Lost Souls in the Cult of State Worship

I have a couple of friends who are true believers. They are older gentlemen, otherwise very intelligent and quite capable of making their own decisions and running their own lives, but for some reason they have chosen to put their faith in a place where perhaps it doesn’t belong.

As good cult members should, they will at times try to convince me of their beliefs. They want me to join them in their delusional ways so we can have nice, quiet conversations about how great their belief system is. Of course when this happens I usually shoot back at them with a couple of obvious truths about the corruption of the entire system. I happen to know they agree with me on these truths and that usually ends the discussion. It seems they don’t want to question and shake up their belief system too much for fear that it might crumble to dust. This would, of course, mean they’d have to build new temples in their minds in which to place their faith.

Their cult has recently installed a new charismatic leader who is well versed in the art of recruiting people and convincing them of the righteousness of his cause. He presents to his followers simplified solutions to daunting problems that may alleviate some of the symptoms, but makes sure the disease remains. Perhaps he does this to maintain the illusion that his institution cares for people and is needed, or perhaps he does it for his own personal glorification, I really don’t know. I do believe, however, that the solutions he espouses will only exacerbate the problems, much like the doctors of old who would try to put leaches on or bleed a man who had already lost too much blood.

I have no idea how many people are like my friends, no idea how many cult members there are in the world today, but I believe there are too many to count. I believe they number in the tens of millions. I hear them talking on a daily basis, discussing how this leader or that leader is better equipped for, or not so good at, handling specific problems. They all believe that this institution will somehow lead the masses of humanity to a better life. Yet during my entire existence in this physical realm I’ve only observed this institution fail. I’ve only seen it bring mayhem and destruction to some and mishandle the affairs of others. I’ve only seen it create problems and yet some still worship it as if it was the only solution and ask that it solve the problems it created.

I am talking, of course, about the cult of state. I am talking about those people who worship government and turn to it and its innate use of force when confronted with a problem they don’t understand or refuse to get personally involved in. These cult members continue to give the illusion of legitimacy to government as they ask those in control of the mechanisms of the state to solve problems for them rather than looking to themselves for the answers they seek. They support the system by using it and don’t care who the system hurts, even when it hurts the very people using it. Like a hamster in a wheel, one wonders if the cult members even realize that they are going nowhere.

I believe there is a basic moral reason why government can’t solve the problems of society and therefore why it continues to degrade the humanity of its worshippers. Anyone with the slightest bit of empathy for their fellow human realizes that stealing is wrong. Societal problems can’t be solved by stealing (taxing) from one class of people to give to another class. Likewise, economic problems can’t be solved by forced redistribution of wealth. But the priests of this cult of government, the ones known as congressmen and senators, presidents and prime ministers, Democrats and Republicans, they espouse the virtues of such immorality to their doe eyed cult members. Indeed, they have gone so far as to claim that each individual has a duty to surrender a portion of his labor to this cult, whether they believe in it or not, and that refusing to do so somehow makes one a bad person. The cult members cry “foul” whenever a brave soul decides to stand up and declare that he doesn’t want to be a slave to the system anymore and refuses to pay his tribute. Such is the power these occult priests have to mesmerize their followers.

This cult worship could become more dangerous yet as it morphs from a cult that worships a failed, immoral system to a cult of personality. It is no longer suitable to the priests of state that the followers of this cult simply submit to their demands without question. They are now seeking the allegiance of the masses to an installed figurehead. They are now attempting to put a smiling, happy face on the hand that controls the mechanisms of power and sell the populace on the idea that a “change” to a new style of socialism can bring “hope” for our future. But it seems to me that the smile is false, the hope is futile and the change is back to an old failed model on a larger scale in twenty first century packaging.

Yet the members of this cult are its enablers. Those that put their faith completely in this system help maintain its veneer of legitimacy. Without these followers the federal government in particular, which is responsible for the central planning schemes that have led us to this juncture, would soon lose its popular support and be forced to turn over the services it attempts to provide to other agencies more adept at handling such functions. These lost souls continue to wander in the illusionary political forest of right and left, liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican, and can’t see that the trees which block their view were planted there to keep them from finding true freedom. They can’t see that these collectivist ideologies are all basically the same and that the ideology of individual rights, individual responsibility and self governance has been crowded out of the American political garden and left to die due to lack of sunshine.

To bring these lost souls back we must help them to realize the harm they are causing simply by using the current system. By promoting federally founded government programs and regulations one helps stifle innovation and remove choices that private individuals and organizations would otherwise bring to the marketplace. By praising those who promote centralized control, socialism, and government involvement through bailouts one helps keep an elite ruling class in power and helps stagnate the growth of small entrepreneurs who would otherwise step in and succeed where others have failed by offering the legitimate services the marketplace demands.

State worship is something we as a society can tolerate no longer. Our empire has grown too large to afford and needs to be cut back. Our individual, natural rights are no longer respected by those who hold the reins of power. Our economy is in shambles due to the monopolistic policies that are only possible with government involvement. It is the federal bureaucracy which created these problems, and it is not they who we should turn to for a fix. It is time to stop worshipping at the altar of the state. It is time to evolve past this over bloated centralized federal government, shrink it to a reasonable size and function, and return the power to the community level and to the individual. Then perhaps we can achieve true freedom. Then perhaps we can begin to build a world where respect for others is honored. Then perhaps we will see a society where no man can be shielded by his power when he decides to bring harm to another.

Constitutionalists, Ron Paul Supporters and Real Terrorists

This article was originally published at americanchronicle.com on March 19th, 2009

By now many of you have probably heard about the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report that labeled constitutionalists, Ron Paul supporters and others as possible domestic terrorists. When I first heard about it my first thought was something like, "Oh no, here we go again. The government propaganda machine is at work again. They are trying to equate ordinary folk and peace loving activists with violent extremists." Indeed, from my point of view this seems correct.

But, alas, I am a man who can´t just scratch the surface of an issue and leave it at that. I must try to dig deeper into the heart of the matter and try to sort through the implications. This is not to say that my initial gut reaction wasn´t correct. Indeed, often times it is. Yet there is often more to such reports than meets the eye and words are often misused or misinterpreted. I began to wonder why such a report would even be considered warranted. It seems clear to me that the language being used in the report was chosen to discourage dissent and incite violence rather than protect officers.

To begin with, we can examine the word terrorist. The word invokes images of hate filled, spiteful people plotting in a secretive fashion to plant bombs in public areas meant to kill and maim as many innocents as possible. Yet that is not what a terrorist is in the strictest sense of the word. A terrorist is one who terrorizes. A terrorist simply creates an atmosphere of fear. One could make the argument that I am a terrorist based on the fact that I write horror novels designed to make the reader feel the tingle of fright run down his spine. To label me as such would be an attempt to misinform and mis-associate in my opinion and the same can be said for the MIAC report. It wouldn´t, however, be totally false as the label was based on a plausible truth.

Or I could simply be looking at this from the wrong point of view. Perhaps from the point of view of those in politics and law enforcement, people in the freedom movement really are terrorists. After all, they have a tendency to not simply submit because someone claiming to have authority over them tells them to. They have a tendency to know their rights and to exercise them. They have a tendency to expect the police officers and government personnel to operate within the bounds of the law written down and codified in the Constitution. What could be more terrifying to a bully on a power trip who insists on being obeyed without question? What could be more frightening to a bureaucrat than someone who insists on the freedom and ability to run his own life rather than depending on the system?

Those of us who have awakened and wish to move forward with a liberty agenda confound the sensibilities of those who insist on regulating every aspect of our lives. We in the freedom movement see ourselves and everyone else as individuals while those with a collectivist point of view have a tendency to lump people together into groups. It could therefore be very logical for those with a collectivist mindset (as many in the government seem to have) to conclude that if one individual involved in the freedom movement becomes violent while defending his rights, all of them are potentially violent. Many of us who are liberty oriented believe that individuals should be punished individually for any harm they may cause to another individual. Those with a collectivist mindset, which is apparently the mindset of the people involved with writing the MIAC report, believe it is ok to punish a group for the actions of an individual, or worse yet to prevent some imaginary incident from possibly happening. It doesn´t matter to them how many innocent people will be hurt or implicated, nor does it matter what principles of human dignity are ignored, it only matters that they are obeyed and that their power, their control and their point of view are all maintained, by force if necessary.

It appears to me as if those currently in control of the mechanisms of power in this nation are, indeed, afraid and perhaps even terrified of those involved with the freedom movement. But I doubt very much that has anything to do with the people involved. The ideas of freedom and liberty are powerful. These ideas make wonderful allies when you side with them and frightening adversaries to fight against. They are ideas that most everyone understands and that just make good sense. Indeed, they seem to be ideas that have been interwoven into the fabric of the human spirit. So as those in control of the mechanisms of power see more and more people begin to question their authority they lash out at those who spread the message. As more ordinary people begin to demand accountability and insist on personal responsibility for the decisions that impact their lives, those who wish to remain in power may find themselves turning to even more tyrannical and devious methods to maintain control.

And so I am also afraid. I am terrified of that the men dressed in blue, or more often black these day, will one day kick down my door, drag me away and lock me in some cold prison cell simply because I choose to embrace the ideals that make men truly free as they go about their day to day lives. I am afraid that one day I will be accused of being a terrorist despite the fact that I abhor violence and do not advocate it, and that I will be forced to defend myself in front of a state owned court more concerned with its own self interests than with truth, justice or preserving the rights of the individual. I´m afraid that such a proceeding could cost me dearly in terms of time and wealth regardless of its outcome. I am afraid because the real terrorists have done their job well and given those who would dissent reason to be afraid. Yet I refuse to let fear silence me and will continue to support Ron Paul, The Campaign for Liberty, The Free State Project, tax protestors, constitutionalists and any other peaceful, freedom advocate I might come across. The more of us that feel this way and speak out about it, the better off we´ll all be.

If you want to know who the real terrorists are, type police brutality into a youtube search and watch the videos. If you want to know how real terrorism works, you only need to watch video of otherwise peaceful protests turned violent not by the protestors, but by those men dressed in black with riot gear and helmets who were supposedly there to keep the peace. Government forces have a history of violence that is far more insidious than any action any private organization has ever taken. Yet despite that they are still so afraid of some peaceful activists that they feel the need to label them and put out propaganda against certain organizations. They know what they are doing is wrong, but they cling to their delusions that it is for the greater good. Freedom and liberty are the ideals that will lead to greater societal good. Those in government would do well to realize and embrace these ideals before popular opinion forces them into an awkward and uncomfortable position they will have trouble defending.

When Horse Theft is State Sanctioned

This article was originally published at americanchronicle.com on March 15th, 2009

The day after the Liberty Forum ended, as I was still driving home from that magnificent event, I heard the news that Brian Travis´ property in Candia, New Hampshire had been raided by area police, a couple of veterinarians and a representative of the SPCA. The alleged purpose of this raid was for the protection of the horses on the property. The authorities had accused the property owner of neglect. I was both saddened and shocked by the news and proceeded to find out as much as I could about the event.

For the record, I admit that I am a little biased toward Mr. Travis. Though I have never met the man personally, I have listened to him on several occasions speak of his adventures on the radio program "Free Talk Live" as he traveled across the country from Colorado to New Hampshire in search of a better life more closely akin to the principles we hold dear, those of non initiation of force and that in order to live in liberty you must allow others to do the same. He came across as an honest, caring, principled individual with a genuine concern for all mankind, not just those close to him. I find it hard to believe that such a man could or would neglect animals he was obliged to care for, especially valuable animals such as those that were kidna--, errr, confiscated from him.

Still, I feel a certain obligation to remain as objective as possible when writing about events and concerns such as this. This can be quite difficult to do at times. I felt the need to distance myself and try to remain objective in this case and so I began reading articles, blogs and the comments of those biased toward Brian Travis and those biased toward the agencies and people involved in the raid. I have to say that it was a real eye opener to read through some of these posts. An occurrence such as this can really bring out the raw emotion in some people. Some comments become very vitriolic and spiteful. There seems to be some real hatred out there against Free State Project members and this issue apparently brought it out. There appears to be at least a few natives of New Hampshire who harbor and nourish a likely unhealthy resentment toward those who believe that the answers to today´s societal and economic ills lay in less government regulation and more individual and personal responsibility. This aspect was a little unnerving in the middle of what could otherwise be a challenging and useful debate.

Much of the expressed concern, however, was for the welfare of the horses. This is understandable. As humans, we have a basic understanding that it is wrong to steal someone else´s property, but we can justify doing so if we feel the reasons for our actions are honorable. People who love animals in general and horses in particular in this case can certainly justify emancipating a helpless equine from the clutches of a cruel, uncaring owner. For this reason, for a moment or so as I was reading through some blog posts, I was a bit torn. It seems that many people in the area where this event occurred believe that the horses were, in fact, neglected. They reasoned that the SPCA and the veterinarians wouldn´t raid the man´s farm unless this was true. For a fleeting moment, I found myself wondering about this point.

Indeed, we as a society wish to believe the best in people. We want to believe that anyone in which the public places its trust has only the best intentions at heart. We´d especially like to believe this coming from people entrusted with the protection of animals who have no voice and cannot directly speak to us and report their own abuse. I would like to believe this too. I would like to believe that there are only good, honorable and trustworthy people working for organizations like the SPCA. So for a moment I was inclined to wonder if perhaps my perceptions of the people involved were wrong and these horses were indeed in danger. After all, I am only looking at this situation from afar and have not had direct contact with any of the players involved with this drama.

Then I saw something that changed my perception entirely. It was this documentary posted on Youtube from ABC´s 20/20 which exposed the abuse perpetrated by some in charge of local SPCAs. It points out that some people will allow their positions of power to go to their heads. The second half in particular shows just how corrupt one man can become when granted such all encompassing power, how he either knowingly lies and cheats for personal and professional profit, or he is so delusional and self righteous that he thinks himself some sort of messiah to the animals who can make no mistakes and do no wrong. My guess is the former.

Those who believe that the welfare of animals is important should consider that likely animals who are not in reality abused have established some sort of rapport with their owners. For them to be taken away from the environment they have grown accustomed to will likely cause undo emotional stress. Who will be held accountable if that is indeed the case? In this particular case, no one, as all those involved have immunity in the eyes of the law. It is sad to think that such criminal activity can be sanctioned by those entrusted to adjudicate and no one will ever answer to the victims of such crimes.

There are some deeper issues of principle at stake here as well. One of those issues is a basic principle of our culture, that a man is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. This is a rule of law that at one time we as a society took great pride in promoting. It is also a rule of law that seems to have become a quaint memory in recent decades. More and more often I see and hear of people who find themselves fighting to prove their innocence. More and more often I see and hear of injustices perpetrated onto the citizenry because of the presumption of guilt by the very system that is supposed to protect the individual from such actions. It is more than simply tragic, it is an abomination to a society that is supposed to cherish and honor the concepts of freedom and liberty.

Brian Travis now finds himself in the awkward position of having to hire a lawyer and fight to regain possession of his pets utilizing the very system that allowed them to be stolen from him in the first place. Can there be more of a conflict of interest? It is as inherent in the system that it should try to protect itself as it is in nature that an organism would engage in self defense when threatened or attacked. Even if he eventually proves that he is innocent of neglecting his animals and shows that not producing the proper paperwork was an honest mistake and oversight on his part, he will have been punished. He will have spent thousands of dollars in fees and precious hours of his time battling an injustice. If actions such as these are to be taken in a free society, if we are to allow people like Steve Sprowl and Dave Garcia (from the 20/20 documentary "Cruelty to Owners") carte blanche to raid people´s farms and businesses, then those people and anyone who helps them should be held personally responsible when mistakes are made and accusations are disproved. This should also be done within a system that minimizes conflicts of interest that could arise between any of the parties involved. In this way, we can be more certain that political considerations or the promise of financial gain are less likely to be at the heart of such actions. In this way, we can be more certain that men wielding power will not attempt such actions as a result of a vendetta against another individual.

I have no reason to doubt Brian Travis when he states he believes this action was taken as a result of an incident that happened on his property and involved Steve Sprowl in November of 2008. I have no reason to doubt that this action occurred because Mr. Travis and his family refused to submit to the demands of a man who is perhaps corrupted by the heady influence of power. In fact, due to the secretive nature of the government position as events continue to unfold, I have reason to suspect that it is Mr. Travis who speaks truthfully and the government bureaucrats who are being less than honest.

Ironically, Mr. Travis moved to New Hampshire to help fight against the very injustices he now finds himself experiencing. He believes there is a better way for society to accomplish its aims rather than simply appointing such people to positions of power and hoping they always do the right thing. Likely it is, at least in part, his libertarian philosophy – that one should never initiate force against another and that in order to live as a free human being one must grant others the same dignity – that helped create the situation he now finds himself in.

It is the people who still believe in the cult of the state who help maintain the illusion of legitimacy these tyrants hold over the populace. It is the people who believe that those in power are just in their actions, or at least their intentions are just, who prop these petty tyrants up and help prevent innovative, real, transparent solutions from being enacted. Until and unless we can hold these individuals responsible for unjust actions and demand they personally compensate those they´ve wronged we will find abuses of power taking place. Until and unless we honor the principles of individual freedoms and liberties upon which our western culture is based we will continue our downward slide toward an authoritarian, collectivist system of society that destroys the human spirit of all those involved with it.

Here are the links to the 20/20 documentary "Cruelty to Owners:"
Part 1 of 20/20 documentary "Cruelty to Owners."
Part 2 of 20/20 documentary "Cruelty to Owners."

It is my hope you will take the time to watch both parts.

My Liberty Forum Report

This article was originally posted on March 11th, 2009 at americanchronicle.com

I had the good fortune to be able to spend the weekend of March 5th – March 8th of 2009 attending the Liberty Forum in Nashua, New Hampshire which was put on by The Free State Project. To say I was energized and excited by the happenings there would be an understatement. Words can not begin to describe the feelings I had as the weekend progressed. I felt welcomed, accepted and embraced by all those in attendance. Never before in my life have I experienced so many people that felt the same way about freedom as I do all gathered together in the same place.

I drove from the Chicago area to Nashua to attend this event. The total drive time was a little over 17 hours one way. I would have flown, but I didn´t want to put up with the TSA and all their dictates. Sorry, but I want to be able to keep my shoes on and drink bottled water when I travel. I could have taken a train, but I didn´t. I wanted to drive. It had been a long time since I´ve taken a road trip. The forum made it worth the trip.

I could talk about the liberty luminaries that gave their speeches. I could talk about how great it was to hear these personalities in person. I could talk about the individual speeches by people like Adam Kokesh from Iraq Veterans Against the War and how great and emotional his presentation was. I could talk about how awed I was to be in the presence of Mary Ruwart (one of my personal heroes) and how exciting it was to be able to speak to her one on one even if it was just for ten minutes. I could talk about how inspiring it was to listen to Will Buchanan tell of his adventures on his Walk for Liberty across America and to discuss freedom with him and his lovely wife Brooke at a round table luncheon.

There are many things about the speakers I could mention. I could talk about how interesting and educating it was to hear Glenn Jacobs from the WWE give a speech on the economy. Glenn Jacobs is a huge man and a powerful presence, but to me it was his intelligence that was the most impressive thing about him. I could mention how entertaining it was to hear John Taylor Gatto speak about education despite his age and the fact that he can´t be as animated as I´m sure he was in the past. I could talk about how fun it was to watch Stefan Molyneux instruct a roomful of libertarian minded people on how to win any political debate in two minutes or less.

I could talk about these things and I guess I just did a little, but I won´t go into any more details because, although these luminaries and their presentations gave this gathering substance and form, it was not they who made the forum so exciting for me to attend. Although these famous and inspiring people gave presentations worthy of the standing ovations they received and never seemed to have enough time to answer all the questions audience members wanted to pose, it was not they who impressed me the most. It was, in fact, the legions of ordinary people who had gathered together in one place to listen to these people who delighted me. It was they who created the positive and exciting atmosphere which permeated the hotel. It is they who make the Free State Project the beacon of hope that it has become in the liberty movement.

One of the first things one notices about this movement is the diversity of those involved. People from all backgrounds, cultures, races and religions attended. That is a testament to the power of freedom. It appeals to most everyone regardless of their upbringing or social status. The other thing I noticed is how friendly everyone was. There was no prejudicial judging going on in this group. There was a tendency I found to introduce one´s self and then to begin conversing with one another as if you´ve known each other for years. The non initiation of aggression principle and the idea that in order to live in liberty you must grant that liberty to all others is ingrained in our psyches, for the most part. That connection alone is a powerful catalyst for tolerance and friendliness in our interactions. Those ideals were personified by just about everyone at the forum.

It is these individuals who make society work. It is they who provide the labor, the products and the services that make day to day living in the modern world possible. The people attending were the teachers, the technicians, the software programmers, the mechanics, the entrepreneurs, the businessmen, the doctors, the clerical workers, etc. who want to see government reduced in size and scope. These are professionals and laborers from a variety of industries, both private and public, who are tired of the overbearing, intrusive nature of our government and simply want back the ability to be able to make decisions for their selves and their businesses and succeed or fail based on their own merits. They came to the forum to get ideas on how to achieve liberty in our lifetime and discuss those same ideas. It was these discussions we had amongst ourselves that made the liberty forum such an exciting place to be.

By the end of the Liberty Forum my head was so full of new information and ideas that it was spinning. I don´t know if it would have been possible to squeeze anymore nuggets into my skull, and yet I didn´t want the weekend to end. I had found a time and a place I would have liked to have stretched into eternity had it been in my power. I now have more hope than ever before that ordinary folks can create the change necessary to return our society back into the type of freedom loving, independent thinking society our founders must have imagined. The ordinary people attending this forum gave me more hope than any politician possibly could. They are the promise of real change, lasting change, change from the bottom up. For me, this is what made the Liberty Forum a rousing success.

Stimulus, Bailouts and Feeding the Sharks

This article was originally published at americanchronicle.com on Feb. 21st, 2009

Recently I´ve been hearing stories in the news of congressmen and senators complaining about the salaries and bonuses of certain CEOs in certain businesses. Now, I´m no fan of high paid CEOs and I doubt very much that any of them actually deserve to be rewarded with the obscene amounts they get paid. In fact, with the performances of so many companies down and judging from the fact that many of the companies they´re talking about should have gone bankrupt, these people hardly deserve to be paid at all. I have the feeling that none of them would be truly hurting if they were to lose their jobs. I think that such statements from these congress critters are diversionary tactics. I don´t blame the CEOs one bit for rewarding themselves; I blame those in congress who gave them the chance to do so.

I liken this situation to a fishing boat tossing chum overboard and then blaming the sharks for eating it. You can´t throw billions of dollars at banking institutions and the like and expect the CEOs to leave those funds untouched. They're not going to let all that fresh green ink just slowly settle to the bottom of the fiscal ocean without first getting their fill. Of course they´re going to gorge themselves. That´s what CEOs do. It´s simply in their nature. If you don´t want the sharks to eat the chum, then don´t dump it in the ocean in the first place.

A few months ago, when congress first began considering bailout bills, they received thousands of letters from their constituents asking them to vote against such bills. I remember some congress critters complaining about the flood of emails they were getting urging them to vote against such bills. They reportedly received so many emails that many congressional offices temporarily closed down their email services so they wouldn´t have to be aware of the clamor. I remember one congressman claiming he had received emails at the ratio of 300 to 1 against the bailout bill. I remember Nancy Pelosi coming out and saying her constituents were uninformed and that´s why they were so against the bill. It was reminiscent of a queen declaring her subjects ignorant as to matters of state and ignoring their cries for an end to injustice.

I can hardly believe someone like Queen Pelosi was re-elected to office after showing so publicly her disdain for the common folk of her district, and yet there she is still firmly in control. It makes one wonder about the validity of the electoral process we as a nation seem to take so much pride in. In fact, before the election of 2008 it was reported that congress had an approval rating of only twelve percent or so and yet something in the neighborhood of eighty four percent of incumbents were re-elected to their posts.

This was a congress dominated by Democrats who were put in power in 2006 to bring about change and stymie the administration of Mr. Bush. The people didn´t like his policies and they didn´t like the Republicans supporting him, so they thought a protest vote and a change of the party in control of the legislative branch would be enough to pressure the administration into stopping the war, bringing home the troops, and controlling the hemorrhaging of green ink that was occurring as a result of such bad policies. This didn´t happen. Why? Perhaps most congress critters simply don´t care what the commoners think, they care about what their major contributors think.

The Democrats kept approving military spending in Iraq and Afghanistan rather than cutting our losses and forcing the administration to bring the troops home. The Republicans didn´t help as they supported W´s administration without question, despite their losses in 2006. It was business as usual. Despite warnings, congress allowed hundreds of billions and maybe trillions of dollars to disappear into the black hole of empire. The corporate friends and associates of those in power, the sharks, continued to circle Washington DC in a feeding frenzy and gorge themselves on emergency funds courtesy of the American taxpayer.

Then the credit bubble burst. Mr. Bush´s administration requested help from congress for the banking industry. Did congress tell him no? Did they chastise him for his mismanagement? Did they indict him for criminal behavior? Did they attempt to impeach him for high crimes and misdemeanors? No. Two years earlier they had taken impeachment off the table, most likely because an indictment of him would have highlighted their complicity in his crimes.

At first congress showed their displeasure by rejecting a four page bailout package which held up the appearance that they were catching on and cared about their constituency, but a little while later they passed an even more massive bailout package, at least a hundred times bigger than the original. This package was laden with pork for their districts, giving the sharks even more to gorge upon.

Did this action cause the masses to stand up and demand accountability? Did the common man stage mass protests to pressure these "public servants" to repeal their folly? No. The congress critters of this nation, shaken as they were, somehow managed to dodge the political bullet. Many of them deflected blame by claiming they had been tricked by threats of civil unrest, violence and mayhem in the streets, and the implementation of martial law if they refused to pass the bailout. Apparently many of their constituents believed their claims and forgave them for their naïve actions since so many were re-elected. For those exercising power and control over others, it was business as usual.

So more sharks came to congress. We listened to auto manufacturers begging for help. We heard their claims of job losses and bankruptcies and economic catastrophe if billions of taxpayer dollars were not infused into their companies. "Throw us more chum!" they seemed to be demanding. And our congress critters, myopic as they are, could only find fault with the fact that the CEOs had used private jets to fly to Washington DC. They couldn´t find fault in their own actions of stirring up the fiscal waters with the bank bailout in the first place. They couldn´t even realize that at least when the auto manufacturers used private jets they created jobs for the maintenance workers, pilots, airport personnel, etc. with those jets.

Last election cycle brought with it more propaganda, flag waving, and promises that were made to be broken. The new administration is set up to take credit for anything good that happens in the economy and to blame anything bad that happens on the previous administration. It´s a vicious cycle that´s been played out again and again over the decades. It´s business as usual for congress. No one ever admits to being at fault. Government keeps growing and there´s always someone else to blame. The buck hasn´t stopped being passed around since the Truman administration.

Now at last the money has come to the little fish. A stimulus package was passed last week despite major opposition to it. It was passed despite the fact that it was so big no one could possibly know everything it entails. It was passed despite the fact that no congress critter could have possibly read the whole bill. Again congress decided to ignore the wishes of many of their constituents and threw more chum into the financial ocean, this time hoping the sharks have had their fill and the little fish will be able to gorge. There´s a bit of a problem when the little fish go after the chum, however. There are still sharks in the water. Sharks have a tendency to gobble up the little fish along with the chum.

I don´t blame the CEOs for looking out for themselves. I blame the congress for throwing the chum in the water. More than that, I blame those who keep voting for incumbents despite the fact that they have proven they couldn´t care less about their constituents. I blame all those who still believe there´s a difference between Democrats and Republicans when it´s been shown they are all big government statists who for the most part only take care of their big money contributors. They will continue to feed the sharks until they are held accountable for their activities, and it is up to the common folk of this nation to hold them accountable.

The Dark Side of the Law of Attraction

This article was originally published at americanchronicle.com on Feb. 19th, 2009

Many people might find it hard to fathom that the Law of Attraction has a dark side. It seems such a fine, positive, happy law that it seems impossible that something could actually be dangerous about it. And yet, in my mind, there is a growing shadow, a creeping suspicion that somewhere in the universe an evil presence is wringing its hands in glee and anticipation as more and more people subscribe to this notion that everything that happens in this world can be controlled by mere thought and that the thought process is what attracts good and bad events into one´s life. Perhaps this evil presence somehow feeds on the notions it creates, perhaps it enjoys polarizing people, or perhaps it´s simply trying to prevent those who can engage in critical thinking from doing so. I really don´t know. I can just sense this presence lurking, waiting for its chance to pounce on the unsuspecting and maximize the chaos and mayhem it plans on unleashing upon the universe. I shudder just thinking about it.

"Why should this be?" I might lay awake at night and ask myself. "What could possibly be so dangerous about a quirky little quasi-religious new age belief?"

Well, if you will indulge me, the answers might become quite clear. You see, and as many of you who regularly read my column probably know, I am an author of fiction novels. But I don´t write your everyday true to life fiction, I specialize in the horror, fantasy and science fiction genres. Should this law prove itself out, I may be in a world of hurt. You see, my imagination runs wild and sometimes the evilest and most terrifying of imagery races through my head and begs to be set to paper. If any of this ever creeps into the material world we now inhabit, well, I´d hate to think that I had a hand in bringing it upon us. I don´t wish to be responsible for the world´s first zombie attack.

But wait, perhaps there is good news. Perhaps the positive action of my putting to words these images for the purpose of entertaining the masses has counteracted this vile plague that was set to spring forth into the world and it will not come to pass. At least, not through me. What a relief. I do, however, still harbor a frightening thought. What if there´s someone with an imagination like mine, only he doesn´t have the wordsmithing talent I have. He may not be able to channel his thoughts into such positive activities and then we´re all in trouble. Vile creatures will spring forth from this person´s head and then we´re all done for. Oh, the humanity! This evil presence I feel has only to find this person and infect him or her and that will be it for mankind.

Or, now that I think about, perhaps this shadow I sense is far more subtle. After all, haven´t some science fiction writers already developed such stories? Star Wars comes to mind. Darth Vader killed a couple of dudes in that movie merely by thinking them to death. He and Luke Skywalker battled not only physically, but psychically as well, testing each other´s wills and the other´s ability to control "The Force," George Lucus´ scifi version of the "Law of Attraction." In his movie, there were all sorts of minor heroes who were affected by The Force, some who lived and some who died, but only Luke and Darth had truly mastered the art of using the Law of Att.., err, I mean "The Force."

In that movie it was all about control. So it is also, one might argue, with the Law of Attraction. For, if this "law" is a universal truth as its proponents believe, then it follows that since we all wield influence over each other, and yet at the same time we all control our destiny by focusing our thought, then at some point divergent viewpoints are going to be seeking conflicting outcomes and it only makes sense to me that he who has better mastered and learned how to manipulate this law will come out on top. Will it be Luke, or Darth?

Let´s pause for a moment to consider reality. In the real world, certain people most definitely wield power and influence over all our lives, even though they may not know us personally. These people are known as politicians. They are called presidents, prime ministers, senators, congressmen, etc. at higher levels and mayors, community leaders, state representatives, bureaucrats, etc. at lower levels. A reasonable question for those who adhere to this Law of Attraction might be, "Did these people attain their power by using the Law of Attraction?" If so, a good follow up question might be "Did they do so knowingly or unwittingly?" Finally one might ask "Are they using this power for their own advantage or to help give each and every individual the best chance of obtaining wealth and bettering their own lives?" In other words, is he using this power for good, or for evil?

The last question is a tricky one. In many cases it might seem like these politicians are trying to do good, they are trying to think positive and attract prosperity for all, but in reality they are only attracting more control and power for themselves and more dependency on government for everyone else. In this way, the political class is able to essentially create many people´s reality while the common man is prevented from becoming independent and self reliant.

This is the dark side of the Law of Attraction and the evil it can produce, and it appears to be winning at the moment. The world seems to be spiraling toward a future where there will be only government owned enterprises and its bureaucratic hierarchy and government approved and licensed monopolies. This over bloated creation we call government is regulating and restricting the free market out of existence and innovation and competition into the realm of criminal activity. This they do under the guise of good intentions, bail outs and stimulus packages.

But what if the Law of Attraction isn´t so powerful and all encompassing? What if these people aren´t always able to envision and bring a world into existence where they command all and the common folk are grateful for what they receive and give praise to the political classes for their "help" and "guidance?" Perhaps it´s not the envisioning at all that brings these things into being and makes these people so powerful. Perhaps it´s a directed effort on their part. After all, they make and pass the laws that dictate to you and to me how we should live our lives and conduct our business. Judging from the quality of the laws coming out of Washington DC lately, that doesn´t take too much thought or effort on their part. And we as a society just accept these dictates without question and abide by these laws no matter how bad, no matter how poorly written, no matter how ill considered.

Perhaps it´s time we exercise a little bit of directed effort on our part. Perhaps it´s time for the common folk of this country to stop thinking wistfully that those in power will help solve problems they´ve created with bigger government. It´s long past time for the common man to begin directing his efforts toward solving these problems himself. To accomplish this, those in power need to be directed to step out of the way. To accomplish this, the monstrosity known as centralized federal government needs to shrink, to cut its spending, and to release its grip on the mechanisms of power that led us to this point in the first place. Individuals should direct their efforts toward helping those in power realize this.

It is up to each and every individual as to the method by which he expends effort toward this goal. Some methods will prove more effective than others. One thing is certain, being apathetic and doing nothing except hoping for change and wishing for better times will accomplish nothing. Voting for one corrupt official over another corrupt official, or for some propagandistic, nebulous ideal which is never precisely defined will change only the guard. Volunteering for a corrupt organization will only help to prop up and maintain the illusion of legitimacy behind the corruption.

The time has come for the common man to show his dissatisfaction of the establishment by directing his efforts toward that goal. Show your dissatisfaction by being civilly disobedient, or support someone who has decided to stand up to the establishment. Start finding people not guilty for breaking laws that have no real victim. Demand that lawmakers read and understand the laws they pass. Discuss these things among your friends and take a contrary, individualist stance when one of them praises collectivist thought or policies. Let the people in government know that it is no longer ok for them to ignore our voices and our grievances. Get angry. Do something.

If it takes positive thinking to motivate you to take action, fine, think those positive thoughts and attract positive things to you. If it takes negative thinking for you to take action, that is also fine, then do so. The point is, take some form of action. Stand up and be counted. Let them know how you feel, for if you don´t then no one will do so for you.

If, however, you wish to just do nothing, to remain apathetic and to only release positive thoughts into the universe and hope that things change, then the dark side has already won.

Here is a list of a few organizations that can help you peacefully do something. There are others if you care to seek them out:

DownsizeDC.org
The Free State Project
Ron Paul´s Campaign for Liberty

It´s no Secret, the Theory of Directed Effort

Recently I was involved in a discussion about what has become known as "The Law of Attraction." It became rather heated. It seems to me that some proponents of this "law" have a tendency to become rather fervent in its defense when its premises are questioned. As so often happens during a verbal interaction, the discussion took directions I never wanted it to go in and logical arguments gave way to emotional examples and anecdotal evidence. Of course, anecdotal evidence presented contrary to "The Law of Attraction" was quickly spun about to fit into the paradigm created by those who worship at the altar of this would be "law."

Before I go on I wish to make something clear. I have quite a few beliefs which some others might consider strange. I am very interested in mysticism and I enjoy studying the occult and the practices of witchcraft. I´ve been known to practice the art of interpreting an astrological chart. I´ve taken part in pagan rituals and prayer. I enjoy meditation. Basically I am open to all kinds of ancient spiritual beliefs and curious as to their origins and their inner workings.

If it becomes obvious that I am no expert on this "Law of Attraction," and if my understanding is incorrect, keep in mind that I am basing these thoughts and opinions on statements made by adherents to this belief system during a heated debate. If I make a statement that seems like misinformation or is not what the belief system is about, then perhaps the adherents to this system are mis-educated or misguided in their beliefs.

So one might ask why someone like myself who so likes to dabble in unorthodox spirituality would be adverse to "The Law of Attraction." Let me say first of all that there are many facets of this "law" that I do agree with, but there are many claims certain adherents make that I find disturbing. Secondly, the semantics involved are highly questionable. Calling something a "law" implies that it is something operating all the time on everyone, such as the law of gravity, and that it is absolute truth. In the realm of spirituality and the metaphysical, I personally find it hard to accept any concept that claims to be the absolute truth simply because there is so much about this realm we do not know or understand.

Let´s take for example the basic tenet behind "The Law of Attraction," that we all attract everything that ever happens to us in our lives, good or bad, simply by thinking about it. In essence, in my opinion, it states that things happen on account of wishful thinking or because of unguarded thought. It seems to me that this doesn´t take into account all the other forces that are interacting with each and every one of us in this physical realm. It takes power away from all the other factors, natural or manmade, and gives it to you. In essence, you become God, or at the very least godlike. The question then becomes, do you have complete control of your thoughts, or are they willy-nilly and you´re going around causing mayhem with the unregulated thoughts swirling about in your head. Perhaps that´s oversimplified, but it´s my understanding of how this "law" works.

Now these adherents might complain upon hearing this that it is simply not true, that there are certain laws of physics one must operate within the parameters of. They will admit in part that there are certain facets of reality that can´t be overcome, and then in the same breath they will make a statement such as you are in complete control of your reality one hundred percent of the time. They will then create an anecdotal argument such as a man envisioning himself in flight can´t simply take off and fly, yet he can create a flying machine. Never mind that men have envisioned themselves taking flight for millennia and that it has only been recently that technology has been able to bring us to a point in time where making such dreams reality was possible. Never mind all those men who may have died or been severally injured in attempts to take flight in poorly designed flying machines. Don´t bring up such anecdotal evidence to these believers. These adherents would argue that those men simply did not envision their goals correctly, or that they must have at some point or another envisioned themselves falling, or some such thing. They will spin any observation in an effort to make their paradigm unchallengeable.

One of the fellows I was debating followed up an anecdotal example with the statement that the universe always answers "yes" to any thought one may envision. He further went on to explain that if you are focused on something like wanting money, for example, than the universe will make certain that you continue to want money or some such nonsense. Now if you want to believe that´s true, it´s okay with me, but I find it quite presumptuous that anyone would claim to know first off that the universe has a consciousness and secondly that he knows how it thinks and how it will react. It is also a little troubling to think that the universe´s consciousness can´t tell the difference between the literal wording of a thought and the true meaning one is attempting to convey. Most humans could, why does the universe have such problems? Is the universe thought dyslexic? Personally, I don´t know if the universe has a consciousness, but if it does I´m sure it would answer requests yes, no or maybe like any other conscious entity. It might even depend on how it was feeling on the day you asked it.

There was a news story I read long ago of a man who was riding his bike in Colorado on a bright sunny day when he was suddenly struck down by lightning. The nearest storm was ten miles away when this happened. While it is true that the lightning was attracted to him for some unknown reason, I doubt very much it was because he was thinking about being hit by lightning. Unfortunately he died, so we can´t say for sure, but even if he was I would guess that there was a more scientific explanation to the event. I certainly don´t think he wished it upon himself and I don´t believe he was in control of the circumstances. He simply had wanted to go on a bike ride on a nice sunny day, was enjoying himself and then was suddenly struck down.

These adherents might say he had thought about getting hit by lightning in the past, or perhaps he was focused on it, but that wouldn´t explain all the people who go through their entire lives without getting hit by lightning, the vast majority of us. Most of us have likely thought about getting hit by lightning and even focused on it at some time. I know I have. Usually when this happens I make every effort to get off the golf course as soon as possible. The likelihood that I will get hit by lightning is slightly higher than the average person´s because I play golf, but not so much higher that I will curtail that activity. So, if I live to be 150 and don´t ever get hit by lightning, how does the law of attraction explain that? I´m not certain it can.

But enough about my misgivings with this "law." I can sum them up by saying I don´t like absolutes. I didn´t like them when President Bush would use them (as in you´re either with us, or you´re with the terrorists) and I don´t like them when they´re ensconced in spiritual dogma that can be neither proven nor disproven. But there are certain aspects about "The Law of Attraction" which I find intriguing and I´d like to examine them a little closer.

I think people are quick to believe that the universe works in this fashion because quite often it seems that we do attract things into our lives by our thoughts. Often times when one thinks positive thoughts positive things happen and when one thinks negative thoughts negative things happen. We used to call this the power of positive thinking. But the reasons for this likely vary, and it isn´t necessarily always true. There are billions of people in the world and billions of experiences and still the possible explanations and variations are not exhausted. In my experience there have been times when I´ve had a positive attitude and negative outcomes have occurred and visa-versa. Likewise, there have been times when I´ve envisioned positive outcomes that haven´t come to pass and visa-versa. Still, many people hold a firm belief that this attraction thing is the secret to their success. There are times when I believe there might be a little something to this attraction thing, and I believe I know why.

I like to think of it as a theory, since I don´t believe in spiritual absolutes which some would call laws. I call it the Theory of Directed Effort. I theorize that if one wants to achieve something in his life then one has to make an effort to do so. He can´t just sit about wishing it to be so and expect it to happen. Furthermore, if one thinks positively about the outcome of his efforts, it becomes easier for one to expend the energy to make the effort. It is definitely easier for me to sit and make the effort to write a book if I believe it´s going to be a best seller and make me lots of money than it would be if I were to think it was going to suck and no one was going to publish it, let alone buy it, so there is value in positive thinking. I would imagine this is true in many cases, but I would also imagine that it´s not the thinking that makes the project a success so much as the effort that goes into it.

These are but two of the variables that go into any venture, however. Talent is another factor that will help decide whether one is a success or not. If one is talented at something, it is also easier to direct one´s effort into a project which utilizes said talent. If one is not talented or unskilled but still interested in accomplishing some goal, than one might want to direct his efforts into honing said talents or skills before attempting to achieve said goal. Another factor is the reality of the circumstances one finds himself surrounded by. Is the timing right? Does the necessary technology exist? Is the world ready for your project? These are factors one does not have control over and should one find that something is simply not right or some critical component is missing, perhaps one would be better off directing his effort to another area.

When everything comes together one has a tendency to be successful. That doesn´t mean, however, that one has attracted success via one´s thoughts. In fact, the other day I was asked to fix my ex´s computer. I went to her house and looked at it, but something quite strange was wrong and I was very confounded. I was ready to give up and felt I´d have to restore the operating system, something I didn´t want to do because it would mean she´d likely lose all her data. I decided that I would try a little trick I knew not because I thought it would work, in fact I believed it wouldn´t work, but it wouldn´t take long and I thought "what the hey." To my surprise it worked and the computer was fixed. I was successful not because I envisioned a successful outcome, or because I asked the universe to give me an idea to help me with my task, but because I directed an effort toward finding a solution and it happened to work. All the thinking and envisioning in the world would have done nothing if I didn´t direct my effort properly. And should one of those adherents twist that around and suggest that I somehow did envision or think of a positive outcome, that tells me that now they believe they know my mind better than I do.

Truth be told, I believe that life is a mix of free will and fate. I believe that it is a mix of effort and circumstance. I believe it is a mix of luck and doing the best you can if dealt a bad hand. I don´t believe there is one all encompassing secret that will lead to success. Trying to maintain a positive attitude will likely make things more pleasant for you as you go through life, but I don´t think it will guarantee you will be a success, though it may make that outcome more likely. On the other side of the coin I don´t believe that one´s failures are always one´s own fault. Though negative thinking may contribute, sometimes more and sometimes less, I think there are other forces working in this world that one cannot always control. It seems to me that there are grains of truth to all dogma, and some people like to try to fit the whole universe inside one of those little grains. I prefer to explore possibilities, keep an open mind, and collect as many of those grains as I can.