MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Why Homeowners Hate Real Estate Developers | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

Yes, everyone feels their neighborhood is special and they don’t want any low-income neighbors moving in who will lower their property values.

Homeowners believe their property rights extended far beyond their property lines. They want to dictate who lives near them, how much money their neighbors make, what their neighbors look like, and most importantly, as Ms. Hahn said above, what the houses in their neighborhood look like and what they cost.

The president might not know much, but as a real estate developer, he knows what homeowners fear most.

https://mises.org/wire/why-homeowners-hate-real-estate-developers?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=7f0fb773b3-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-7f0fb773b3-228343965

On August 12 the president tweeted “The ‘suburban housewife’ will be voting for me. They want safety & are thrilled that I ended the long running program where low income housing would invade their neighborhood. Biden would reinstall it, in a bigger form, with Corey Booker in charge!”

Commentators on MSNBC and CNN took issue with the tweet, referring to it as a “racist dog whistle” and believing the president is out of step to believe apron-clad June Cleavers are worried about people of color moving into their neighborhoods.

Right or wrong, the president, in this case, knows of what he tweets. Go to any city council meeting when a developer attempts to rezone property for high-density zoning, and angry neighbors appear en masse, organized and vocal, not an apron in sight.

In a town as small as Auburn Alabama, angry residents packed city hall chambers to protest proposed student apartments. I wrote of one particular meeting where a woman claimed,

these “students are just nomads” and don’t care about the city the way a homeowner with a white picket fence does. What’s worse, according to the speaker, is new apartments create vacant older units whose owners must lower rents and attract low-income tenants.

“No more poor people in Auburn,” she concluded, not embarrassed by the collective groan in the room or Councilman Tommy Dawson’s quick rebuke. She clarified she was talking about poor people from Mexico.

In tiny Boulder City, Nevada, outside of Las Vegas, the local citizens have no interest in any new development. My former employer purchased a mobile home park out of bankruptcy with the intent to build a new neighborhood of affordably priced townhomes. The local residents fought him at every turn. In a piece for fee.org, I related what happened at a public meeting for the approval of a couple of minor variances from city code to make the project work.

A couple agitators quoted the five criteria of variance approval from a Maine township and insisted this project didn’t meet two of the criteria, as if a town’s laws located hundreds of miles away were relevant at all. One protester told the commission that approving a variance is allowing the applicant to break the law, implying the commission members would be accessories to a crime.

When it was mentioned that affordable housing would be built on the site and fancy drawings were displayed, a gentleman snarled that the town didn’t need affordable housing and it wasn’t the city’s business anyway.

The group’s coup de grâce was that the developer was shamefully maximizing his profit. Of course, they didn’t know that zoning for up to 127 apartment or condo units had been obtained a couple months earlier and our proposed project was for just 66 units. These busybodies didn’t know the costs of the project or how fast the units would sell, or whether the units would sell at all. By the looks of most of them, none had taken any risk beyond shoving a few coins into a slot machine.

The homeless crisis in California is a direct result of the “not in my backyard” movement. In 2017 one state legislator tried to pass legislation to keep local antidevelopment zealots from stopping construction. The New York Times reported,

A full-fledged housing crisis has gripped California, marked by a severe lack of affordable homes and apartments for middle-class families. The median cost of a home here is now a staggering $500,000, twice the national cost. Homelessness is surging across the state.

A nurse making $180,000 a year told the Times she commutes eighty miles each way to her job, because she couldn’t afford housing close to her job. But, legislation to restrict zoning restrictions meets fierce opposition from homeowners, environmentalists, and neighborhood groups. The mayor of Santa Barbara claimed that any restriction from the state level would be “giving developers a great gift and not giving residents and voters a chance to cast their opinions about what happens in their own neighborhood.”

Adam Nagourney and Conor Dougherty wrote, “cities regularly make developments smaller than their zoning allows, something that gradually chips away at future housing production.”

“People here feel like this is a special place, like people in any town or city do,” said Chris Coursey, the mayor of Santa Rosa. “And they want decisions about the future of the community to be made by people in the community who they can actually talk to about this.”

Yes, everyone feels their neighborhood is special and they don’t want any low-income neighbors moving in who will lower their property values.

In Las Vegas, the battle over the development of the former Badlands Golf Club went to the state’s supreme court. In an email obtained by Channel 13 from one then Las Vegas councilman to the rest of the council, he refers to the property owner/developer as an a**hole, mother****er, mentally ill, and worst of all, as imposing surrounding homeowners with “a horrible cost of security in your home and loss of values.”

At a council meeting, the councilman said of the Israeli developer, “You have rights, but you’ve got to stop treating these people like a bunch of unruly Palestinians getting thrown—you know—a concrete block settlement thrown into their land right there.”

The bankrupt Black Mountain Golf and Country Club in Henderson, Nevada, has sat fallow for a couple years as neighbors fought redevelopment. While the developer (my former employer) finally gained rezoning approval, the process took over four years.

“Not only are they putting houses on it. They are putting houses that are not acceptable to us,” Denell Hahn told Carla Wade of KTNV13. “Very high density. Very tiny streets. We’re already maxed out on traffic. We are already maxed out on schools and public services.”

“I’ve lived on the golf course since 1975,” said John Cahill. “And I have four family members that have lived there since 1962 and they looked out on the fairway every day. And all that has gone away.”

Homeowners believe their property rights extended far beyond their property lines. They want to dictate who lives near them, how much money their neighbors make, what their neighbors look like, and most importantly, as Ms. Hahn said above, what the houses in their neighborhood look like and what they cost.

The president might not know much, but as a real estate developer, he knows what homeowners fear most.

Author:

Doug French

Douglas French is former president of the Mises Institute, author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money Supply, and author of Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth. He received his master’s degree in economics from UNLV, studying under both Professor Murray Rothbard and Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Judicial Tyranny in the Drug War

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

It makes you wonder how someone who is intelligent enough to get a law degree can end up with such a ludicrous and illogical mindset. Wood’s draconian sentences accomplished nothing. And neither did the draconian sentences metered out by other federal judges in the 1970s.

Some might argue that the solution to this drug-war madness is better education in American law schools. I say that the solution is to legalize drugs. In that way, it won’t matter how much federal judges want to do their part to“win” the war on drugs through the imposition of  draconian jail sentences because there no longer will be drug-war prosecutions in federal court.

Judicial Tyranny in the Drug War

by

If you still have any doubts about the tyranny of the federal government’s beloved “war on drugs,” perhaps the case of Juan Carlos Seresi, Vahe Andonian, and Nazareth Andonian will remove them.

Back in 1991, a federal judge named William D. Keller sentenced these three men to 500 years in jail for a non-violent drug offense—i.e., laundering drug money.

Yes, you read that right — 500 years!

Why, that’s just plain stupid. Any lawyer that has gone to any decent law school knows that most people die before they are 200 years old. What law school did Keller attend?

Or maybe it’s just plain vicious. Making known his intention to play a role in “winning” the “war on drugs,” Keller, who was appointed to the bench by conservative President Ronald Reagan, declared, “I intend to deter forevermore anybody doing anything like this.”

Wouldn’t you love to ask the honorable Judge Keller how his draconian policy of deterrence has worked out for him? I mean, exactly how many people did he deter from engaging in drug-law violations with his 500-year jail sentences for those three men? Correct me if I’m wrong but there have been countless people engaging in the drug trade since 1991, when Keller imposed those 500-year jail sentences. Obviously, none of them was deterred by Keller’s tyrannical jail sentences.

The fact is that Keller policy of deterrence accomplished nothing. All it did was ruin the lives of three men and their families. Even if a few people were deterred by his 500-year jail sentences, it didn’t make any difference because there were more than enough people who were not deterred to ensure a plentiful supply of drugs for American drug consumers.

Other federal judicial tyranny

Of course, Keller isn’t the only federal judge who has vowed to do his part to “win” the war on drugs. There have been many other federal judges over the years who have had the same mindset.

When I was a young lawyer back in Texas back in the 1970s there was a federal judge in San Antonio named John Wood. His moniker was “Maximum John.” Why did lawyers and others call him that? Because his policy was to mete out the maximum possible jail sentences to drug-war violators. Like Keller some 15 years later, Wood was determined to “deter” people from engaging in the drug trade. Like Keller, Wood was doing his part to “win” the war on drugs with his maximum jail sentences.

It makes you wonder how someone who is intelligent enough to get a law degree can end up with such a ludicrous and illogical mindset. Wood’s draconian sentences accomplished nothing. And neither did the draconian sentences metered out by other federal judges in the 1970s. Wasn’t Keller aware of this phenomenon when he meted out those 500-year jail sentences to those three men in the 1990s? When Keller was in law school, didn’t they teach him about Judge Wood and other federal judges doing the same thing that Keller would be doing when he would later become a federal judge. Didn’t they teach him the futility of such judicial tyranny?

Early release from prison?

According to an article on CNN.com, recently federal prosecutors agreed with defense attorneys that Seresi, Andonian, and Andonia should now be released from prison, after spending some 30 years there. The reason revolves around the original prosecutors in the case failing to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defendants that revolved around special treatment having been accorded a prosecution witness in the case.

You would think that that would be the end of the matter, right?

Not so. It turns out that a federal judge has to approve the deal. In the case, the federal judge, whose name is Joseph V. Wilson, is a former federal prosecutor who served under Judge Keller when he was a federal prosecutor before becoming a federal judge. Wilson ruled that the exculpatory evidence wasn’t enough to affect the outcome of the original trial. He denied the defendants’ motions for release. Seresi, Andonian, and Andonia are now appealing his order.

Some might argue that the solution to this drug-war madness is better education in American law schools. I say that the solution is to legalize drugs. In that way, it won’t matter how much federal judges want to do their part to“win” the war on drugs through the imposition of  draconian jail sentences because there no longer will be drug-war prosecutions in federal court.


This post was written by:

Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

How Ron Paul Became a Beacon for Liberty | Guest: Dr. Ron Paul | Ep 83

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

Dr. Ron Paul sits down with Matt Kibbe deep in the heart of Texas to discuss his intellectual influences and his political history. He talks about his education in Austrian economics, which explains why government intervention in the economy, particularly through the Federal Reserve, makes us all poorer and less free. He also turns his attention to current events, explaining why the U.S. can’t seem to get out of any wars and why the government’s coronavirus response has been worse than useless.

Subscribe to Kibbe on Liberty everywhere you get podcasts.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Life is More Like Wrestling than Dancing

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

‘I Pity The Fool’: Mr. Max Boot on Joe Biden’s Foreign Policy ‘A-Team’ – Antiwar.com Original

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

If you think Bolton was bad…

https://original.antiwar.com/Danny_Sjursen/2020/08/27/i-pity-the-fool-mr-max-boot-on-joe-bidens-foreign-policy-a-team/

Dream with me.

Imagine an America where even marginal accountability reigned. A land of appropriate consequences for war-criminal cheerleaders. A country where going 0 for 4 on “freedom” wars – Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria – got pundits and policymakers sent down to the minors. Heck, one might make some strategic moves in a town like that.

Alas, we live in the world as it is: whence one of the nation’s leading newspapers – the Bezos’-billionaire-owned Washington Post – would dare deign to hire such a fedora-topped neocon-retread-shell as Max Boot as columnist. Then, surely symptomatic of the upside-down society wrought by Trump-derangement syndrome, the Post recently had the gall to proudly publish that warmonger’s latest screed: “Trump relies on grifters and misfits. Biden is bringing the A Team.”

In his latest broadside, Boot offers his best Mr. T impression to celebrate Uncle Joe’s “A-Team” – and overall propensity to “surround himself with good people,” all of them supposedly “effective operatives.” He saves special praise for the “veterans of high-level government service” on Biden’s foreign policy team.

Here again, we should look to the language. I, for one, find the prospect of Washington “operatives” running war and peace less than reassuring. But before digging into the shortcomings inherent in each of the four figures he highlighted, here’s a brief reminder of why Max and his opinions should’ve “got the boot” long ago:

  • Let’s start with my own introduction to this king of the chickenhawks: his then celebrated 2002 book, The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power – in which Max played unapologetic neo-imperial visionary and recruiting sergeant for an American reboot of a European colonial constabulary. He even, un-ironically I might add, lifted the title from the English chronicler of empire, Rudyard Kipling’s poem, “White Man’s Burden.”
  • He once worked with an infamous Bush-doctrine, Iraq War, architect-outfit: the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) think tank.
  • Ever the faux-historian, Max drew all the wrong conclusions and lessons from the Vietnam War, in his more recent 2018 book, The Road Not Taken: Edward Lansdale and the American Tragedy in Vietnam. Old David Petraeus – surprise, surprise – found this work “wonderful,” although, according to a real subject scholar, its endnotes “contain few, if any, materials from Vietnamese sources.” The Road Not Taken belongs squarely in the – popular with mil-civ-counterinsurgents crowd – school of we could’ve, would’ve, should’ve “won” in Vietnam (and, by extension, Iraq, Afghanistan, et. al.) “if only” [insert implausible alternative tactic excuse here].
  • Oh, and he’s supported every war for the past half century – including some he thinks should’ve but weren’t fought – and has hardly met a regime he wouldn’t like to change.

Now, for the core members of Biden’s ostensible A-team of always-an-Obama-bridesmaid deputies, and just a few reasons to doubt each’s competence, character, and Trump-corrective capacities:

  • The presumed A-Team leader, Obama’s Deputy Secretary of State and Deputy National Security Adviser, Tony Blinken:
    • Though, admittedly – like Biden – more right than most in that administration on the Afghan surge folly, he played nice and helped craft a compromise policy, which, he later bragged “helped competing Afghan political blocs avoid civil war, and achieve the first ever peaceful democratic transition in that country’s history.” How’s that turned out?
    • Blinken was a key architect and muddled messenger for Obama’s ever-shifting, never-plausible, and utterly ill-advised Syria regime-change-lite policy.
    • After leaving office, he teamed up with Michèle Flournoy (another unnamed Biden-top-prospect) at the consulting-firm (and Obama-alumni agency) WestExec Advisors – which helped Silicon Valley pitch defense contracts to the Pentagon. Blinken was also a partner at the private equity firm Pine Island Capital Partners. Tony’s a human revolving-door of interest-conflicts!
    • A resident Russiagater, “arm-Ukraine” enthusiast, and Israeli hard-right apologist on Biden’s campaign advisory team, he categorically declared that his boss “would not tie military assistance to Israel to things like annexation or other decisions by the Israeli government with which we might disagree.” Good to know that international legal constraints and common decency are already off the Biden-table in Palestine – no doubt, Bibi Netanyahu took notice.
  • Then there’s Obama’s ex-director of policy planning at the State Department, Jake Sullivan:
    • He was a senior policy adviser for hyper-hawk Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 campaign. There was even chatter back then that he’d been a frontrunner for national security adviser upon her anointment.
    • Before becoming Vice President Biden’s national security guru in 2013, he was considered uber-close (pun-intended) to Secretary Clinton – at her aside on trips to 112 countries, and even reviewing chapters for her book Hard Choices in his spare time. A Vox profile dubbed Sullivan “the man behind hawkish Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy.” Think Libya; think Syria.
    • Out of office, and after Clinton’s defeat, he joined Macro Advisory Partners and represented Uber in its negotiations with labor unions. Incidentally, he’s wedded to Maggie Goodlander, a former senior policy advisor to that militarist-marriage of Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman. Perhaps that’s why Anne-Marie Slaughter, who ran the State Department’s policy planning office in Obama’s first term, called Jake “the consummate insider.”
  • Next on Boot’s list is career diplomat and – sure to excite old Max – George W. Bush’s former undersecretary of state for political affairs, Nicholas Burns:
    • During the Bush II years he – like its greatest Democratic Party cheerleader, Joe Biden – supported the 2003 Iraq invasion.
    • What’s more, NATO added seven new members and provocatively expanded towards Russia’s very borders in his tenure as alliance ambassador.
    • He left the foreign service in 2008, but graciously stayed on as special envoy to finalize the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal – that pact being proof-positive that nonproliferation has always been selectively applied by Washington..
    • Nick happens to be on the board, or affiliated with, an impressive range of hawkish Washington hot-spots, such as: The Atlantic Council, Aspen Institute, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and the Cohen Group – this last one a lobbying organization for arms manufacturers. He also gave paid speeches at Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, State Street, Citibank, and Honeywell.
  • Lest it seem Boot only touted a Biden boy’s club, there’s also the former first female deputy CIA director – though Trump ironically one-upped her boss Barack by placing Gina Haspel at the Agency’s helm – Ms. Avril Haines:
    • Well, about the only thing you have to know about this A-Teamer is that she chose not to discipline any of the CIA agents implicated in the senate’s tell-all torture report, then was part of the team redacting their landmark indictment.
    • As for her supposed Trump-corrective chops: Haines supported Gina Haspel’s nomination as CIA director, even though she’d been directly implicated in CIA torture.
    • Plus, as a reminder of the duality of (wo)man, she is a fellow at Columbia University’s Human Rights Institute and consulted for the “Trump-favorite” data firm Palantir, which emerged from the CIA itself.

So really, here’s a crew of Hillary-hawks and Obama-bureaucrats without many truly fresh ideas among them. They don’t want to crash the system that birthed Trump and an age of endless wars – they are that system. The only really redeeming quality of the bunch: some helped craft the eminently reasonable Iran-nuclear deal. Count me less than enthused.

Unlike Might Max and his chickenhawk crew, time was that I fought and lived beside a real life special forces A-team (Operational Detachment-Alpha) in the villages of Kandahar, Afghanistan. Mr. Boot fetishizes folks he hardly knows; I know and respect them enough to reject the disrespect of romantic-caricature. The fellas my cavalry troop shared an outpost, raised a local militia, and seized towns with, were some brave bastards – they were also flawed and fallible. We failed together in style: tactical casualties of an impossible mission dreamed up by the likes of Max Boot, and – at the time – futilely prolonged by many members of Biden’s A-Team then on the Obama squad.

Boot was the big (bad) ideas guy, Biden’s posse – Tony Blinken, Avril Haines, Jake Sullivan, Nicholas Burns, and even Michèle Flournoy – these are “company men,” polite imperialists just smart enough to run the machine, and just dumb enough not to question its putrid products. Max reminds us – not incorrectly – that if “more people in [Trump’s] White House knew what they were doing, at least 172,000 Americans might not be dead.”

Yet, in a classic crime of omission, he lets Biden’s shadow squad off the hook for their own morbid-complicity: had they not supported and shepherded an Obama Afghan surge that even their boss sensed was hopeless, 1,729 U.S. troops – during Barack’s tenure – might not be dead. They included three of my own scouts, who – like our unit – were only unexpectedly routed to Afghanistan because Biden’s boss chose to surge in the “good war” there:

  • Gustavo A. Rios-Ordonez, 25, of Ohio – a Colombian national attempting to gain his US citizenship via military service, and father to two young daughters.
  • Nicholas C. D. Hensley, 28, of Alabama – a father of three on his third combat tour.
  • Chazray C. Clark, 24, of Michigan – who left behind a wife and stepson.

Those young men – and two dozen others wounded in action that year – were proud members of my ill-fated team. They deserved better than the Biden-bunch that Boot bragged are “seasoned professionals, ready to govern on Day One.” So too do some 8,600 of their brothers and sisters still stuck in Afghanistan, and many more sure to serve in whichever harebrained scheme Uncle Joe’s side of the duopoly dreams up.

It hardly needs saying, but most of The Donald’s defense deputies haven’t been stellar. Actually, most were establishment Republican or neocon retreads – or born-again war criminals like Eliot Abrams – themselves. Trump’s a monster and so are his misfit managers, blah blah blah. But let’s not pretend Biden’s band waiting in the wings shall be our salvation. Nor delude ourselves that Boot’s promise they’ll be “cleaning up after a Republican president,” will amount to any real cleanse of Washington’s militarist system.

Mr. Boot pings Trump from the right, but he also ought heed warning from the that classic lefty Cornel West – who advised we “tell the truth” about “Brother Biden.” An Uncle Joe administration with an “A-Team?” Give me a break.

I wouldn’t fill a kickball squad with this crew…

Danny Sjursen is a retired U.S. Army officer, contributing editor at antiwar.com, senior fellow at the Center for International Policy (CIP), and director of the soon-to-launch Eisenhower Media Network (EMN). His work has appeared in the NY Times, LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, The American Conservative, Mother Jones, ScheerPost and Tom Dispatch, among other publications. He served combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge. His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War (Heyday Books) is available for pre-order. Follow him on Twitter @SkepticalVet and see his website for speaking/media requests and past publications.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Is the UN Preparing for the “Second Covid Lockdown”? Oppressive Measures Worldwide, Obedience and Acceptance… – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

They are means and instruments for the New World Order (NWO) to “train” the population for total obedience and control by the invisible super power, or deep dark state. WHO plays a key role in this nefarious plans, as it still is regarded by most people and governments as an authority, as far as world health is concerned which sadly, it has ceased to be decades ago.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/is-un-preparing-next-lockdown/5722203

Driven by WHO, the Geneva UN Medical Directors (UNMD) group has just issued a CONSENSUS STATEMENT for UN staff in Geneva that is essentially warning UN staff of stricter measures to be taken, such as mask wearing in the office when 2-meter distances could not be respected, as well as increased working from home again, when as recently as in June these conditions were relaxed. Working from home means separating colleagues from each other, connecting them by Zoom, but NO HUMAN CONTACT. That’s the name of the game.

The UNMD refers to the Canton of Geneva’s new regulations, based on Switzerland’s claim of a steady increase in Covid-19 “infections”. Since the beginning of July new “cases” have surpassed 100 a day and reached even way beyond 200 at the end of July and above 250 in mid-August. The testing positive has allegedly steadily increased and often by close to 10% per day. Now, surprisingly – they say – 40% of the “cases” concern people between 20 and 40 years of age. But who checks? – Is it a mandate by WHO to diversify the statistics, so as to better justify universal vaccination and another total lockdown?

We know by now that nothing of this, masks, “cases / infections”, quarantine, lockdown, vaccination, or any other repressive measure have anything to do with covid. They are means and instruments for the New World Order (NWO) to “train” the population for total obedience and control by the invisible super power, or deep dark state. WHO plays a key role in this nefarious plans, as it still is regarded by most people and governments as an authority, as far as world health is concerned which sadly, it has ceased to be decades ago.

The Canton of Geneva, where, incidentally, WHO and the UN are located, is the “worst” Canton of Switzerland, counting for about a third of all “infections”. So, say the Swiss authorities. A spokesperson of the Swiss Ministry of Health remarked, “if Geneva were a separate country, anybody coming from Geneva to the rest of Switzerland would have to go into quarantine.”

How scary!

That’s the level of fearmongering going on – justifying obliging face masks in public places and shops and closed areas. Never mind that there is a strong protest of small shop keepers and retail corporations, since they are losing rapidly customers. People do not want to shop with masks. They also find it useless. So, they migrate to online shopping, much of it abroad. Retail losses are estimated at least at 30%. There is already talk of forcing a masquerade also in the streets. Likewise, new emphasis is put on ‘social distancing’. People are to be trained and reminded at every corner to stay away from each other. A masquerade with people walking – in lockstep – or standing two meters apart.

If a Martian would see the human race, no backbone, no self-esteem, just following orders for what most serious scientists consider human history’s worst hoax – he or she, the Martian, would think “the human race has gone mad, let them lockstepping themselves into oblivion. Let’s the hell get out of this lovely blue but crazy planet.”

And the population zombies along because the authorities order them to do so, under threat of fines – against all common sense. But zombies have been deprived of any common sense to resist in masses. Such restrictions and more are now in place until at least 1 October 2020. That’s about the beginning of the 2020 / 2021 flu season which will be conveniently mixed up with covid-19 – and justifies another lockdown – not to forget – with mass vaccination, for covid and flu. Quarantine, livelihood destruction – an economic skyfall into more poverty, more misery, more deprivation, more famine – more death. Not covid- death, but socioeconomic death. That’s exactly what the eugenics fanatics are dreaming of. A decimation of the world population.

WHO is part and parcel of the party, recommending these steps, if and when they are told to do so. By the invisible monsters, of course. The UN is going along. Or, is it the UN who has forced these increasing covid figures in Geneva, so they may prepare first their staff, then the population in general – worldwide – for a new lockdown in October-November? – All is possible.

We are in for the long haul; the UN paper suggests. And so do authorities (sic-sic), not only in Switzerland, but all around the world. Look at the tyrannical oppressive measures of Melbourne, the Department of Victoria in Australia; similar in New Zealand; South Africa; Thailand has hermetically closed all her borders – Germany is preparing for a new lockdown, though they say the contrary (not withstanding a strong popular resistance), so is France – and the US, State by sorry State, as they are battling racial unrest, Woke protests, Black Lives Matter (BLM) movements, and anti-police riots. All organized and paid for by the Soroses, Rockefellers, Fords, Gates and more oligarchic “philanthropic” humanitarian foundations. The mainstream cannot even keep up anymore with covering the US city chaos.

All this talk, predictions, projections, threats, contradictions, anarchy in the cities – is fabricated on purpose not only to confuse, but also to repress and depress people. Hopelessness is an effective weapon. It’s a weaponized narrative.

The “Consensus Statement of the Geneva UN Medical Directors network” starts by saying – “The recent surge in new cases” – without ever describing what NEW CASES entail.

New infections? Newly tested positive, but no symptoms? Sick people? Hospitalized people? People who died? – In fact, the death rate has not gone up whatsoever. Nobody has died from these “new cases” or “new infections”. But nobody reports on this important fact.

It sounds dramatic: a case, an infection — but nobody dares ask the so-called pathetic and corrupted authorities such crucial questions. Nobody asks for an explanation what these “increased figures” really mean? – Are they increased as a function of increased testing? How is testing performed? Does anybody ever ask how the infamous and controversial polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests are performed and analyzed, and the results reported into the annals of statistics, so as to produce ever more “virus-cases”?

The website “Virology Down Under” reports a comment of Professor Martin Haditsch, writing in ProMed-mail:

As to my knowledge “infection” is defined as the proof of an infectious agent AND the proof of multiplication of this agent inside the body (OR associated inflammatory response that can be linked to this agent). Therefore, my question is: where was the specimen taken from the “asymptomatic” nurses? PCR, as we all know, just detects nucleic acids. So, if multiplication cannot be proven and no local or systemic inflammatory response is given, how was “contamination” (no matter whether due to inactivated parts of MERS-CoV or even complete virus particles) ruled out? This is not a semantic question only but should impact the reported number of “cases”.

Does the surge in “new cases” coincide with a surge of new tests?

Who makes the tests?

Is there an independent entity that controls the tests, monitors the tests, as to who is tested and when and with what frequency tests are carried out – and the results reported? For example, are people who are tested several times, also reported several times?

The UNMD CONSENSUS STATEMENT is nothing but a support to the globalized fearmongering. It fits an agenda, a huge sinister agenda. The compulsory mask wearing is the most detested measure imposed by the deep dark state – the invisible masters that are pressuring us into a NWO scheme. They know it. They love it. They are psychopaths. And mask-wearing is dangerous, dangerous for one’s health and well-being.

In most places in Europe, the new school year just began. Students in many places are forced to wear masks, where “social distancing” in class rooms cannot be respected. Many students have been interviewed throughout Europe – and probably on other Continents too. Their response is almost unanimous – masks are uncomfortable, concentration is faltering after about two hours, we are exhausted in the evening and often have headaches. No wonder, breathing your own CO2 instead of oxygen cannot be very healthy.

The forced mask-wearing is an important agenda in the Great Transformation or the Great Reset, predicted by both the IMF and the WEF (World Economic Forum), to be officially “rolled out” in Davos, Switzerland in January 2021. It is an agenda of re-education by rituals. The mask wearing is a ritual on behavioral acceptance. It’s a ritual of initiation towards obedience. The faster and easier you accept the mask, the faster you are accepted – accepted in society. Most people want to be accepted. It makes them comfortable, no matter how much this acceptance is uncomfortable and based on lies.

Watch the first 4 min. of this video.

Then there are the few who will resist, who don’t care about acceptance. They fiercely resist. The system of tyranny makes sure they are socially discriminated and excluded from “society” they are social no-goes. They are looked at as if they were monsters, spreaders of disease, discriminated against, excluded. It is the old “divide to conquer”. Your friend for years has suddenly become your enemy. Families, groups, clubs, entire societies are divided and made to despise each other – division along the ‘ritual line’.

Amazing how it works for masks. Wait until you see how it works for vaccination – another ritual being prepared, as we are oblivious to what’s awaiting us in the next 5 to 10 years. Think Agenda ID2020 and Agenda 2030 – under the UN disguise of Sustainable Development Goals.

We are not doomed yet. But we have to act fast and decisively and in unison – in solidarity. Let’s reinvent solidarity.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research; ICH; New Eastern Outlook (NEO); RT; Countercurrents, Sputnik; PressTV; The 21st Century; Greanville Post; Defend Democracy Press; The Saker Blog, the and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

A critique of modern socialism

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

But that has not stopped socialism, which has simply evolved into a new form dominated by the social democratic model. The title is itself a contradiction. Social is laudable and democratic is inclusive but put them together and the state has been handed power over its electors by its electors.

https://www.goldmoney.com/research/goldmoney-insights/a-critique-of-modern-socialism

Socialism has moved on from the Marxist version of the state owning the means of production to one whereby production remains in the hands of individuals but are heavily regulated — echoing Mussolini’s fascist-socialist model.

But after nearly nine decades this model faces collapse, much like the Soviet collapse after sixty-seven years. This article explores the modern socialist model, updates the economic calculation problem identified by von Mises in 1920 and explains why it still fails in today’s socialism. And finally we predict the consequences for governments and their state-issued currencies.

Introduction

It is presidential election year in the United States. The choice is between the Republican’s or the Democrat’s socialism, the former being a milder version of the latter. A further difference is President Trump’s administration increasingly pays the government’s bills by socialising money, while great-uncle Joe wants to tax the rich even more (which in practice means not the rich but the middle and lower classes) as well as defoliating  the magic money tree.

In Britain, those of us who rejoiced at a free marketeer becoming Prime Minister with a strong electoral mandate have experienced a greater clampdown on personal freedom than imposed by any British government since post-war rationing. Admittedly, Covid-19 and its lockdowns were not foreseen, but will the British ever regain any of their hitherto restricted freedoms? And those of us with long memories are reflecting that the imposition of taxes — the socialising of our earnings — under the Conservatives is almost always more onerous than under Labour. It was not meant to be like that.

One way or the other, the establishment’s socialisation of our wealth, money and freedom “creeps in this petty pace day to day until the last syllable of recorded time”. Whether we like it or not, we are all socialists now. It is a fact of our lives, if not our inclinations. The destruction of our money and what wealth we have left is claimed to be for the common good, as opposed to capitalism, which the socialists tell us enriches the few and is deeply immoral. They, the socialists, have captured the moral high ground, leading us to their higher plain. They allege it is progress towards a better humanity. Their utopian view sees the end of social inequality as its final goal, and as Man progresses towards it the human race will discard capitalism and the class wars that go with it.

No longer should we define socialism by its post-Marxian objective, the acquisition by the state of the means of production and the ending of property ownership. The failure of the organising state to produce goods demanded by the consumer was fully exposed by the collapse of the USSR and the ending of the Chinese state’s monopoly on production. But that has not stopped socialism, which has simply evolved into a new form dominated by the social democratic model. The title is itself a contradiction. Social is laudable and democratic is inclusive but put them together and the state has been handed power over its electors by its electors.

The social democratic philosophy begs some fundamental questions. If it is a better system than the alleged evils of capitalism, why does social cooperation not evolve towards it at the behest of ordinary people without the need for an organising government? Why are leaders required to coerce, organise and force people to part with their income and wealth for their own common good? Who benefits?

Those who are said to benefit are the sick and the poor through the redistribution of wealth. But the evidence is overwhelming that a state bureaucracy is not better at this humane function than independent charities. The socialist’s rebuttal is that no one should have to rely on charity, to which those who value their freedom are normally too dull-witted to respond by asking, why not, when the alternative is state coercion backed by imprisonment?

Claims of morality are a thin cover, a disguise for wealth transfer from ordinary people to the state. The state is now an organisation that leeches on its electors in order to pursue its own separate agenda. We must therefore put claims of morality to one side if we are to understand the damage socialism has done to ordinary people and their economic progress. No longer ambitious for the acquisition of the means of production, modern socialism has evolved into a fascist form, a fact which when pointed out to social democrats leads to instant denial and horror, because in their language it is right wing and extreme, wrongly associated with free market capitalism.

Being fascists without knowing it

The accusation that social democratic planning is fascism is easily proved. Some claim fascism’s origins were in the nineteenth century, when European philosophers expressed ideas which were only later described as fascist. But the fascist movement proper started in Italy, when Benito Mussolini, then an avowed Marxist, was the most forceful Italian proponent of the Marxian paradise to come.

In 1914 on the declaration of the Great War Italian communists declared it to be a fight between imperialists and exploiters of the proletariat. In their view, the proletariat should stand aside and not be exploited by either side, waiting for the inevitable civil war which would pave the way to the destruction of capitalism, giving power to the workers.

Having initially taken the Italian communist position of abstaining from war, Mussolini then aligned himself with the nationalists against the imperialist Austrians. It was an opportunist move and a grab for support from the communist rank and file. Following the First World War, the Italian communist party movement faltered, and Mussolini with his new fascist party stepped into the void. Members left the communists and joined Mussolini’s fascists in droves, because there was little discernible difference between Mussolini’s socialism and that of the Italian Marxists. His 1919 manifesto was anti-capitalist and posed as socialism with renewed vigour. From there, it evolved into advocating aggressive interventionism, and then towards Nazism which was developing in parallel. The Nazi economic creed was simple: capitalists can own the means of production so long as they obey the commands of the state. In other words, business was directed and regulated instead of owned by the state.

It neatly describes the socialism of today. Socialists no longer deem it necessary for the state to own the means of production, it merely controls it by regulation, directing it by selective subsidies and taxes. It also exposes the intellectual ignorance of the useful idiots who blindly follow slogans.

The loss of the means of economic calculation

We have established that the objectives of today’s social democrats are little different in principal from those of the fascists in the interwar years. But this modifies our analysis from that of Ludwig von Mises in 1920, who wrote an important essay titled “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth”[i], which sparked what became known as the socialist calculation debate. Mises demonstrated why public ownership of the means of production was bound to fail. Central to his argument was the state’s inability to make the calculations necessary to allocate the means of production, a function which can only be attempted successfully by independent entrepreneurs putting their own resources on the line.

Today’s institutional socialism is now fascist instead of being on the Marxist lines which were debated between Mises and socialist economists a century ago. The failure of Marxist socialism was for the reasons Mises predicted. It must still apply today to that portion of a socialist economy that relates to government spending which is not redistributed in the form of welfare payments or put out to private sector contracts by means of competitive tender. What then remains of government expenditure will lack the basis of economic calculation, which cannot be performed. But welfare distributions and government contracts raise a separate issue, the distortion of an economy by state-directed spending into spending that would not otherwise occur, and the wasteful use of all forms of capital which would otherwise be deployed more efficiently by private enterprise.

Economic activities that remain under free market principles, whereby entrepreneurs seek to profit by anticipating the needs and wants of consumers successfully, are now heavily regulated and restricted. State bureaucrats effectively control the forms and characteristics of goods and services offered by producers. They claim to protect the consumer from unscrupulous capitalist profiteers. Sometimes, regulations imposed by the state succeed in this objective, but it is wrong to argue that free markets would not have matched or even provided higher standards of product than those framed by the state’s regulatory regime, because it is manifestly in every producers’ interest to produce the best product for the market, unless, that is, the state regulator protects the producer from competition. This is too often the case.

Why bureaucracy fails and free markets succeed

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Teen, 17, absurdly charged with murder in Kenosha for DEFENDING himself from BLM thugs and rioters: How come the terrorists are never charged? – NaturalNews.com

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

#1) The police won’t protect you. You are on your own.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-08-27-17-year-old-murder-kenosha-defending-himself-blm-thugs-rioters.html

(Natural News) Democrats are walking, talking double-standard hypocrites who only enforce laws when it suits them — as is the case in Kenosha, Wis., where a 17-year-old teen has been charged with murder over a clear act of self-defense.

On Tuesday, for the third straight night, Black Lives Matter and Antifa agitators and anarchists took to the streets of the once-sleepy city of about 100,000 people on the banks of Lake Michigan to loot, burn, destroy and terrorize citizens.

You know the story well, by now: A white police officer shoots an ‘unarmed’ black man, and without knowing any details or waiting for an explanation, BLM and Antifa supporters use it to justify destroying major portions of large cities.

They don’t want facts. They don’t want answers. They don’t really want much to change, either — because that would deprive them of the opportunity to continue the ‘revolution.’

All they want to do is tear down, never build, and it doesn’t matter how many innocent people have to lose their businesses, their livelihoods, or their safety in the process.

In recent weeks these ongoing protests have often been met by counter-demonstrations of armed patriots who are sick and tired of seeing their police officers abused and their communities burned down. But in such volatile environments, armed clashes are inevitable, and that’s what happened Tuesday night in Kenosha.

Two rioters were killed and another badly wounded after they tried chasing down a teenager who was armed with what appears to have been an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle.

Video clips of the incidents were plastered all over social media, and we will warn you, they are graphic:

There are others, and those are below — but you can clearly see in the above video, the shooter, who has been arrested, was being chased. And as you’ll see below, one of the rioters chasing him had a handgun.

Also, independent journalist Andy Ngo posted another screenshot of the shooter being pummeled with rioters’ weapon of choice, a skateboard (which can kill someone if they are struck in the head with it).

Fox News has more information on the alleged murder suspect:

Kyle Rittenhouse was arrested in his hometown of Antioch, Ill., Wednesday on suspicion of intentional first-degree homicide, Commander Norman Johnson of the Antioch Police Department said. Antioch is about 20 miles southwest of Kenosha. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

After Kenosha — Divided We Stand

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

We are victims of a vicious program to divide and conquer the U.S. through a culture war designed to dehumanize each other.

We fight among ourselves over scraps while the people who manipulated events to this point walk away laughing at the destruction.

https://tomluongo.me/2020/08/26/kenosha-divided-states-of-america/

It would always come to this. At some point there would be a reckoning for BLM and Antifa.

The shootings in Kenosha, WI are a dividing line for America.

This is the moment where normal people finally said, “Enough. There will be consequences. “

This is a war between radicalized lunatics bathed in unquenchable envy and self-pity and those who refuse to act like victims.

But they are victims.

All of us are. On both sides of the divide.

We are victims of a vicious program to divide and conquer the U.S. through a culture war designed to dehumanize each other.

We fight among ourselves over scraps while the people who manipulated events to this point walk away laughing at the destruction.

They want the violence. They love it. They relish it. It brings them power and prestige.

To maintain their power, as the systems they’ve built fail, they have set us against each other: paid looters and rioters to become cannon fodder in their war against common decency, culture, communities and family.

All for control over the levers of political power.

In 2016 we tried to tell them, peacefully, enough was enough. We elected Donald Trump, of all people, to be our standard bearer. We did it the way we were taught was the right way, through the ballot box.

It was supposed to be the hallmark of our enlightenment, the peaceful transfer of power. It’s been anything but.

For four years we’ve endured a non-stop parade of political venality unmatched in modern history. The quest for regaining the power of the White House brooked no holds being barred.

And if Trump wouldn’t go willingly and we didn’t learn our lesson, then they would activate every cell to flood the streets with disaffected and nihilistic youths to loot and rob; using their outrageous sense of entitlement as fuel for their rage against a machine they are, unwittingly, the main cogs of.

But having watched one young man clear in his purpose to defend his town from roving thugs in Kenosha be forced (under clear conditions of self-defense) to kill two people is a dividing line we’re not coming back from.

Wars are only profitable for those that promote them. Those that fight the wars are the real victims. This kid, a hero by my personal reckoning, is also a victim and there’s no coming back from what he’s had to do.

Killing while justified is still killing. It scars you, no matter if you wear a blue uniform, fatigues or a green t-shirt.

The animals I see on the streets under the auspice of what the media calls ‘peaceful protests’ beating people to within inches of their lives for the crime of being white and defending their property have no humanity.

My livestock have more decency than these people.

And yet, in order for us to survive this dark period of history, we will still have to reach out to them and offer them peace and assistance back from the insanity that grips them now.

That will be the hardest thing for us to do, while also maintaining the resolve to do what we feel is necessary to preserve something of what we’ve built.

That is the dividing line for many of us.

Only you know where that limit is. There are a lot of people out there right now confronting that limit for the first time.

As my dad used to say, as NYPD, “I’d rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.”

We are up against people who brook no limit on their behavior. Everything is justified in the pursuit of their righteous cause. You can see in it all the video footage.

And they know it. They know that we’d rather not fight back. That, unfortunately, to people empowered by the mob and turned into bullies, is misinterpreted as weakness.

Having humanity is not weakness. It is strength.

And nothing bursts the bubble of false bravado on display by Anfita/BLM at this point than strength of character, which defines limits, creates boundaries and establishes consequences.

The sad truth is that this is only the beginning of what’s to come. The line is crossed and from town to town, that line will be more difficult to assess than ever before.

The myth of policing is failing. There aren’t enough cops to quell these riots. The State has been revealed as their enablers.

The law has been used against property owners told they shouldn’t defend themselves or their businesses.

They’ve been afraid of being the ones who cross the line while the looters overwhelm the streets. That impulse will continue to wither. This anarcho-tyranny will not stand for much longer.

That’s what we saw it on the streets of Kenosha.

We’ll see more of it, until a new form of order asserts itself.

Published by Tom Luongo

Publisher of the Gold Goats n Guns. Ruminations on Geopolitics, Markets and Goats.

Be seeing you


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

How the haunting words of an escaped slave apply today

Posted by M. C. on August 27, 2020

To Douglass this arrangement was the worst of both worlds.

I was to be allowed all my time, make all contracts with those for whom I worked, and find my own employment; and, in return for this liberty, I was to pay him three dollars at the end of each week; find myself in calking tools, and in board and clothing. My board was two dollars and a half per week. This, with the wear and tear of clothing and calking tools, made my regular expenses about six dollars per week. This amount I was compelled to make up, or relinquish the privilege of hiring my time. Rain or shine, work or no work, at the end of each week the money must be forthcoming, or I must give up my privilege.

This arrangement, it will be perceived, was decidedly in my master’s favor. It relieved him of all need of looking after me. His money was sure. He received all the benefits of slaveholding without its evils; while I endured all the evils of a slave, and suffered all the care and anxiety of a freeman. 

According to how much of his wages and labor were taken by his master, Douglass was 100% a slave at times, at other times 99% a slave, and even at one point 50% a slave.

His master stole his wages. Sound familiar?

How the haunting words of an escaped slave apply today

By Joe Jarvis

Everyone knows that slavery is when someone else owns you.

Freedom is when you own yourself.

All individual rights stem from the concept of self-ownership.

For example, the reason why consent is required for sex, is that no one gets to decide what you do with your body.

Unfortunately, we do not live in a society that respects self-ownership.

And I don’t just mean random criminal acts.

Slavery is embedded in the structure of our society, right down to the relationship between government and citizens.

Born into slavery, Frederick Douglass was in a unique position to see the parallels between outright chattel slavery, which is owning another human being outright, and other “milder” forms of slavery, where only a portion of your time, labor, and money is stolen from you by force, without your consent.

At some points, Frederick Douglass was essentially rented out by his master to work a regular job, and then forced to pay all his income to his owner.

In his 1855 book My Bondage and My Freedom, Douglass explained:

Besides, I was now getting—as I have said—a dollar and fifty cents per day. I contracted for it, worked for it, earned it, collected it; it was paid to me, and it was rightfully my own; and yet, upon every returning Saturday night, this money—my own hard earnings, every cent of it—was demanded of me, and taken from me by Master Hugh.

He did not earn it; he had no hand in earning it; why, then, should he have it? I owed him nothing. He had given me no schooling, and I had received from him only my food and raiment; and for these, my services were supposed to pay, from the first.

The right to take my earnings, was the right of the robber. He had the power to compel me to give him the fruits of my labor, and this power was his only right in the case.

Douglass draws a distinction: his master had the power to make him a slave, but certainly not the right.

And certainly the fact that his master provided food and shelter did not justify his slavery. Whatever the master provided the slave with his own stolen money does not change the fact that Douglass did not consent to the arrangement.

Douglass then explains what allows masters to keep men enslaved.

To make a contented slave, you must make a thoughtless one. It is necessary to darken his moral and mental vision, and, as far as possible, to annihilate his power of reason. He must be able to detect no inconsistencies in slavery. The man that takes his earnings, must be able to convince him that he has a perfect right to do so.

It must not depend upon mere force; the slave must know no Higher Law than his master’s will. The whole relationship must not only demonstrate, to his mind, its necessity, but its absolute rightfulness. If there be one crevice through which a single drop can fall, it will certainly rust off the slave’s chain.

Douglass also recounted the advice he received from his master, on how to live happily as a slave.

He exhorted me to content myself, and be obedient. He told me, if I would be happy, I must lay out no plans for the future. He said, if I behaved myself properly, he would take care of me. Indeed, he advised me to complete thoughtlessness of the future, and taught me to depend solely upon him for happiness.

He seemed to see fully the pressing necessity of setting aside my intellectual nature, in order to contentment in slavery. But in spite of him, and even in spite of myself, I continued to think, and to think about the injustice of my enslavement, and the means of escape.

One arrangement in slavery was that a slave would be allowed to essentially go out and live his own life. But he would be forced to give a percentage of his income to his master. A slave was essentially renting ownership of himself.

Frederick Douglass found himself in this situation, and felt no better for it.

I could see no reason why I should, at the end of each week, pour the reward of my toil into the purse of my master…

He would, however, when I made him six dollars, sometimes give me six cents, to encourage me.

It had the opposite effect. I regarded it as a sort of admission of my right to the whole. The fact that he gave me any part of my wages was proof, to my mind, that he believed me entitled to the whole of them.

I always felt worse for having received any thing; for I feared that the giving me a few cents would ease his conscience, and make him feel himself to be a pretty honorable sort of robber.

To Douglass this arrangement was the worst of both worlds.

I was to be allowed all my time, make all contracts with those for whom I worked, and find my own employment; and, in return for this liberty, I was to pay him three dollars at the end of each week; find myself in calking tools, and in board and clothing. My board was two dollars and a half per week. This, with the wear and tear of clothing and calking tools, made my regular expenses about six dollars per week. This amount I was compelled to make up, or relinquish the privilege of hiring my time. Rain or shine, work or no work, at the end of each week the money must be forthcoming, or I must give up my privilege.

This arrangement, it will be perceived, was decidedly in my master’s favor. It relieved him of all need of looking after me. His money was sure. He received all the benefits of slaveholding without its evils; while I endured all the evils of a slave, and suffered all the care and anxiety of a freeman. 

According to how much of his wages and labor were taken by his master, Douglass was 100% a slave at times, at other times 99% a slave, and even at one point 50% a slave.

He was still a slave, because he did not own himself.

But in 1838, Douglass embarked on his second attempt to escape slavery.

Frederick Douglass disguised himself a free black sailor. He boarded a train in Maryland with a sailor’s protection pass, borrowed from a free black man he knew. After a few close calls, Douglass arrived in New York. With the help of abolitionists, he found safety in New Bedford, Massachusetts, and began his life as a free man.

Don’t let the masters keep you a thoughtless slave.

Never let a good crisis go to waste is the mantra of the elites.

Subscribe to THE DAILY BELL and immediately receive TWO FREE BLACKPAPERS:

1. Four Ways The Elite Control You in a Crisis

     And how to flip the script to seize their power now

2. The Trojan Horse: How (and Why) to Join the Ranks of the Elite

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »