to people at the Orange County Court Complex and taking pictures of police officers doing their work to point out the ridiculousness of tyrannical laws, but it is the distributing of food down there that has really piqued my interest. The other activism is important as it sheds light on practices the controllers would like to keep secret, but one must truly wonder what on earth was going through their heads when they decided to make it illegal to help others who are less fortunate.
So, some local tyrants have decided not to allow the local serfs to grow vegetables in their front yards. They've decided that only they are allowed to help the needy, and they're doing a real poor job of it. If that's not enough to convince you of the immorality of many local governments that the common folk are supposed to be protected against, then I would point out the slew of kids' lemonade stands that have been shut down recently. Many stories of this occurring have been circulating lately and all I've heard about is people shaking their heads and complaining. Recently, however, someone has decided to do something about it.
Robert Fernandes has decided to create a website that promotes an event called Lemonade Freedom Day on August 20th, 2011. The idea is to spread the word that selling lemonade is not a crime and should not be treated as such. Don't you remember being a kid and setting up a lemonade stand? I remember doing so, only I sold Kool-Aid. I'm fairly certain that millions of children across this nation have fond memories of similar experiences. Why would someone want to steal such a valuable activity from modern youth? Why would anyone want to criminalize such a delightful piece of summertime Americana? Could it be that perhaps they wish to suppress the entrepreneurial spirit that helped build America? Could it be that their lust for control is so overwhelming to them that they couldn't care less about the children affected? Could it be that they are simply trying to drill into the heads of our youth the idea of obedience to law, no matter how onerous, bad, or immoral the law is? As I see it, authority has grown so far out of control that it has made itself illegitimate.
There are a couple of things that tie all these news stories together. The first is that none of these laws would matter if it wasn't for the enforcers, the police. All of these so called crimes would not have made the news if the police had simply said "no" when asked to arrest the perpetrators or shut down their operations. But the police in this nation seem to no longer be able to think for themselves. They have become the automatons of the state, excusing their actions because they are "just doing their jobs" just like the German Nazis excused their actions during World War II. I would point out that their job includes upholding the Constitution of the United States of America. I would point out that their job includes saying "no" to enforcing bad laws when ordered to. If things were running properly and the system wasn't so corrupt, perhaps that's what would be happening. In a perfect world, the brave peace officer who stands up to the corrupt government official would become a hero and be rewarded while the corrupt government official would get his comeuppance. Instead, we have a world where any "law enforcement officer" is punished for standing up to the system and lives in fear of losing his job or worse if he does what's right.
The other thing that ties these stories together is the common folk. It is their apathy that has allowed the system to deteriorate to this point. It is their going along to get along and simply not saying anything that has allowed the system to become so corrupt. It is their shrugging their shoulders and keeping their heads down that has allowed evil to win as much as it has, as the proverbial saying goes. Those in government have come to believe they can simply do as they please. They have come to believe that whatever they say is law and the people will grumble and moan, but simply obey and not do anything else about it. Well, that seems to be changing. The people spoke up about the Julie Bass situation and they're taking action to correct the other injustices mentioned above. Methinks that perhaps the government officials have pushed the envelope just a little too far and more than enough people can now see just how much the tyranny has grown. Next month should be an interesting one as the people attempt to trim it back.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Individual Rights, Justice and Policing the World
Lately I have been concentrating my writings on Democrats and their big government programs. This is likely because the president is a Democrat and supposedly his administration is one that pushes the agenda of the Democrats. He has, in my opinion, misrepresented his principles to the American people and has simply continued and expanded the big government programs of the previous administrations, programs he intimated would end when he was a candidate.
But I have claimed for years that Democrats and Republicans are more or less the same, two sides of the same coin so to speak. They are all big government control freaks that wish to rule the common folk from on high and remove freedom and opportunity from those of little means so that they cannot compete with the ruling elite. Recently, I received an email from the newest senator from Illinois, Mark Kirk, that troubled me. I felt that this freshman Republican, swept into office due to the mistakes of the power hungry Democrats and their refusal to listen to the will of the common folk, needed a little lesson in the principles of freedom this nation was founded upon.
In his email, Mr. Mark Kirk asked a question that struck me as absolutely obnoxious and ignorant in its nature. To paraphrase, he wanted to know if I felt "terrorists" should be transferred to the US and "given" Constitutional rights. I was aghast that an American who had taken a vow to uphold the Constitution would have such a gross misunderstanding as to what individual rights are, where they come from and what the Bill of Rights was all about. Of course it strikes me that most members of congress likely have the same misunderstandings, or perhaps they just claim to so that they have an excuse to continue growing government and imposing an authoritarian regime upon the common folk.
I shouldn't have to explain to Mr. Mark Kirk, or anyone for that matter, that rights aren't something that are granted by the government, rights are something inherent to every human being because of their humanity. Why is it I constantly feel I have to explain this to people? This is why the Bill of Rights was put in the Constitution in the first place. Our founding fathers, and many of the European common folk inhabiting the North American continent alongside them at the time, didn't trust the authoritarian governments of the times. They realized governments took and took and took from the common folk and gave all manner of privileges to the elite rulers. The sad truth is that likely those at the top who call themselves lawmakers think of themselves as superior to the rest of us and don't believe in individual rights. They likely actually place themselves on the level of gods and believe they grant or deny rights rather than respect or violate them.
The proper question, I suppose, would be should the people in positions of authority within the United States military be allowed to continue to violate an accused man's right to a fair and open trial, or should the right to face his accusers and defend his actions be honored by government officials? My answer to that question is the latter. Of course the United States should honor the human rights of others, no matter their birth origin. These are human beings, not lesser beings to be trifled with. They have the same thoughts, emotions and wishes for a better life as anyone. If they are guilty of some crime, let it be proven in a court of law just like anyone else. Let them be sentenced so they can pay for their crime just like anyone else. If they are innocent, they need to be freed to pursue their own destiny as all humans should. The United States of America was supposed to be a nation that held a moral high ground when it came to law and individual rights. Even if that moral high ground was lost long ago, it is never too late to try to reestablish it.
Another word whose meaning has been obfuscated, much like the term human rights, is the word war. For thousands of years, war was a condition where two nations mustered as many soldiers as they could and then battled on fields of honor, or some such thing. War in the modern vernacular has come to mean any action taken against people who refuse to bow to the dictates of government officials. Any real war that might have been is over in a few days, after that what we have would better be described as an occupation and the subjugation of an indigenous population by military force. The word war is used simply as an attempt to legitimize and excuse violations committed against individual rights that might otherwise be subject to more scrutiny.
Americans might do well to remember that at one time it was our forefathers who were fighting against tyranny and oppression brought to our shores by the military prowess of another nation. One of the reasons the Bill of Rights was written in the first place was because England's military was violating the individual rights of so many colonists. The king felt his men had the right to invade your home without warrant. He felt his men had the right to detain individuals indefinitely without trial. He felt he had the right to ship his prisoners away to a far off foreign land, to torture them, and to use any evidence or confession obtained from said tortures in a court of law to convict them. The colonists felt otherwise. They felt that the individual rights of the most vulnerable should be respected by government, not violated by the powerful, and that the burden of proof should be on the shoulders of the accusers to prove the accused guilty, not on the shoulders of the accused to prove himself innocent. That is the moral high ground, and that is the principle our government needs to uphold if it is to remain legitimate.
The government should have nothing to worry about if those they accuse of being terrorists have, in fact, engaged in some form of terrorism against the civilian populace. They should have no problems bringing the facts into open court and allowing those facts to be scrutinized by the general public. The fact that they keep these accused hidden and their trials secret is troublesome. The fact that it takes whistleblowers and organizations like Wikileaks to uncover disturbing behaviors of our military is also troubling. These behaviors and methods should frowned upon within military and intelligence organizations, not condoned by them. Of course, if the US military was to withdraw from policing the world and maintaining an empire, such methods would be unnecessary and there would be no worrying behaviors to uncover.
More and more I hear people speaking out against the practices of government violating individual rights. For years many common folk have grumbled beneath their breath and silently gone along to get along. Some have even been frightened to speak out against these government practices much like the soviets and those behind the iron curtain were. More and more people are nodding their heads in agreement and adding their two cents worth when I speak of the freedom message at taverns and bars. People are tired of our so called representatives violating their oaths to uphold the Constitution. People are tired of having their rights and the rights of others violated by government office holders and their enforcers. Most people just want to be left alone to live their own lives, and this includes many of the so called terrorists that have been imprisoned by the US military. It is time for politicians to start honoring their oaths and the principles they're supposed to represent to regain the moral high ground the founding fathers fought to establish.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
But I have claimed for years that Democrats and Republicans are more or less the same, two sides of the same coin so to speak. They are all big government control freaks that wish to rule the common folk from on high and remove freedom and opportunity from those of little means so that they cannot compete with the ruling elite. Recently, I received an email from the newest senator from Illinois, Mark Kirk, that troubled me. I felt that this freshman Republican, swept into office due to the mistakes of the power hungry Democrats and their refusal to listen to the will of the common folk, needed a little lesson in the principles of freedom this nation was founded upon.
In his email, Mr. Mark Kirk asked a question that struck me as absolutely obnoxious and ignorant in its nature. To paraphrase, he wanted to know if I felt "terrorists" should be transferred to the US and "given" Constitutional rights. I was aghast that an American who had taken a vow to uphold the Constitution would have such a gross misunderstanding as to what individual rights are, where they come from and what the Bill of Rights was all about. Of course it strikes me that most members of congress likely have the same misunderstandings, or perhaps they just claim to so that they have an excuse to continue growing government and imposing an authoritarian regime upon the common folk.
I shouldn't have to explain to Mr. Mark Kirk, or anyone for that matter, that rights aren't something that are granted by the government, rights are something inherent to every human being because of their humanity. Why is it I constantly feel I have to explain this to people? This is why the Bill of Rights was put in the Constitution in the first place. Our founding fathers, and many of the European common folk inhabiting the North American continent alongside them at the time, didn't trust the authoritarian governments of the times. They realized governments took and took and took from the common folk and gave all manner of privileges to the elite rulers. The sad truth is that likely those at the top who call themselves lawmakers think of themselves as superior to the rest of us and don't believe in individual rights. They likely actually place themselves on the level of gods and believe they grant or deny rights rather than respect or violate them.
The proper question, I suppose, would be should the people in positions of authority within the United States military be allowed to continue to violate an accused man's right to a fair and open trial, or should the right to face his accusers and defend his actions be honored by government officials? My answer to that question is the latter. Of course the United States should honor the human rights of others, no matter their birth origin. These are human beings, not lesser beings to be trifled with. They have the same thoughts, emotions and wishes for a better life as anyone. If they are guilty of some crime, let it be proven in a court of law just like anyone else. Let them be sentenced so they can pay for their crime just like anyone else. If they are innocent, they need to be freed to pursue their own destiny as all humans should. The United States of America was supposed to be a nation that held a moral high ground when it came to law and individual rights. Even if that moral high ground was lost long ago, it is never too late to try to reestablish it.
Another word whose meaning has been obfuscated, much like the term human rights, is the word war. For thousands of years, war was a condition where two nations mustered as many soldiers as they could and then battled on fields of honor, or some such thing. War in the modern vernacular has come to mean any action taken against people who refuse to bow to the dictates of government officials. Any real war that might have been is over in a few days, after that what we have would better be described as an occupation and the subjugation of an indigenous population by military force. The word war is used simply as an attempt to legitimize and excuse violations committed against individual rights that might otherwise be subject to more scrutiny.
Americans might do well to remember that at one time it was our forefathers who were fighting against tyranny and oppression brought to our shores by the military prowess of another nation. One of the reasons the Bill of Rights was written in the first place was because England's military was violating the individual rights of so many colonists. The king felt his men had the right to invade your home without warrant. He felt his men had the right to detain individuals indefinitely without trial. He felt he had the right to ship his prisoners away to a far off foreign land, to torture them, and to use any evidence or confession obtained from said tortures in a court of law to convict them. The colonists felt otherwise. They felt that the individual rights of the most vulnerable should be respected by government, not violated by the powerful, and that the burden of proof should be on the shoulders of the accusers to prove the accused guilty, not on the shoulders of the accused to prove himself innocent. That is the moral high ground, and that is the principle our government needs to uphold if it is to remain legitimate.
The government should have nothing to worry about if those they accuse of being terrorists have, in fact, engaged in some form of terrorism against the civilian populace. They should have no problems bringing the facts into open court and allowing those facts to be scrutinized by the general public. The fact that they keep these accused hidden and their trials secret is troublesome. The fact that it takes whistleblowers and organizations like Wikileaks to uncover disturbing behaviors of our military is also troubling. These behaviors and methods should frowned upon within military and intelligence organizations, not condoned by them. Of course, if the US military was to withdraw from policing the world and maintaining an empire, such methods would be unnecessary and there would be no worrying behaviors to uncover.
More and more I hear people speaking out against the practices of government violating individual rights. For years many common folk have grumbled beneath their breath and silently gone along to get along. Some have even been frightened to speak out against these government practices much like the soviets and those behind the iron curtain were. More and more people are nodding their heads in agreement and adding their two cents worth when I speak of the freedom message at taverns and bars. People are tired of our so called representatives violating their oaths to uphold the Constitution. People are tired of having their rights and the rights of others violated by government office holders and their enforcers. Most people just want to be left alone to live their own lives, and this includes many of the so called terrorists that have been imprisoned by the US military. It is time for politicians to start honoring their oaths and the principles they're supposed to represent to regain the moral high ground the founding fathers fought to establish.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Monday, July 4, 2011
War, the Sickness of Empire and Economic Genocide
I've made the claim for some time now that the economy is people. It's you and me trading goods and services on a voluntary basis. It's me providing you with my labor or something I've created, then you providing him with your labor or something you've created, then him providing her with his labor or something he's created and so on and so forth. This is what makes economy, so it would make sense that the economy would grow as the population grows. It would make sense that the economy would shrink as the population shrinks. It would make sense that the economy would stabilize when the population stabilizes. But this is not what has happened. I believe this is at least partially because some people have been able to manipulate the mechanisms of economy in unnatural ways for their own benefit, and therefore to the detriment of most others.
One way this can be accomplished is through war. It has been said that war is the health of the state. Certainly it has been shown through history that nothing grows the power of a central government better than war. But while war may help the machinations of the state, it does not do the same for the economy. Instead, it takes resources that would be better spent on other ventures and uses them to destroy lives and property. Yes, it might help enrich certain individuals and corporations and those who work for them, but in the end it is a drain on resources and kills the very people who could help grow the economy through peaceful, mutually beneficial trade.
This might be something that many Americans in particular might find hard to accept. The population of that nation has not had to deal with the horrors of war upon the citizenry for almost a hundred and fifty years. The wars their government has engaged in have more or less been profitable to them. World War I helped its economy as it remained neutral and provided arms to the combatants before they entered it in 1917. World War II provided American industry with many opportunities before the Japanese attacked near the end of 1941. The industrial might of America was unrivaled coming out of World War II and the adoption of the dollar as the world's reserve currency created a military, industrial and financial super power unmatched in the world's history. War seemed to be good for America.
Yet the nation's populace seemed to remain ignorant as to the true nature of its perceived wealth. The wars its government has engaged in have been paid for by borrowing, not by using money that had been saved. The resources that may have helped pay for wars have in reality been stolen from indigenous populations at the point of a gun. These resources certainly weren't acquired through voluntary trade. These debts need to be paid back in some form or another, the question is by whom? I certainly don't believe it should be by the common folk who may have tacitly gone along with the war programs but did not orchestrate them. Yet it is the common folk who will pay because of the fiscal and political manipulations of the super wealthy elite who continue to hide and obfuscate their influence in such matters.
The debts are coming due. Those who have loaned the money, regardless of whether or not paper money has any real value, want to be paid back. There is a problem, however, in that the nation is technically bankrupt. And it's not just the United States of America that has this problem, but many nations worldwide take in less revenue than they spend and can no longer afford to pay back even the interest on the loans they've received from various lenders. To solve this problem, governments often feel they can do two things, either raise taxes or cut spending. The United States government has for years decided to put the burden on the backs of their future generations by printing money and inflating the currency supply. I think a better solution would be to stop wasting money on bullets, bombs and engines of destruction. I think it is a good time to stop policing an empire, start closing down bases and bringing home troops, and use the trillions that would be saved by not empire building to pay off the debt and start rebuilding prosperity and wealth.
Yet this is not something that the central banking institutions would have. They wish to keep the common folk in debt. They wish to siphon off the unprecedented wealth that has been enjoyed by the largest and most powerful middle class the world has ever known and horde it in their own coffers. Why not do this by bombing already impoverished people? Why not destroy the infrastructure of nations that are on their way up the socio-economic ladder? Why not use fear, ignorance and the inherent distrust of other cultures to foment a clash of civilizations? In this way, they can keep the wealthier nation in debt and dependent on their good graces and at the same time steal the natural resources of less fortunate nations through the international corporations they control. Why should they care if innocents are killed along the way, as long as their pockets are lined and their coffers filled?
War of any kind does not bring economic prosperity to the masses. It does not bring freedom, liberty or democracy to the people. It brings only death and destruction, the exact opposite of economic prosperity. It brings complete moral degradation. It brings about the enslavement of the masses in one form or another to all the parties involved. It brings about unprecedented profits for a few societal parasites who wish to horde all the wealth for themselves. It brings prosperity only to the fat spiders at the top who spin their webs to entrap all humanity so they can feed upon the misery they create. It is these few wealthy elite who seem to wish for the destruction of all economy who should be held to account, not the common folk. It is they who have failed miserably, for they have shown their utter disdain for humankind and the desperate emotional impoverishment they wallow in when it comes to caring for the less fortunate.
Peace is the way to economic prosperity. Individual freedom is the way to peace. Only by creating and producing will the economy grow, not through killing and destroying. How much more can mankind endure before this lesson is learned? It is time to stop empowering the elite who pull the strings. It is time to stop borrowing their worthless paper money for wars and other destructive government programs they have set up to entrap the masses of humanity. It is time to create alternatives to the monopolies of currency they control and to allow these alternatives to operate unmolested by the government agencies that the wealthy corporate elite have bought and paid for. It is time to stop forcing our empire and corporate world government upon the masses of the world and to start allowing all individuals to operate as the sovereign beings they are. Americans should be leading by example, not by the heavy handed machinations of a militarized police force.
We have seen this sickness before in the world. We have seen historically how empire corrupts and rots away the core of the principles that brought it into being. We have seen how power corrupts and how absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is time for the common folk to shout "Enough!" It is time we refuse to pay for the destruction any longer. It is time to trim back the branches of empire, break the grip of government monopoly and rid ourselves of the tyranny that is now encamped upon our shores. When this happens, the buds of freedom can grow again and perhaps one day blossom into beautiful flowers. When this happens, prosperity will once again visit the common folk and we can all build wealth together.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
One way this can be accomplished is through war. It has been said that war is the health of the state. Certainly it has been shown through history that nothing grows the power of a central government better than war. But while war may help the machinations of the state, it does not do the same for the economy. Instead, it takes resources that would be better spent on other ventures and uses them to destroy lives and property. Yes, it might help enrich certain individuals and corporations and those who work for them, but in the end it is a drain on resources and kills the very people who could help grow the economy through peaceful, mutually beneficial trade.
This might be something that many Americans in particular might find hard to accept. The population of that nation has not had to deal with the horrors of war upon the citizenry for almost a hundred and fifty years. The wars their government has engaged in have more or less been profitable to them. World War I helped its economy as it remained neutral and provided arms to the combatants before they entered it in 1917. World War II provided American industry with many opportunities before the Japanese attacked near the end of 1941. The industrial might of America was unrivaled coming out of World War II and the adoption of the dollar as the world's reserve currency created a military, industrial and financial super power unmatched in the world's history. War seemed to be good for America.
Yet the nation's populace seemed to remain ignorant as to the true nature of its perceived wealth. The wars its government has engaged in have been paid for by borrowing, not by using money that had been saved. The resources that may have helped pay for wars have in reality been stolen from indigenous populations at the point of a gun. These resources certainly weren't acquired through voluntary trade. These debts need to be paid back in some form or another, the question is by whom? I certainly don't believe it should be by the common folk who may have tacitly gone along with the war programs but did not orchestrate them. Yet it is the common folk who will pay because of the fiscal and political manipulations of the super wealthy elite who continue to hide and obfuscate their influence in such matters.
The debts are coming due. Those who have loaned the money, regardless of whether or not paper money has any real value, want to be paid back. There is a problem, however, in that the nation is technically bankrupt. And it's not just the United States of America that has this problem, but many nations worldwide take in less revenue than they spend and can no longer afford to pay back even the interest on the loans they've received from various lenders. To solve this problem, governments often feel they can do two things, either raise taxes or cut spending. The United States government has for years decided to put the burden on the backs of their future generations by printing money and inflating the currency supply. I think a better solution would be to stop wasting money on bullets, bombs and engines of destruction. I think it is a good time to stop policing an empire, start closing down bases and bringing home troops, and use the trillions that would be saved by not empire building to pay off the debt and start rebuilding prosperity and wealth.
Yet this is not something that the central banking institutions would have. They wish to keep the common folk in debt. They wish to siphon off the unprecedented wealth that has been enjoyed by the largest and most powerful middle class the world has ever known and horde it in their own coffers. Why not do this by bombing already impoverished people? Why not destroy the infrastructure of nations that are on their way up the socio-economic ladder? Why not use fear, ignorance and the inherent distrust of other cultures to foment a clash of civilizations? In this way, they can keep the wealthier nation in debt and dependent on their good graces and at the same time steal the natural resources of less fortunate nations through the international corporations they control. Why should they care if innocents are killed along the way, as long as their pockets are lined and their coffers filled?
War of any kind does not bring economic prosperity to the masses. It does not bring freedom, liberty or democracy to the people. It brings only death and destruction, the exact opposite of economic prosperity. It brings complete moral degradation. It brings about the enslavement of the masses in one form or another to all the parties involved. It brings about unprecedented profits for a few societal parasites who wish to horde all the wealth for themselves. It brings prosperity only to the fat spiders at the top who spin their webs to entrap all humanity so they can feed upon the misery they create. It is these few wealthy elite who seem to wish for the destruction of all economy who should be held to account, not the common folk. It is they who have failed miserably, for they have shown their utter disdain for humankind and the desperate emotional impoverishment they wallow in when it comes to caring for the less fortunate.
Peace is the way to economic prosperity. Individual freedom is the way to peace. Only by creating and producing will the economy grow, not through killing and destroying. How much more can mankind endure before this lesson is learned? It is time to stop empowering the elite who pull the strings. It is time to stop borrowing their worthless paper money for wars and other destructive government programs they have set up to entrap the masses of humanity. It is time to create alternatives to the monopolies of currency they control and to allow these alternatives to operate unmolested by the government agencies that the wealthy corporate elite have bought and paid for. It is time to stop forcing our empire and corporate world government upon the masses of the world and to start allowing all individuals to operate as the sovereign beings they are. Americans should be leading by example, not by the heavy handed machinations of a militarized police force.
We have seen this sickness before in the world. We have seen historically how empire corrupts and rots away the core of the principles that brought it into being. We have seen how power corrupts and how absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is time for the common folk to shout "Enough!" It is time we refuse to pay for the destruction any longer. It is time to trim back the branches of empire, break the grip of government monopoly and rid ourselves of the tyranny that is now encamped upon our shores. When this happens, the buds of freedom can grow again and perhaps one day blossom into beautiful flowers. When this happens, prosperity will once again visit the common folk and we can all build wealth together.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)