This article originally appeared on Aug 22nd, 2008 in americanchronicle.com
I have a new hero. He calls himself Sam I am and he´s from Texas. He has bravely decided to take on a gang of thugs, liars and thieves armed with nothing but a camera. He put his life and fortune at risk to expose these criminals. He rattled their cages a little and got under their skin. He took a big chance, realizing the violence they could perpetrate upon him, and yet he stuck to his quest and managed to film their shady activities for all the world to see. You can see the results here: http://www.youtube.com/ObscuredTruth
If you go to the above link and watch the videos, you will see that Sam I am is taking on the Texas justice system. He felt that there was an inherent conflict of interest in the system and wanted to demonstrate this for all to see. As he explains, he was pulled over by two armed men and detained for forty five minutes while they questioned him. According to Sam, they did not show him proper ID and did not tell him why he was being detained. They demanded he appear to be judged by one of their black robed men under the threat of being kidnapped and thrown in a cold cage if he should have decided not to show up. Knowing that any black robed man behind a bench would be paid by the same people that paid the uniformed men who had detained him, Sam felt that perhaps there was a conflict of interest here and that he would not be fairly judged. He decided to confront these people who seem to believe they are better than the rest of us. He armed himself with a video camera for his own protection and thought he might ask a few questions to get a better understanding of the nature of our convoluted justice system. What he found was deeply disturbing to anyone who loves freedom and wants to live their lives free of tyranny.
The first thing Sam discovered is that these people are very afraid of video cameras. They don´t want their actions to be public knowledge. They seem to want to prevent the "common folk" from finding out some little secret. They also appear to be frightened of questions. The man in the black robe who calls himself "judge" is especially adverse to answering any questions one may have. How dare anyone question his authority? How dare anyone not understand the nature of his proceedings? Doesn´t everyone know we are all to simply bow down before him and do his bidding, no questions asked? And how dare anyone bring a recording device into a courtroom? Why, all the proceedings are recorded by the state sanctioned stenographer, as they have been for centuries. No need to bring a twenty first century device which would reveal all into the room. Certainly the stenographer, who by the way is paid by the same people who pay the judge and the police, certainly he would never make a mistake, lie, change the testimony or bare false witness should something go amiss. There´s a reason these people do the things the way that they do them, and I highly doubt it has anything to do with protecting the accused against the power of the state.
The refusal of the judge – who is supposed to be a servant of the people, not their master – to allow a video camera into the courtroom should concern everyone. After all, if he´s not doing anything illegal, if he´s not doing anything wrong, then he should have nothing to worry about. Isn´t that what they always tell us when they want to intrude on our privacy? His refusal to give straight forward answers to straight forward questions should be of even greater concern. How is one supposed to defend oneself in a system where the judge refuses to explain the rules of the game? Sam should be ashamed of himself for wishing to obtain knowledge. Why, doesn´t he know that in the courtroom the judge´s word is law? To him, it matters not what any silly state constitution might say. He can change the rules anytime he wants if they get too inconvenient. After all, it´s his courtroom, right?
Then there´s the judge´s insistence that Sam hire a lawyer to answer his questions. It seems to me that here we have another inherent flaw in the system. First off, hiring a lawyer for a traffic ticket is a bit like hiring a mechanic to fill up your gas tank. You´re just going to pay that much more for the gas. After all, defense lawyers swear an oath to the same powers that judges and prosecutors do. They´re all on the same team! They´ve all joined the same club. They´re all there for the purpose of relieving the common folk of their cash. Besides, it´s always been my understanding that the law should to be clear and concise so that everyone can understand it. Why have we allowed it to become so complicated that only a certain class of people can understand it? Why have we allowed a ruling class to develop in this country where everyone is created equal? How did we devolve to such a point where men´s egos become so important that they believe themselves to be of more value than their fellow human beings? How did we become a nation of wimps who have forsaken their God given rights and allowed such individuals to rule over us like kings without even questioning what was happening?
Then there´s Sam. He´s a man who wants to learn, wants to defend himself, and yet the man who calls himself judge does not respect this. After entering a plea for Sam – a blatant conflict of interest since no one should be able to both act as a judge in a person´s case and represent him – the railroading really begins. Rather than simply ask Sam what it was he didn´t understand, "judge" orders one of his uniformed men to remove him from the courtroom. It is out in the hallways of this public building that we find out the real shocker. The police, those who are supposed to protect the rights of individuals, those who swore and oath to uphold the constitution of the state of Texas, don´t care about their oaths. They are more concerned with the orders of their master, the man known as "judge". It is they who ultimately empower him.
And so it is for Sam, taking on the system for something that could have easily been dealt with for a few bucks. Indeed, many of us would probably have buckled and paid the extortion demanded by these men who believe themselves better than us commoners. Why bother with something that would make us feel so uncomfortable? Why challenge something that seems so small? It´s not just the money, it´s the principle. We need men like Sam to remind us of these things. We need to remember out dignity. We need to remember that we are a nation of free people, not a nation of sheep willing to follow without question whatever hollow men present themselves as authority. Indeed, our forefathers founded this nation because they questioned authority. They bravely stood up to a very powerful authority, the most powerful of its day. And that is what Sam has done.
It has been the small things that have mattered. It is the small things that have been used to slowly convince us to stop caring about the liberties we once proudly proclaimed we would die to protect. It is in small ways and with guile that our politicians and justice officials have been able to convince us that we should allow them to stop respecting our rights and start violating them. Sam has concerned himself with something small to alert us to something big. He has done so in a very brave manner, putting himself in harm´s way to sound the alarm to the rest of the freedom loving people´s of the world. He is a freedom lover and a hero much like William Wallace was, and so I name him Braveheart Sam. I wish him the best of luck and pray he gets the backing he deserves.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Politicians, Gods and Messiahs
This article was originally published on Aug. 10, 2008 at americanchronicle.com.
I heard a conversation take place the other day where one person was explaining to another how he felt about Barack Obama. He told this woman that to him, and to people in his generation, Barack Obama represented the same hope that Jack Kennedy had represented to that generation. This statement sent shivers down my spine. Here was a man in his late fifties not only comparing Barack Obama to John F. Kennedy, (no offense, but Mr. Obama is no John F. Kennedy) but he´s hanging his hopes and dreams on one individual who has an undetermined agenda, may have a questionable past, and has a collectivist voting record. I think this man´s faith is misplaced and the thought that there are millions more out there like him disturbs me.
Let´s start with the John F. Kennedy thing. I was born the year Mr. Kennedy was elected president and was only three when he was assassinated, so I personally remember nothing about his presidency. What I know about him I know from what I´ve read in history and what I´ve read I liked. One of the things I understand about JFK is that he was not a fan of the Federal Reserve or of central banks in general. He was a threat to them. Mr. Obama has not taken such a position. JFK also took a stand against secrecy and secret societies. Mr. Obama has done no such thing. Many have suggested that it was these facets of John F. Kennedy´s policies along with his brother´s stance against organized crime that got him assassinated. It appears to me that Mr. Obama is working with the establishment rather than against it. He may promise change, but all I hear is propaganda and happy speak spewing from his mouth and all I see is more of the same should he be elected. He offers no real change and any change that should come about from his promises will not necessarily be change for the better.
Yet this is nothing new. People have always expected their politicians to save them from some perceived injustice or threat ever since they ceded their own personal responsibility and thrust it upon some appointed leader. Even back in the days of the Roman Empire the leaders were considered gods. In fact, it was mandated that the people worship them as gods. It is frightening to consider that this is the direction our nation is taking. The United States of America was supposed to be a country based on the premise that all men are created equal, not the premise that there is one among us who is more perfect than the rest of us. It was based on the premise that each individual can best determine his own needs, not the premise that one amongst us knows what´s best for all. It was based on the idea that individuals and localities could best determine which policies suited the general area, not the idea that a centralized government or a single leader should force some utopian idea down the throats of all Americans in a one sized fits all construct.
In the days of the Roman Empire it was easy to keep the people worshipping the state. There were threats surrounding them. Armies of "barbarians" gathered on the borders of the empire and threatened the citizens of Rome. The "less civilized" peoples of the world were easy targets for the Roman leaders to demonize and attack. The people of the Roman Empire often looked to their military and their emperor for protection. It´s not so simple in today´s world. Boogie men are harder to come by. Sometimes they may need to be invented or a group may need to be labeled and marginalized to provide the necessary fear factor. In this way modern man will look to his leaders for protection, so that he may be "saved" from some perceived threat. In this way he will give up his liberties for a measure of security. In this way one may very well be conned into giving up his rightful property for an empty promise. As it was in Roman times, so it has become presently.
The emperors of Rome had other ways of controlling the masses besides the fear of attack from the outside and the promise of safety the military provided. They also knew the value of spectacle. They knew the benefit they could derive from public works. They also understood the concept of class warfare and knew very well how to play the people of one class against another. In this way they could keep the populace entertained and prevent them from realizing they were being fleeced. In this way they could keep groups of people focusing their ire on other groups rather than on the elite atop the economic pyramid. Modern politicians work in much the same way. They promise the fruits of other people´s labor to those considered less fortunate while the political class and their friends wallow in unearned wealth. They keep the focus of the people off those who are truly conspiring to manipulate them by delivering to them gifts stolen from the public treasury. With such promises it is no wonder the masses will look upon them with the adoration usually reserved for gods. In this way the masses give up their self reliance and become dependent on those in power to provide for them. As it was in the time of the Roman Empire, so it has become presently.
The mass media is only too happy to provide spectacle for the masses. With the promise that the huge media conglomerates will be able to keep their information monopolies they are just as happy to project a positive image of any politician they anoint as the chosen one. In such a manner they can decide which image to promote and which stories to bury so the common man perceives a diluted and manipulated picture of those who seek power. In this way those who own the media also own the politician. Even the vilest, most depraved human can worm his way into the hearts of millions so long as he says what the people want to hear and the media shows only what it wants the public to see. Like the emperor of old presiding over the gladiatorial games, the masses see only a strong, vibrant personage in the public figure of their future leader. It is a distorted view the masses see. It is a dangerous practice to put the faith of a populace in the hands of such a figure. Perhaps the old adage that some things never change applies here.
The founders of this nation gave us a gift. Though that gift is embodied in the Constitution of this land and the Declaration of Independence that helped birth our nation, those documents are not the gift I speak of. The founders of the United States of America, having been brought up in the age of enlightenment, understood the principles of liberty, personal responsibility and self reliance. They chose these principles as a template for building the nation. They understood the folly of giving too much power to one man, or to one class, and fought to prevent such a situation from happening to their progeny. The Constitution has been ignored and defiled for decades now, but the founders taught us what it means to be free. That is their gift, and hopefully their ultimate legacy.
We should regain our self reliance. We should stop depending on others to do so for us. We should take matters into our own hands. We should reclaim our liberty and our power. We should strip the federal government of its control of our lives and shrink it down to the point where we´re hardly aware it even exists. Decentralization is what´s needed now, not bigger government, more bureaucracy and failed wealth redistribution schemes. We need to stop believing that some messiah is going to come to our rescue and show us the way to some promised land. Each one of us needs to be his own savior. Each one of us needs to be the change he desires.
I heard a conversation take place the other day where one person was explaining to another how he felt about Barack Obama. He told this woman that to him, and to people in his generation, Barack Obama represented the same hope that Jack Kennedy had represented to that generation. This statement sent shivers down my spine. Here was a man in his late fifties not only comparing Barack Obama to John F. Kennedy, (no offense, but Mr. Obama is no John F. Kennedy) but he´s hanging his hopes and dreams on one individual who has an undetermined agenda, may have a questionable past, and has a collectivist voting record. I think this man´s faith is misplaced and the thought that there are millions more out there like him disturbs me.
Let´s start with the John F. Kennedy thing. I was born the year Mr. Kennedy was elected president and was only three when he was assassinated, so I personally remember nothing about his presidency. What I know about him I know from what I´ve read in history and what I´ve read I liked. One of the things I understand about JFK is that he was not a fan of the Federal Reserve or of central banks in general. He was a threat to them. Mr. Obama has not taken such a position. JFK also took a stand against secrecy and secret societies. Mr. Obama has done no such thing. Many have suggested that it was these facets of John F. Kennedy´s policies along with his brother´s stance against organized crime that got him assassinated. It appears to me that Mr. Obama is working with the establishment rather than against it. He may promise change, but all I hear is propaganda and happy speak spewing from his mouth and all I see is more of the same should he be elected. He offers no real change and any change that should come about from his promises will not necessarily be change for the better.
Yet this is nothing new. People have always expected their politicians to save them from some perceived injustice or threat ever since they ceded their own personal responsibility and thrust it upon some appointed leader. Even back in the days of the Roman Empire the leaders were considered gods. In fact, it was mandated that the people worship them as gods. It is frightening to consider that this is the direction our nation is taking. The United States of America was supposed to be a country based on the premise that all men are created equal, not the premise that there is one among us who is more perfect than the rest of us. It was based on the premise that each individual can best determine his own needs, not the premise that one amongst us knows what´s best for all. It was based on the idea that individuals and localities could best determine which policies suited the general area, not the idea that a centralized government or a single leader should force some utopian idea down the throats of all Americans in a one sized fits all construct.
In the days of the Roman Empire it was easy to keep the people worshipping the state. There were threats surrounding them. Armies of "barbarians" gathered on the borders of the empire and threatened the citizens of Rome. The "less civilized" peoples of the world were easy targets for the Roman leaders to demonize and attack. The people of the Roman Empire often looked to their military and their emperor for protection. It´s not so simple in today´s world. Boogie men are harder to come by. Sometimes they may need to be invented or a group may need to be labeled and marginalized to provide the necessary fear factor. In this way modern man will look to his leaders for protection, so that he may be "saved" from some perceived threat. In this way he will give up his liberties for a measure of security. In this way one may very well be conned into giving up his rightful property for an empty promise. As it was in Roman times, so it has become presently.
The emperors of Rome had other ways of controlling the masses besides the fear of attack from the outside and the promise of safety the military provided. They also knew the value of spectacle. They knew the benefit they could derive from public works. They also understood the concept of class warfare and knew very well how to play the people of one class against another. In this way they could keep the populace entertained and prevent them from realizing they were being fleeced. In this way they could keep groups of people focusing their ire on other groups rather than on the elite atop the economic pyramid. Modern politicians work in much the same way. They promise the fruits of other people´s labor to those considered less fortunate while the political class and their friends wallow in unearned wealth. They keep the focus of the people off those who are truly conspiring to manipulate them by delivering to them gifts stolen from the public treasury. With such promises it is no wonder the masses will look upon them with the adoration usually reserved for gods. In this way the masses give up their self reliance and become dependent on those in power to provide for them. As it was in the time of the Roman Empire, so it has become presently.
The mass media is only too happy to provide spectacle for the masses. With the promise that the huge media conglomerates will be able to keep their information monopolies they are just as happy to project a positive image of any politician they anoint as the chosen one. In such a manner they can decide which image to promote and which stories to bury so the common man perceives a diluted and manipulated picture of those who seek power. In this way those who own the media also own the politician. Even the vilest, most depraved human can worm his way into the hearts of millions so long as he says what the people want to hear and the media shows only what it wants the public to see. Like the emperor of old presiding over the gladiatorial games, the masses see only a strong, vibrant personage in the public figure of their future leader. It is a distorted view the masses see. It is a dangerous practice to put the faith of a populace in the hands of such a figure. Perhaps the old adage that some things never change applies here.
The founders of this nation gave us a gift. Though that gift is embodied in the Constitution of this land and the Declaration of Independence that helped birth our nation, those documents are not the gift I speak of. The founders of the United States of America, having been brought up in the age of enlightenment, understood the principles of liberty, personal responsibility and self reliance. They chose these principles as a template for building the nation. They understood the folly of giving too much power to one man, or to one class, and fought to prevent such a situation from happening to their progeny. The Constitution has been ignored and defiled for decades now, but the founders taught us what it means to be free. That is their gift, and hopefully their ultimate legacy.
We should regain our self reliance. We should stop depending on others to do so for us. We should take matters into our own hands. We should reclaim our liberty and our power. We should strip the federal government of its control of our lives and shrink it down to the point where we´re hardly aware it even exists. Decentralization is what´s needed now, not bigger government, more bureaucracy and failed wealth redistribution schemes. We need to stop believing that some messiah is going to come to our rescue and show us the way to some promised land. Each one of us needs to be his own savior. Each one of us needs to be the change he desires.
The Fear of Failure, the Failure to Allow Failure
This article was originally published on Aug 1st, 2008 at americanchronicle.com
When I was in the fourth grade, I had a friend named Andy. I walked to school with him every day. Back then we had neighborhood schools, so we were allowed to walk home at lunch time to enjoy a home made meal. People might say that times were different then, that people were different, but I don´t believe we were so much different than we are now. I don´t believe that the nature of human beings has changed, but perhaps the attitudes reflected in our society have.
Andy would pick me up in the mornings and we´d walk to school together, then at noon break we´d walk together as far as we could until we had to separate to go to our respective homes. After lunch, I often times walked back to school alone. Andy often failed to make it back to school on time. He was tardy quite often during the course of the year. As a result, when the final grades came out and we were passed to the next grade, Andy was held back. He failed to move on that year and would be forced to spend an extra year in school.
I doubt very much a similar circumstance could occur in today´s society. Even if it did, it is not likely one of today´s schools would fail Andy and hold him back. We as a society seem to have developed this fear of failure, as if to say that failure is bad and should not be tolerated. It is a fear that is unwarranted, in my opinion. Failure can and should be a good thing if one learns from it and deals with it accordingly. As it turns out, Andy was hardly ever tardy again after that year. The importance of punctuality was a lesson he learned well. To this day Andy is very conscientious of the time and is certain to keep any appointment he makes. Had he not been allowed to fail in the fourth grade, had he not learned his lesson back then, there is every possibility that he may have learned it in a far more significant way when he got older, such as by not finding employment or getting fired from a job. As it is, things turned out fine, which they usually do.
Today´s students are never held back. They hardly ever fail. This is because educators have become afraid that failing a child may hurt his self esteem. They seem to fear that the child will learn the wrong kind of lesson and turn into a psycho killer or something if one should fail. More likely the child will learn that the behavior or non behavior he engaged in will lead to failure and therefore change the undesired behavior. Unfortunately, this type of attitude has crept up from the educational system and leached into our nation´s economic system.
Recently in the news there´s been several bailout stories including Bear Stearns, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. There´s all kinds of fears surrounding what would happen should these institutions fail. Politicians and those in power seem to believe that should these institutions fail the world would come to an end, or at least the economy would come crashing down around us. Perhaps it would, but perhaps not. We will never know because these behemoths, these privately owned publicly traded companies, will be or have been bailed out using our money, the money the hard working middle class of this great nation have labored hard for. The extremely wealthy caretakers and the investors who should be lamenting their poor judgment will benefit while the working class foots the bill, with interest that could keep our progeny in debt for generations, all because of fear of failure.
Now, I don´t claim to know what would happen if these institution failed like some financial psychics might, but I can tell you some things that will or will not happen because of the bailout. New opportunities for small businesses to step in and take up the slack, for innovation to occur within the home mortgage industry and for competition to develop and thrive in that industry will not present itself. CEOs and others in charge of these huge companies will not have to be held accountable for their mistakes. They will not lose their fortunes because of their bad decisions. They will not learn from their mistakes and so they are likely to make the same mistakes again. They will learn that failure is no big deal and that they will be rewarded by their friends in Washington DC and given billions of stolen tax dollars to play with when they err. They will basically come to understand that when an institution becomes more or less a government sanctioned monopoly fiscal responsibility and common sense are unnecessary to keep the company afloat.
Failure should be a learning experience. It is what helps make a man or woman understand why things are done a certain way and not another. It helps people understand the importance of certain facets of human existence. When there is a system built up that fails to allow failure, than the system itself is doomed to eventually fail, for those lessons are not learned by the people on top and so they will continue to make the same mistakes that lead to failure. It is like the accountant who insists that two plus two is five. Until he learns that two plus two is four, he will continue to fail to keep accurate books and will one day have to learn reality the hard way. One day, the piper must be paid and I´m not so sure I want to be around when that day comes.
Failure should not be feared. It is a fear that stems from uncertainty of an unknown. Yet hasn´t mankind survived these kinds of situations before? Haven´t we shown our resilience and our resolution in the past? When a house burns down, certainly it´s a tragedy and we wonder what will happen next, but we keep on living and we rebuild. Whenever disaster strikes, we pull ourselves up and rebuild. The same can happen if our institutions fail. It might take some time to get over the initial shock and assess the situation, but eventually the industry would rebuild itself and life would move forward, perhaps even improve. In the case of the above mentioned institutions, fear won out and those in power refused to allow failure. Perhaps in the future we can prove ourselves a little bit braver.
When I was in the fourth grade, I had a friend named Andy. I walked to school with him every day. Back then we had neighborhood schools, so we were allowed to walk home at lunch time to enjoy a home made meal. People might say that times were different then, that people were different, but I don´t believe we were so much different than we are now. I don´t believe that the nature of human beings has changed, but perhaps the attitudes reflected in our society have.
Andy would pick me up in the mornings and we´d walk to school together, then at noon break we´d walk together as far as we could until we had to separate to go to our respective homes. After lunch, I often times walked back to school alone. Andy often failed to make it back to school on time. He was tardy quite often during the course of the year. As a result, when the final grades came out and we were passed to the next grade, Andy was held back. He failed to move on that year and would be forced to spend an extra year in school.
I doubt very much a similar circumstance could occur in today´s society. Even if it did, it is not likely one of today´s schools would fail Andy and hold him back. We as a society seem to have developed this fear of failure, as if to say that failure is bad and should not be tolerated. It is a fear that is unwarranted, in my opinion. Failure can and should be a good thing if one learns from it and deals with it accordingly. As it turns out, Andy was hardly ever tardy again after that year. The importance of punctuality was a lesson he learned well. To this day Andy is very conscientious of the time and is certain to keep any appointment he makes. Had he not been allowed to fail in the fourth grade, had he not learned his lesson back then, there is every possibility that he may have learned it in a far more significant way when he got older, such as by not finding employment or getting fired from a job. As it is, things turned out fine, which they usually do.
Today´s students are never held back. They hardly ever fail. This is because educators have become afraid that failing a child may hurt his self esteem. They seem to fear that the child will learn the wrong kind of lesson and turn into a psycho killer or something if one should fail. More likely the child will learn that the behavior or non behavior he engaged in will lead to failure and therefore change the undesired behavior. Unfortunately, this type of attitude has crept up from the educational system and leached into our nation´s economic system.
Recently in the news there´s been several bailout stories including Bear Stearns, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. There´s all kinds of fears surrounding what would happen should these institutions fail. Politicians and those in power seem to believe that should these institutions fail the world would come to an end, or at least the economy would come crashing down around us. Perhaps it would, but perhaps not. We will never know because these behemoths, these privately owned publicly traded companies, will be or have been bailed out using our money, the money the hard working middle class of this great nation have labored hard for. The extremely wealthy caretakers and the investors who should be lamenting their poor judgment will benefit while the working class foots the bill, with interest that could keep our progeny in debt for generations, all because of fear of failure.
Now, I don´t claim to know what would happen if these institution failed like some financial psychics might, but I can tell you some things that will or will not happen because of the bailout. New opportunities for small businesses to step in and take up the slack, for innovation to occur within the home mortgage industry and for competition to develop and thrive in that industry will not present itself. CEOs and others in charge of these huge companies will not have to be held accountable for their mistakes. They will not lose their fortunes because of their bad decisions. They will not learn from their mistakes and so they are likely to make the same mistakes again. They will learn that failure is no big deal and that they will be rewarded by their friends in Washington DC and given billions of stolen tax dollars to play with when they err. They will basically come to understand that when an institution becomes more or less a government sanctioned monopoly fiscal responsibility and common sense are unnecessary to keep the company afloat.
Failure should be a learning experience. It is what helps make a man or woman understand why things are done a certain way and not another. It helps people understand the importance of certain facets of human existence. When there is a system built up that fails to allow failure, than the system itself is doomed to eventually fail, for those lessons are not learned by the people on top and so they will continue to make the same mistakes that lead to failure. It is like the accountant who insists that two plus two is five. Until he learns that two plus two is four, he will continue to fail to keep accurate books and will one day have to learn reality the hard way. One day, the piper must be paid and I´m not so sure I want to be around when that day comes.
Failure should not be feared. It is a fear that stems from uncertainty of an unknown. Yet hasn´t mankind survived these kinds of situations before? Haven´t we shown our resilience and our resolution in the past? When a house burns down, certainly it´s a tragedy and we wonder what will happen next, but we keep on living and we rebuild. Whenever disaster strikes, we pull ourselves up and rebuild. The same can happen if our institutions fail. It might take some time to get over the initial shock and assess the situation, but eventually the industry would rebuild itself and life would move forward, perhaps even improve. In the case of the above mentioned institutions, fear won out and those in power refused to allow failure. Perhaps in the future we can prove ourselves a little bit braver.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
An Open Letter to My Alien Friends Visiting Earth
This article was originally published at uncoverthenews.com on July 25th, 2008
Hello and welcome to planet Earth.
I trust your trip was a pleasant one. To be honest I´ve always believed you existed. I know some of us here have a little problem believing in you guys, but I´ve always figured in such a big universe with so many planets that you guys had to exist. I heard Dr. Edgar Mitchell do a radio interview today where he confesses you guys do, in fact, exist. Here´s a man who walked on the moon, achieved a doctorate degree, and is a respected scientist who speaks out and says you exist. It´s my understanding that he´s been saying such things for years and yet I´ve never heard of the mainstream media reporting on it. I´m sure some skeptics are going to continue to insist that something else happened or was said. I´m fairly certain that some of the spinners will try to convince themselves and others that Dr. Edgar Mitchell is some kind of lunatic or didn´t mean what he said. A friend of mine already asked me if he was suffering from dementia. Someone else claimed he was suffering from space craziness or some such thing. I don't know about that and see no reason not to take him at his word.
I would personally like to know what planet you are from, where you are located and how you solved the speed of light problem, but hey, that´s just me. It would be nice to get to know you a little better, to find out what you´re all about. I certainly would like to be certain beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are real, like Dr. Mitchell does. I mean, after all, though the possibilities exist and the evidence is convincing, there´s nothing like being able to see, hear, touch, and smell to validate existence. Besides, Dr. Mitchell admitted to being involved with many government agencies, including intelligence agencies, and it´s difficult for me to believe anything coming out of the mouth of anyone involved with the government. I always look for the agenda. I don´t see an agenda right now with Dr. Mitchell´s statement, but that doesn´t necessarily mean one doesn´t exist.
Anyway, Dr. Mitchell said something during the interview which really concerns me. He claims that many governments have known about you guys for decades and you´ve been in contact with these people. It occurs to me that you may not have made the best decision here. Governments are not always the bastions of the best and the brightest of humanity. In fact, it is quite possible that the opposite is true. It is also quite possible that if you have only had dealings with politicians and high level bureaucrats, it would be understandable if you have a very low opinion of humanity. I would ask that you reconsider who you are dealing with. I would ask that you start searching out others who would be more representative of the hard working common man.
I believe that if you dealt with common folk rather than those who inhabit the halls of power, your impression of humanity might shift dramatically. You would find that not all humans have a lust for power, not all humans wish to control all others. Some of us understand the concept of freedom and wish to grant it to all humanity so that everyone can reach their full potential. You would find that most of us are honest. We mean what we say and we stick to our word. We don´t use language in such a way as to deceive. We are not all plotting and seeking ways to steal from someone to give to another while making sure our own fortunes and those of our friends are well served. Truly, there are many more of us that are principled than you might think.
Of course, whether or not you want to deal with us commoners depends much on what you are like and why you are here. If you are here to study our civilization and learn about us as individuals, then you should try to diversify your experiences with us as much as possible. Dealing only with politicians, high level military and intelligence officials, and other high level bureaucrats is not a good way to go about this. Perhaps you could come experience our socializing functions, how we interact, and see the wonderful products and services we offer each other to make our lives more fun and meaningful. Talk to us. Get to know us. I ´m certain these experiences would open your eyes, especially if you are judging humanity only from such a small, unrepresentative sample.
If you want to trade fairly with us and create an honest, peaceful trade and business relationship with us, again you have made a mistake dealing with government types. They have a tendency to want to regulate everything to make sure those who are rich remain so and those who have new ideas find it difficult to put their products or services on the open market. Indeed, there are some accusations that certain technologies have been hidden and sat upon for years so that those in power would remain in power. If you wish to trade with the mass of humanity, it is best to do so directly for those who seek control over humanity will do whatever is in their power to keep beneficial technologies that would challenge their financial empires away from us. They would also always try to get the upper hand to maximize their own worth while minimizing yours. I´m sure you´ll find the common man more open to find something we could trade that would benefit all parties involved.
If you have come to try to control or enslave us, then you have indeed picked the right allies. In that case, I wish you the best of luck, for I think you will find the common man is full of more surprises than you might realize. Humans are more resilient than you might think. We are more intelligent than some give us credit for. Ideas do not die among us and many of us will continue to seek self reliance no matter the situation. It just might be that we won´t be the easy pushovers you may think we are.
In any case, I invite you to make yourselves known to us if you are visiting. You may find we are more hospitable than you imagine. If you are not visiting and Dr. Mitchell´s statement is just some kind of disinformation, some kind of game being played for nefarious purpose, then this letter is for naught. In that case I say to those who spread such propaganda that one day we will have an open society, an open government which doesn´t keep secrets from its populace. One day, such deception will not be tolerated. When that day comes, our founding fathers´ dreams will have come true and their vision of freedom will have come to fruition.
Hello and welcome to planet Earth.
I trust your trip was a pleasant one. To be honest I´ve always believed you existed. I know some of us here have a little problem believing in you guys, but I´ve always figured in such a big universe with so many planets that you guys had to exist. I heard Dr. Edgar Mitchell do a radio interview today where he confesses you guys do, in fact, exist. Here´s a man who walked on the moon, achieved a doctorate degree, and is a respected scientist who speaks out and says you exist. It´s my understanding that he´s been saying such things for years and yet I´ve never heard of the mainstream media reporting on it. I´m sure some skeptics are going to continue to insist that something else happened or was said. I´m fairly certain that some of the spinners will try to convince themselves and others that Dr. Edgar Mitchell is some kind of lunatic or didn´t mean what he said. A friend of mine already asked me if he was suffering from dementia. Someone else claimed he was suffering from space craziness or some such thing. I don't know about that and see no reason not to take him at his word.
I would personally like to know what planet you are from, where you are located and how you solved the speed of light problem, but hey, that´s just me. It would be nice to get to know you a little better, to find out what you´re all about. I certainly would like to be certain beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are real, like Dr. Mitchell does. I mean, after all, though the possibilities exist and the evidence is convincing, there´s nothing like being able to see, hear, touch, and smell to validate existence. Besides, Dr. Mitchell admitted to being involved with many government agencies, including intelligence agencies, and it´s difficult for me to believe anything coming out of the mouth of anyone involved with the government. I always look for the agenda. I don´t see an agenda right now with Dr. Mitchell´s statement, but that doesn´t necessarily mean one doesn´t exist.
Anyway, Dr. Mitchell said something during the interview which really concerns me. He claims that many governments have known about you guys for decades and you´ve been in contact with these people. It occurs to me that you may not have made the best decision here. Governments are not always the bastions of the best and the brightest of humanity. In fact, it is quite possible that the opposite is true. It is also quite possible that if you have only had dealings with politicians and high level bureaucrats, it would be understandable if you have a very low opinion of humanity. I would ask that you reconsider who you are dealing with. I would ask that you start searching out others who would be more representative of the hard working common man.
I believe that if you dealt with common folk rather than those who inhabit the halls of power, your impression of humanity might shift dramatically. You would find that not all humans have a lust for power, not all humans wish to control all others. Some of us understand the concept of freedom and wish to grant it to all humanity so that everyone can reach their full potential. You would find that most of us are honest. We mean what we say and we stick to our word. We don´t use language in such a way as to deceive. We are not all plotting and seeking ways to steal from someone to give to another while making sure our own fortunes and those of our friends are well served. Truly, there are many more of us that are principled than you might think.
Of course, whether or not you want to deal with us commoners depends much on what you are like and why you are here. If you are here to study our civilization and learn about us as individuals, then you should try to diversify your experiences with us as much as possible. Dealing only with politicians, high level military and intelligence officials, and other high level bureaucrats is not a good way to go about this. Perhaps you could come experience our socializing functions, how we interact, and see the wonderful products and services we offer each other to make our lives more fun and meaningful. Talk to us. Get to know us. I ´m certain these experiences would open your eyes, especially if you are judging humanity only from such a small, unrepresentative sample.
If you want to trade fairly with us and create an honest, peaceful trade and business relationship with us, again you have made a mistake dealing with government types. They have a tendency to want to regulate everything to make sure those who are rich remain so and those who have new ideas find it difficult to put their products or services on the open market. Indeed, there are some accusations that certain technologies have been hidden and sat upon for years so that those in power would remain in power. If you wish to trade with the mass of humanity, it is best to do so directly for those who seek control over humanity will do whatever is in their power to keep beneficial technologies that would challenge their financial empires away from us. They would also always try to get the upper hand to maximize their own worth while minimizing yours. I´m sure you´ll find the common man more open to find something we could trade that would benefit all parties involved.
If you have come to try to control or enslave us, then you have indeed picked the right allies. In that case, I wish you the best of luck, for I think you will find the common man is full of more surprises than you might realize. Humans are more resilient than you might think. We are more intelligent than some give us credit for. Ideas do not die among us and many of us will continue to seek self reliance no matter the situation. It just might be that we won´t be the easy pushovers you may think we are.
In any case, I invite you to make yourselves known to us if you are visiting. You may find we are more hospitable than you imagine. If you are not visiting and Dr. Mitchell´s statement is just some kind of disinformation, some kind of game being played for nefarious purpose, then this letter is for naught. In that case I say to those who spread such propaganda that one day we will have an open society, an open government which doesn´t keep secrets from its populace. One day, such deception will not be tolerated. When that day comes, our founding fathers´ dreams will have come true and their vision of freedom will have come to fruition.
Revolution Ron Paul Style, the Fun is Just Beginning
This article was originally published at uncoverthenews.com on July 20th, 2008
As anyone who has been paying attention to the Ron Paul r3VOLution knows, the movement was never really about getting Ron Paul elected president – although that certainly should have happened considering the other (cough) candidates and it would have been the icing on the cake – it was about getting the message of freedom back into the American consciousness. His was a campaign about getting rid of the Fed and returning to honest money. His was a campaign about dismantling the IRS, eliminating the income tax and allowing the people to keep the fruits of their labor. It was a campaign about ending not only the war in Iraq, but American involvement in all wars. It was about bringing home not only the men fighting and dying on foreign battlefields, but those conducting their everyday lives on bases even in peaceful countries where our imperial presence is maintained. It was about paring down the centralized federal government to a more manageable size and freeing ourselves from its omnipresence. Basically, it was about changing the paradigm we live in and ridding ourselves of our dependency on government.
It is difficult, however, to build a structure upside down. A pyramid with its point planted firmly in the ground and its base floating in the air high above is destined to fall over one day. Politics in a republic can follow a similar fate. The head of government can accomplish nothing if his base is spread out far above him trying to outflank him to maintain power. In order for the structure to maintain its stability, it must be built from the bottom up. It is therefore necessary to start electing freedom loving politicians to local offices and as representatives. These are the slabs of stone we will be able to build upon as we structure our political system to support smaller government of an individual mindset rather than the collectivist, socialist style system of authoritarian government we have today. Anyone who understands this message of liberty, is principled and can afford to do so should run for local office and try to start by reducing the size of local government. These people can do something such as signing a smaller government pledge in order to show their sincerity.
It may take a while for a peaceful revolution like this to bear fruit, but it would be well worth it. These principles I write about were actually abandoned long ago by the politicos of this country. Many people may feel that we have been a free nation all along when in reality the flaws and injustices of the system have been evident for some decades. Only now are they getting so pervasive that so many are beginning to realize what has been going on. Many people would like to believe that the prosperity we´ve seen over the latter half of the twentieth century was the product of good governance when it reality it was the product of a much less regulated marketplace and a much more voluntary society. The coming crises many see coming are the result of government regulation and policies and the fact that we have yet to pay back the massive debt that has kept this nation afloat for so long. Big government will lead to big collapse.
Such a revolution would be well worth it because it would plant the seeds and knowledge of the liberty ideal in the minds of those who live through it, making it harder for such tyranny as we have now to once again take hold. It would be easy for one to give up, to look at the opposition and believe they are too powerful, too many, and too entrenched to defeat. What could such a small number do against what appears to be so many allied with such a powerful elite? But the numbers game is disingenuous. The masses are easy to sway and once they begin to realize what is to be gained in a free society and how they will benefit they should come around. They will work harder and be more productive when they are working for themselves. A small number of dedicated individuals will indeed have a good chance of defeating the establishment as the message spreads. Why? Mostly because such a group stands upon the moral high ground.
Ours is a peaceful revolution. I realize that this has been tried before and not much has come from it, so what makes this one so different? It is not hard these days to see the violence inherent in the system. The people are starting to tear down the veneer of legitimacy the government has painted over itself for the past few decades. They are beginning to recognize the coercive and violent nature of the gang that controls the streets of Washington DC. They are beginning to understand that these people have been stealing from them and giving their money to a powerful elite for a long time now. They are looking to their roots and realizing that the founding fathers saw this possibility and provided for it when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Many are starting to demand that government no longer infringe upon their rights, including the right to keep the fruits of their labor. When they do so, they are arrested, charged with a victimless crime, and then thrown into a cold cell for a number a years. Society suffers from such occurrences. These people have been removed from our lives and their productivity removed from the marketplace. This is not the way to run a civil society.
Ron Paul and his supporters have shown us a better way. They have bravely stood up to the establishment where others have taken a safer route and gone along with the propaganda. We can allow for greater personal freedom and responsibility. We can reinstate honest money into the system. We can remove our troops from all foreign lands. We can interact internationally on a peaceful base of trade and diplomacy without threatening and flexing our military muscle. Such an America would be good for us and good for the world. Now is not the time to give up and turn your back on the movement. Even though none of the presidential candidates are discussing such issues with any kind of seriousness, electing instead to discuss policies that have already failed, we have not yet lost. We can make the change happen from the bottom up. Talk about these issues to your friends and neighbors. Elect local officials who believe in freedom. If one is not running, than run yourself. Elect congressmen who support smaller government. Most importantly, get involved in whatever way works best for you.
We may have lost a battle, but we are a long way from losing a war. Our socialist government did not establish itself overnight, certainly one wouldn´t expect the individualist government to do so. We can turn this thing around, but it will take some effort. Provide a stronger base and we will build upon it a better structure that will last into the millennia, a structure our progeny can continue to prosper in. This is the nature of the revolution, Ron Paul style.
As anyone who has been paying attention to the Ron Paul r3VOLution knows, the movement was never really about getting Ron Paul elected president – although that certainly should have happened considering the other (cough) candidates and it would have been the icing on the cake – it was about getting the message of freedom back into the American consciousness. His was a campaign about getting rid of the Fed and returning to honest money. His was a campaign about dismantling the IRS, eliminating the income tax and allowing the people to keep the fruits of their labor. It was a campaign about ending not only the war in Iraq, but American involvement in all wars. It was about bringing home not only the men fighting and dying on foreign battlefields, but those conducting their everyday lives on bases even in peaceful countries where our imperial presence is maintained. It was about paring down the centralized federal government to a more manageable size and freeing ourselves from its omnipresence. Basically, it was about changing the paradigm we live in and ridding ourselves of our dependency on government.
It is difficult, however, to build a structure upside down. A pyramid with its point planted firmly in the ground and its base floating in the air high above is destined to fall over one day. Politics in a republic can follow a similar fate. The head of government can accomplish nothing if his base is spread out far above him trying to outflank him to maintain power. In order for the structure to maintain its stability, it must be built from the bottom up. It is therefore necessary to start electing freedom loving politicians to local offices and as representatives. These are the slabs of stone we will be able to build upon as we structure our political system to support smaller government of an individual mindset rather than the collectivist, socialist style system of authoritarian government we have today. Anyone who understands this message of liberty, is principled and can afford to do so should run for local office and try to start by reducing the size of local government. These people can do something such as signing a smaller government pledge in order to show their sincerity.
It may take a while for a peaceful revolution like this to bear fruit, but it would be well worth it. These principles I write about were actually abandoned long ago by the politicos of this country. Many people may feel that we have been a free nation all along when in reality the flaws and injustices of the system have been evident for some decades. Only now are they getting so pervasive that so many are beginning to realize what has been going on. Many people would like to believe that the prosperity we´ve seen over the latter half of the twentieth century was the product of good governance when it reality it was the product of a much less regulated marketplace and a much more voluntary society. The coming crises many see coming are the result of government regulation and policies and the fact that we have yet to pay back the massive debt that has kept this nation afloat for so long. Big government will lead to big collapse.
Such a revolution would be well worth it because it would plant the seeds and knowledge of the liberty ideal in the minds of those who live through it, making it harder for such tyranny as we have now to once again take hold. It would be easy for one to give up, to look at the opposition and believe they are too powerful, too many, and too entrenched to defeat. What could such a small number do against what appears to be so many allied with such a powerful elite? But the numbers game is disingenuous. The masses are easy to sway and once they begin to realize what is to be gained in a free society and how they will benefit they should come around. They will work harder and be more productive when they are working for themselves. A small number of dedicated individuals will indeed have a good chance of defeating the establishment as the message spreads. Why? Mostly because such a group stands upon the moral high ground.
Ours is a peaceful revolution. I realize that this has been tried before and not much has come from it, so what makes this one so different? It is not hard these days to see the violence inherent in the system. The people are starting to tear down the veneer of legitimacy the government has painted over itself for the past few decades. They are beginning to recognize the coercive and violent nature of the gang that controls the streets of Washington DC. They are beginning to understand that these people have been stealing from them and giving their money to a powerful elite for a long time now. They are looking to their roots and realizing that the founding fathers saw this possibility and provided for it when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Many are starting to demand that government no longer infringe upon their rights, including the right to keep the fruits of their labor. When they do so, they are arrested, charged with a victimless crime, and then thrown into a cold cell for a number a years. Society suffers from such occurrences. These people have been removed from our lives and their productivity removed from the marketplace. This is not the way to run a civil society.
Ron Paul and his supporters have shown us a better way. They have bravely stood up to the establishment where others have taken a safer route and gone along with the propaganda. We can allow for greater personal freedom and responsibility. We can reinstate honest money into the system. We can remove our troops from all foreign lands. We can interact internationally on a peaceful base of trade and diplomacy without threatening and flexing our military muscle. Such an America would be good for us and good for the world. Now is not the time to give up and turn your back on the movement. Even though none of the presidential candidates are discussing such issues with any kind of seriousness, electing instead to discuss policies that have already failed, we have not yet lost. We can make the change happen from the bottom up. Talk about these issues to your friends and neighbors. Elect local officials who believe in freedom. If one is not running, than run yourself. Elect congressmen who support smaller government. Most importantly, get involved in whatever way works best for you.
We may have lost a battle, but we are a long way from losing a war. Our socialist government did not establish itself overnight, certainly one wouldn´t expect the individualist government to do so. We can turn this thing around, but it will take some effort. Provide a stronger base and we will build upon it a better structure that will last into the millennia, a structure our progeny can continue to prosper in. This is the nature of the revolution, Ron Paul style.
I Refuse to Abandon My Freedom Loving Friends in the United States of America
This article was originally published at uncoverthenews.com on July 20th, 2008
Recently, I wrote an article explaining the tyranny of seatbelt laws and pointing out some basic flaws in the system that make me question of the reality of our supposed freedom in this nation. In my opinion, we are no longer a free people and instead have become, for the most part, a nation of sheep who are unwilling to stand up for liberty and individual rights and instead have decided to go along in order to get along. I also believe, however, that more and more people are beginning to realize the folly of this position and are starting to find the intestinal fortitude to stand up to those people who continue to insist that they have authority to rule over our lives. I believe their stories need to be told and support garnered for their struggles and so I wrote about Jon fighting the seatbelt laws.
Sometimes these stories of mine get quite a bit of attention. Such was the case with this story. As usual, it was blogged in a number of places and the authoritarian statists posted their rants praising the laws and the greatness and wisdom of the state. Many of them made fun of Jon and stooped to calling me names, questioning my sanity and suggesting I was somehow an inferior human being. None of this bothers me as I consider the source and I rise above such juvenile practices. I did, however, see one blog post that caught my attention not because of what he had to say about the content of my article, which was irrelevant as he had obviously missed the point, but because of how he decided to end his post. He decided to use the tired old argument used by many government apologists, authoritarians, statists, and other collectivists when they become unable to carry on a reasonable discourse that if one doesn´t like the laws, he should leave the country. America, love it or leave it, as the old saying goes. I feel the time has come for me to share my opinion on this type of thinking.
When I was a kid, I was taught that America was the place the oppressed and downtrodden of the world came. These were the dregs of society, the people no one else wanted populating their world. I often wondered why these people had abandoned their people, why they hadn´t stayed in their homeland and fought for their rights. I was certain even back then that if enough of them had stood up for their rights that they could have overthrown their oppressors and gained their freedom. Of course, I realize now that things are not so simple. The poor classes hardly had the wherewithal back then to rise up and throw off the yoke of tyrannical government, and anyone with the money, the cunning or the willingness to work hard for a time who managed to make it to America were welcomed with opened arms and American society was better off for it as we built a powerful nation on the backs of willing, hard working individuals. It is those individuals that built America and made it a great nation, not the government. These pioneers came to a new world and cared not what the governments of Europe or any centralized authority had to say, they did things their own way and hardly ever asked for help from authorities.
Now a few people would demand obedience from everyone. In their minds, anyone who would disagree with them should be dismissed from society. They seem afraid to listen to them, fearful that their points may be poignant and valid. It reminds me somewhat of a child who sticks his fingers in his ears and sings "La, la, la, la, la" so that he doesn´t have to hear something someone else is saying when he knows they´re right. They feel that if the messenger goes away, if those who realize the truth no longer live amongst them, than their problems will be solved and the message will fade to oblivion. But things don´t work that way. Those who worship at the altar of the state might think that dismissing those who believe in the power and rights of the individual will lead to the state providing welfare and security for them, but at what cost? As the old saying goes, what good is it to gain the world at the cost of one´s soul? Besides, you´ll most likely find that when all is said and done, you will have no security, no welfare, and no freedom.
This is the message that has been passed down to us through the ages. It was a message that was realized by civilizations as ancient as the Greeks and perhaps by civilizations even further back. The message is that freedom works, that people don´t need to be ruled over in a tyrannical fashion, that they can do business, socialize, and interact with each other on a voluntary basis and they don´t need some higher power stealing their money and telling them how to run their lives. We have finally evolved to the point where we can truly understand the truth and the importance of this message. We have finally found a technology that makes it easy to disseminate this message to the vast majority of the populace. We have finally found a place, the land called America, where that message can settle into the hearts of millions, grow and maybe someday bear fruit. I´ll be damned if I am going to abandon such a place and such a time because a few collectivists still want to try to convince the majority of people that the state knows better how to run their lives than they do.
I will not abandon my freedom loving friends who wish to take their lives back. Did Martin Luther King, Jr. abandon his people when he saw injustice in the world? No. He stayed in the country of his birth and spoke out against it. Did Thomas Jefferson or George Washington abandon their people when they saw the tyranny of a king cracking down on their friends and neighbors? No. They put their lives and fortunes on the line, fought against the ancient power of royalty, and forged a new nation with the blood of free men. These were true patriots, dedicated to the principle of honoring other men´s freedom and respecting the choices of their neighbors. They were not those who would rule over others and tell them how to behave. They would not try to legislate safety or tax the free man on his labor. They were individualist, not collectivists, and they understood the wisdom in letting individuals decide how best to live their lives and spend their money.
I will not abandon those who see the inherent wrong in a system that insists on making behaviors into crimes rather than prosecuting only those who have victimized others. I will not abandon those who see the truth of coerced taxation, that it is nothing more than a form of legalized slavery. I will continue to live in the country of my birth, the country that supposedly embodies the principles of freedom and liberty, and use my keyboard as best I can to battle tyranny. Unlike those who back in the early history decided to abandon their countries to come to a foreign land offering freedom, I will stay with the people I grew up with and try as best I can to convince those who need convincing that freedom of the individual and respect for their natural rights are the best options, not obedience to the state. And for anyone who wants to remain obedient to some power, rest assured that in a free market where such demand exists someone will offer the service of watching over you, providing security and welfare, for a fee. You will be free to contract such services and will not have to worry about forcing everyone else to contract with the company that best suits you.
Another disturbing comment I´ve seen making its way across the blogosphere lately is the comment that we should stop "whining", that we should just shut up and deal with the problems government has created. This kind of statement is the cousin to the "if you don´t like it than leave" mentality. It is not whining to point out an inherent wrong in the system. It is not whining when one attempts to right the wrong. If no one complains, than how´s anyone supposed to know there is a problem? If no one says anything, than those in power will continue to fleece the sheep more and more, to see how far the sheep can be pushed, how closely they can be shaved. Well, I for one have had enough. I will continue to speak out against injustice, against big brother, against the intrusions on not only my privacy, but on everyone´s, and against the coercive nature of the state. I will continue to speak out as long as someone, somewhere is forced to pay for services he doesn´t necessarily need, won´t necessarily use, and doesn´t necessarily want to pay for. I will continue to speak out against unjust laws so long as the powers that be continue to kidnap my friends, railroad them in the court system, steal their money and falsely imprison them for "crimes" that have no victim. I will not shut up and I will not abandon my freedom loving friends. If you don´t like it, than you have the right to not read my articles and I will respect that right. If you don´t like it, then go ahead and speak against the message of freedom and defend the tyrannical state. You have every right to do so and I respect that right. Unlike the state I will not infringe upon your rights, even though I never made the promise or set it down in writing as they did. Unlike most of those individuals who run the state, I am a man of my word.
Recently, I wrote an article explaining the tyranny of seatbelt laws and pointing out some basic flaws in the system that make me question of the reality of our supposed freedom in this nation. In my opinion, we are no longer a free people and instead have become, for the most part, a nation of sheep who are unwilling to stand up for liberty and individual rights and instead have decided to go along in order to get along. I also believe, however, that more and more people are beginning to realize the folly of this position and are starting to find the intestinal fortitude to stand up to those people who continue to insist that they have authority to rule over our lives. I believe their stories need to be told and support garnered for their struggles and so I wrote about Jon fighting the seatbelt laws.
Sometimes these stories of mine get quite a bit of attention. Such was the case with this story. As usual, it was blogged in a number of places and the authoritarian statists posted their rants praising the laws and the greatness and wisdom of the state. Many of them made fun of Jon and stooped to calling me names, questioning my sanity and suggesting I was somehow an inferior human being. None of this bothers me as I consider the source and I rise above such juvenile practices. I did, however, see one blog post that caught my attention not because of what he had to say about the content of my article, which was irrelevant as he had obviously missed the point, but because of how he decided to end his post. He decided to use the tired old argument used by many government apologists, authoritarians, statists, and other collectivists when they become unable to carry on a reasonable discourse that if one doesn´t like the laws, he should leave the country. America, love it or leave it, as the old saying goes. I feel the time has come for me to share my opinion on this type of thinking.
When I was a kid, I was taught that America was the place the oppressed and downtrodden of the world came. These were the dregs of society, the people no one else wanted populating their world. I often wondered why these people had abandoned their people, why they hadn´t stayed in their homeland and fought for their rights. I was certain even back then that if enough of them had stood up for their rights that they could have overthrown their oppressors and gained their freedom. Of course, I realize now that things are not so simple. The poor classes hardly had the wherewithal back then to rise up and throw off the yoke of tyrannical government, and anyone with the money, the cunning or the willingness to work hard for a time who managed to make it to America were welcomed with opened arms and American society was better off for it as we built a powerful nation on the backs of willing, hard working individuals. It is those individuals that built America and made it a great nation, not the government. These pioneers came to a new world and cared not what the governments of Europe or any centralized authority had to say, they did things their own way and hardly ever asked for help from authorities.
Now a few people would demand obedience from everyone. In their minds, anyone who would disagree with them should be dismissed from society. They seem afraid to listen to them, fearful that their points may be poignant and valid. It reminds me somewhat of a child who sticks his fingers in his ears and sings "La, la, la, la, la" so that he doesn´t have to hear something someone else is saying when he knows they´re right. They feel that if the messenger goes away, if those who realize the truth no longer live amongst them, than their problems will be solved and the message will fade to oblivion. But things don´t work that way. Those who worship at the altar of the state might think that dismissing those who believe in the power and rights of the individual will lead to the state providing welfare and security for them, but at what cost? As the old saying goes, what good is it to gain the world at the cost of one´s soul? Besides, you´ll most likely find that when all is said and done, you will have no security, no welfare, and no freedom.
This is the message that has been passed down to us through the ages. It was a message that was realized by civilizations as ancient as the Greeks and perhaps by civilizations even further back. The message is that freedom works, that people don´t need to be ruled over in a tyrannical fashion, that they can do business, socialize, and interact with each other on a voluntary basis and they don´t need some higher power stealing their money and telling them how to run their lives. We have finally evolved to the point where we can truly understand the truth and the importance of this message. We have finally found a technology that makes it easy to disseminate this message to the vast majority of the populace. We have finally found a place, the land called America, where that message can settle into the hearts of millions, grow and maybe someday bear fruit. I´ll be damned if I am going to abandon such a place and such a time because a few collectivists still want to try to convince the majority of people that the state knows better how to run their lives than they do.
I will not abandon my freedom loving friends who wish to take their lives back. Did Martin Luther King, Jr. abandon his people when he saw injustice in the world? No. He stayed in the country of his birth and spoke out against it. Did Thomas Jefferson or George Washington abandon their people when they saw the tyranny of a king cracking down on their friends and neighbors? No. They put their lives and fortunes on the line, fought against the ancient power of royalty, and forged a new nation with the blood of free men. These were true patriots, dedicated to the principle of honoring other men´s freedom and respecting the choices of their neighbors. They were not those who would rule over others and tell them how to behave. They would not try to legislate safety or tax the free man on his labor. They were individualist, not collectivists, and they understood the wisdom in letting individuals decide how best to live their lives and spend their money.
I will not abandon those who see the inherent wrong in a system that insists on making behaviors into crimes rather than prosecuting only those who have victimized others. I will not abandon those who see the truth of coerced taxation, that it is nothing more than a form of legalized slavery. I will continue to live in the country of my birth, the country that supposedly embodies the principles of freedom and liberty, and use my keyboard as best I can to battle tyranny. Unlike those who back in the early history decided to abandon their countries to come to a foreign land offering freedom, I will stay with the people I grew up with and try as best I can to convince those who need convincing that freedom of the individual and respect for their natural rights are the best options, not obedience to the state. And for anyone who wants to remain obedient to some power, rest assured that in a free market where such demand exists someone will offer the service of watching over you, providing security and welfare, for a fee. You will be free to contract such services and will not have to worry about forcing everyone else to contract with the company that best suits you.
Another disturbing comment I´ve seen making its way across the blogosphere lately is the comment that we should stop "whining", that we should just shut up and deal with the problems government has created. This kind of statement is the cousin to the "if you don´t like it than leave" mentality. It is not whining to point out an inherent wrong in the system. It is not whining when one attempts to right the wrong. If no one complains, than how´s anyone supposed to know there is a problem? If no one says anything, than those in power will continue to fleece the sheep more and more, to see how far the sheep can be pushed, how closely they can be shaved. Well, I for one have had enough. I will continue to speak out against injustice, against big brother, against the intrusions on not only my privacy, but on everyone´s, and against the coercive nature of the state. I will continue to speak out as long as someone, somewhere is forced to pay for services he doesn´t necessarily need, won´t necessarily use, and doesn´t necessarily want to pay for. I will continue to speak out against unjust laws so long as the powers that be continue to kidnap my friends, railroad them in the court system, steal their money and falsely imprison them for "crimes" that have no victim. I will not shut up and I will not abandon my freedom loving friends. If you don´t like it, than you have the right to not read my articles and I will respect that right. If you don´t like it, then go ahead and speak against the message of freedom and defend the tyrannical state. You have every right to do so and I respect that right. Unlike the state I will not infringe upon your rights, even though I never made the promise or set it down in writing as they did. Unlike most of those individuals who run the state, I am a man of my word.
An Open Response to DoJ Antitrust Div. Explaining Sean Dix´s Antitrust Accusations
This article was originally published at uncoverthenews.com on July 20th, 2008
A couple days ago I read an article by Mary Sparrowdancer explaining the predicament of one Sean Dix, the inventor of a simple yet revolutionary product for flossing teeth. Ms. Sparrowdancer struck me as a thoughtful, intelligent, trustworthy individual and a principled reporter. She did an excellent job of telling Mr. Sean Dix´s story and provided many facts I´m sure she verified and included information about witnesses. The story she told was very disturbing, for it involved people and companies who many Americans would trust implicitly and would believe incapable of such malicious acts. The story I´m referring to can be found here: Floss Story
Toward the end of the article Ms. Sparrowdancer asks the reader to send an email to the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice asking them to provide justice to Mr. Dix. It is the only thing Sean Dix desires. After everything he went through, that seems to be a pretty magnanimous request. I felt it was only fair and followed the instructions provided to me, keeping my letter to the DoJ simple and providing a link to Ms. Mary Sparrowdancer´s well written story. To my surprise, the DoJ actually emailed me back. Here is a copy of the email:
"Thank you for contacting the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Citizen Complaint Center has reviewed your complaint, and though we understand your concerns, we have determined that the information provided does not warrant further review by the Division at this time. We have your information on file and should the legal staff need further information, they may contact you in the future.
We appreciate your interest in the enforcement of the federal antitrust laws and we wish you the best in resolving your concerns.
Sincerely,
Citizen Complaint Center
Antitrust Division
Department of Justice"
So, they understand my concerns, yet they feel the information does not require further review? How can that be? It makes me wonder if they actually read the article I sent them a link to. If they understand my concern, they certainly should understand that this matter needs to be investigated. They seem to have forgotten the purpose for which they were created. The public puts trust in certain institutions and businesses and they expect certain government entities to make sure those institutions and businesses do not become too powerful. The Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice would certainly qualify as one such government entity. Those of us who would like to see this matter investigated are simply asking you to do your job.
The information provided does not warrant further review by the division at this time? What would warrant further review? Are you not supposed to investigate practices that unfairly limit competition? Need I remind you that back in the early 1900s Standard Oil and John D. Rockefeller were investigated for using the government sanctioned railroad monopolies unfairly to stifle his competition? Need I remind you that it was by virtue of his millions and his conniving with others of great means that he was able to cut out the hard working small business men and prevent them from innovating to better serve consumers? It seems to me that something very similar has happened here.
These accusations need to be investigated and either verified or proven false. If CNN was paid off by Johnson and Johnson to misrepresent Mr. Dix´s FlossRings or did so to protect one of their largest advertisers from competition with the potential to take millions of dollars in market share, that certainly "warrants" further review by the division. The man just wants his day in court to try to prove his allegations, so why not let him have it? Is there something about this case that frightens you?
Perhaps lying, providing misinformation to the public, and misrepresentation with malicious intent don´t concern you. After all, the DoJ is a monopoly in itself. Where else can one go to seek justice in such a matter? You can certainly pick and chose which antitrust "crimes" you´d like to investigate and which you wouldn´t. Some small, little businessman whose life was ruined by two huge conglomerates colluding with each other, who cares about that? Of course if it was some small business accusing another small business, or some such thing, you´d probably jump all over that. It wouldn´t be so tough to prosecute such a case. Perhaps it wouldn´t be so hard if it wasn´t CNN, the propaganda arm of the government, that was the culprit here.
Although I´d like to, I won´t stoop to name calling here. I´m sure the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice thinks it has better things to do than investigate the accusations of one Sean Dix who has a legitimate grievance and the documentation to prove it. But if you just don´t want to do your job, than just say so. Prove that the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice is just as worthless as any other government agency. Meanwhile, perhaps the consumers can help the market decide what floss is best for them. Start buying Dix´s FlossRings and let the demand for them grow. Go to CVS, Walgreen´s, Walmart, Target, or any local drugstore and start asking them to carry FlossRings. Tell your friends about how FlossRings would have offered the only sterilized floss on the market if not for CNN´s hit piece. Let them know the government is helping to keep a superior product from reaching consumers. If your government refuses to do its job, perhaps the consumers can provide justice for Sean Dix and gain a superior product in the process.
A couple days ago I read an article by Mary Sparrowdancer explaining the predicament of one Sean Dix, the inventor of a simple yet revolutionary product for flossing teeth. Ms. Sparrowdancer struck me as a thoughtful, intelligent, trustworthy individual and a principled reporter. She did an excellent job of telling Mr. Sean Dix´s story and provided many facts I´m sure she verified and included information about witnesses. The story she told was very disturbing, for it involved people and companies who many Americans would trust implicitly and would believe incapable of such malicious acts. The story I´m referring to can be found here: Floss Story
Toward the end of the article Ms. Sparrowdancer asks the reader to send an email to the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice asking them to provide justice to Mr. Dix. It is the only thing Sean Dix desires. After everything he went through, that seems to be a pretty magnanimous request. I felt it was only fair and followed the instructions provided to me, keeping my letter to the DoJ simple and providing a link to Ms. Mary Sparrowdancer´s well written story. To my surprise, the DoJ actually emailed me back. Here is a copy of the email:
"Thank you for contacting the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Citizen Complaint Center has reviewed your complaint, and though we understand your concerns, we have determined that the information provided does not warrant further review by the Division at this time. We have your information on file and should the legal staff need further information, they may contact you in the future.
We appreciate your interest in the enforcement of the federal antitrust laws and we wish you the best in resolving your concerns.
Sincerely,
Citizen Complaint Center
Antitrust Division
Department of Justice"
So, they understand my concerns, yet they feel the information does not require further review? How can that be? It makes me wonder if they actually read the article I sent them a link to. If they understand my concern, they certainly should understand that this matter needs to be investigated. They seem to have forgotten the purpose for which they were created. The public puts trust in certain institutions and businesses and they expect certain government entities to make sure those institutions and businesses do not become too powerful. The Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice would certainly qualify as one such government entity. Those of us who would like to see this matter investigated are simply asking you to do your job.
The information provided does not warrant further review by the division at this time? What would warrant further review? Are you not supposed to investigate practices that unfairly limit competition? Need I remind you that back in the early 1900s Standard Oil and John D. Rockefeller were investigated for using the government sanctioned railroad monopolies unfairly to stifle his competition? Need I remind you that it was by virtue of his millions and his conniving with others of great means that he was able to cut out the hard working small business men and prevent them from innovating to better serve consumers? It seems to me that something very similar has happened here.
These accusations need to be investigated and either verified or proven false. If CNN was paid off by Johnson and Johnson to misrepresent Mr. Dix´s FlossRings or did so to protect one of their largest advertisers from competition with the potential to take millions of dollars in market share, that certainly "warrants" further review by the division. The man just wants his day in court to try to prove his allegations, so why not let him have it? Is there something about this case that frightens you?
Perhaps lying, providing misinformation to the public, and misrepresentation with malicious intent don´t concern you. After all, the DoJ is a monopoly in itself. Where else can one go to seek justice in such a matter? You can certainly pick and chose which antitrust "crimes" you´d like to investigate and which you wouldn´t. Some small, little businessman whose life was ruined by two huge conglomerates colluding with each other, who cares about that? Of course if it was some small business accusing another small business, or some such thing, you´d probably jump all over that. It wouldn´t be so tough to prosecute such a case. Perhaps it wouldn´t be so hard if it wasn´t CNN, the propaganda arm of the government, that was the culprit here.
Although I´d like to, I won´t stoop to name calling here. I´m sure the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice thinks it has better things to do than investigate the accusations of one Sean Dix who has a legitimate grievance and the documentation to prove it. But if you just don´t want to do your job, than just say so. Prove that the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice is just as worthless as any other government agency. Meanwhile, perhaps the consumers can help the market decide what floss is best for them. Start buying Dix´s FlossRings and let the demand for them grow. Go to CVS, Walgreen´s, Walmart, Target, or any local drugstore and start asking them to carry FlossRings. Tell your friends about how FlossRings would have offered the only sterilized floss on the market if not for CNN´s hit piece. Let them know the government is helping to keep a superior product from reaching consumers. If your government refuses to do its job, perhaps the consumers can provide justice for Sean Dix and gain a superior product in the process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)