MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Freedom’

Freedom Eliminates The Evils of Socialism & Fascism

Posted by M. C. on March 26, 2021

Socialism & Fascism are two sides of the same totalitarian coin, with the latter ideology being an offshoot of the former. While Socialism preaches the State being the sole owner of the means of production, Fascism preaches a partnership of State (Power) and Corporations (Money). Socialism leads to rapid ruin, while Fascism leads to a longer and drawn out ruin. The destination is the same regardless of the speed in getting there. Freedom and free markets are the only escape from this totalitarian vice.

Be seeing you

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

The Asinine Notion That There Is an Easy Solution To Gaining Back ‘Freedom’ – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on March 15, 2021

And yes, Americans were much less dumbed down and much more intelligent in the past, but allowed this government to steal all the schools so that nearly every citizen could be trained to be stupid and obedient. They did this in plain sight. I understood this when I was a young teenager, so why did not millions more also see it? I can tell you, they do not want to know the truth, they simply want to be taken care of at the expense of their neighbors. Soon they will get their wish, as all will be slaves to this heinous and evil system allowed by the very people now complaining.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/03/gary-d-barnett/the-asinine-notion-that-there-is-an-easy-solution-to-gaining-back-freedom/

By Gary D. Barnett

GaryDBarnett.com

Every single week, and sometimes, several times a week, I get letters, usually nasty, about how I have never given any solution to this takeover being experienced today. It is normally something to the tune of: “All you (and others) do is tell us what the problem is, but you ‘never’ tell us what to do about it, and what the solution (apparently a one time fix-all solution) should be to fix it. This question and criticism is irritating to no end, and exposes the real problem that faces us today.

For how am I, or anyone else for that matter, going to be able to convince hundreds of millions, or in this case billions of people, to all act in a way that is not only sane, but that will drive these masses of humanity to at least attempt to help themselves? The very thought of such an attitude should be fully descriptive of why this country and the world are now consumed by a lack of drive to do anything to address their own plight by simply taking personal responsibility. Most everyone in this country apparently thinks that someone else should come up with a ‘plan’ for them, and all ills will magically be cured. How absolutely childish and absurd!

I have penned tens of thousands of words just this past year alone as to what the solution entails, but that does not mean that any large number of people are listening, or more importantly are willing to take any real risk to save themselves.

I am sick of this question, and of those that expect me to fix all their problems in life by “telling them what to do and how to act,” as if they would ever take my advice in the first place. They are willing to do as they are told by government, but not willing to fight or do anything else to save their own liberty. They continually seek a “master’s” approval, and desire to follow the orders of others. This is the problem.

The long letter I received this morning from a reader was pretty much as all the others asking this question or demanding a ‘solution,’ but at least this gentleman was fairly cordial and non-threatening, but still very critical of me and any exposing the problems we face, but not fixing the problems we describe. I am not including his letter, as it was long and somewhat repetitive. I felt I owed him a decent response, so this is what I told him:

“Thank you for writing to me. I appreciate it. I am always disheartened by letters like yours, because I have given the solution over and over again. There is but one, but it is impossible to bring it to fruition by announcing some sort of trick to get this ignorant and indifferent population to do anything other than follow orders. They simply have no desire to protect their own freedom, and seem content to wallow in apathy while waiting for the government to tell them what to do. They go to the polls to choose new masters every year, and every four years, they scream and fight to see which of  the selected two presidential masters will rule them. In what has always been a scam, people continue to vote, which is a fools game, and think because of it they are free. Indoctrination at this level cannot be overcome by simply saying; “Here is a plan for you.” 

If one is to walk the streets of America today and not understand the idiocy present and the depth of our problems due to the people themselves, then blindness has certainly consumed all the masses plus those expecting someone else to come up with a solution to change the minds of 330 million people just by saying “do this.”

The solution is mass disobedience and dissent, but by me telling people to do this, as I have been for over two decades, will not change anything. The people themselves have to stand up and take risk to protect their own liberty, because I or no one else can do it for them.

As to patriots, those that do the state’s bidding in war are not patriots, but simply murderers for the state, and are perpetuating their own servitude by taking orders to kill others instead of doing something to free themselves. This is just another state trick to get people believing that war is in their interest, when in fact, it just tightens the chains of tyranny at home. Now, the real rulers and their pawns in government are at war against the people, and they still cower in fear of nothing.

And yes, Americans were much less dumbed down and much more intelligent in the past, but allowed this government to steal all the schools so that nearly every citizen could be trained to be stupid and obedient. They did this in plain sight. I understood this when I was a young teenager, so why did not millions more also see it? I can tell you, they do not want to know the truth, they simply want to be taken care of at the expense of their neighbors. Soon they will get their wish, as all will be slaves to this heinous and evil system allowed by the very people now complaining.

Only individual resolve and a willingness to take great risk in order to restore true freedom can change this course we are on, and absolutely no one can force these citizens to do it; they have to come to that as individuals. Nothing I say or do will change millions of minds and drive them to action, and in fact, if I had to force people to act as I wanted, I would be no better than the low-life scum that is running this country today.”

It is incredible how as soon as a people become subject, it promptly falls into such complete forgetfulness of its freedom that it can hardly be roused to the point of regaining it, obeying so easily and willingly that one is led to say that this people has not so much lost its liberty as won its enslavement.”

~ Etienne de La Boetie (1552-53) “The Politics of Obedience, The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude”

Be seeing you

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

Experts Warn Lifting Mask Mandates Could Contribute To Dangerous Spread Of Freedom

Posted by M. C. on March 4, 2021

California and New York quickly responded to the declaration with emergency bans on importing any freedom from Texas, Mississippi, Florida, or South Dakota.

https://babylonbee.com/news/experts-warn-lifting-mask-mandates-could-contribute-to-dangerous-spread-of-freedom

U.S.—Experts have issued a dire warning to the nation that the lifting of mask mandates, business closures, and capacity limits in Texas and Mississippi could contribute to the spread of liberty across the nation.

“As states like Texas begin to lift their mandates, we could be seeing a deadly outbreak of freedom, liberty, and personal responsibility all across the nation,” said Dr. Andy Patton of MIT. “We’re really not encouraged by the numbers here.”

“I’m worried other states will see this. People will start thinking they are supposed to take responsibility for their own health and their own decisions. And that’s just not what America is about.”

In a sweeping consensus, scientists all agreed that one state finally ending its unconstitutional mandates could lead to other states doing the same. Consequences could be severe, ranging from people doing what they want and just living their lives, to the populace attaining herd immunity and making government action on the pandemic irrelevant.

California and New York quickly responded to the declaration with emergency bans on importing any freedom from Texas, Mississippi, Florida, or South Dakota.

Bee seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 5 Comments »

Freedom

Posted by M. C. on February 21, 2021

May be an image of 1 person and text that says 'The struggle for freedom is ultimately not resistance to autocrats or oligarchs but resistance to the despotism of public opinion. -Ludwig von Mises FEE'

Be seeing you

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

A Penchant for Controlling Others | Mises Institute

Posted by M. C. on February 6, 2021

Think of this the next time you are in a big city zooming around curves and between lanes along with thousands of others, doing top speeds. Here we have 4,000-pound hunks of steel barreling down the road without aids other than a dotted yellow line on the road. These are real-life death machines in which one wrong move could cause a 100-car pileup and mass death.

And yet it works. Why? The reason is that it is not in anyone’s interest to get in a crash. It is in everyone’s interest to get to where one is going in one piece and to do it efficiently. Roll together tens of thousands of people with the same broad goal and you get spontaneous cooperation. Something that people normally think could not work does in fact work. Looked at from that angle, the orderliness we see on the roads is a general expression of the capacity for human society to work in the context of self-interested individualism.

https://mises.org/library/penchant-controlling-others

Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.

Editor’s Note: In this 2009 article, Lew Rockwell lists the problems with government mandates on private use of mobile phones. Observant readers will note the “public safety” arguments against the freedom to use phones as we choose are essentially the same as current claims that “public health” is a justification for dictating daily habits and behavior. ]

We all want freedom for ourselves, but many people have doubts about the way others might use their own freedom. Under these conditions, the state is there to help. Get enough people to favor enough restriction, and the state is good to go, administering every aspect of life from its smallest to its largest detail.

Every day presents more cases, but the most recent case is stunning. It turns out that 97% of people polled support a universal ban on texting while driving. Half of those surveyed say that the penalty should be as severe as that for drunk driving. Among these, how many do you suppose do text and drive but don’t want to admit it to the pollster? Probably plenty. And yet I couldn’t find a single online defense of the practice anywhere on the web.

The truth is that it is not necessarily unsafe to text behind the wheel. It all depends on the situation. If you are in a traffic jam, and are late to an appointment, the ability to text can be a lifesaver. Or if there are no cars around, you might be able to risk it. On the other hand, it would probably be a mistake to attempt this doing 80 mph around slower traffic on a freeway.

How can we know the difference between when it is safe and when it is not? The principle applied on American roads is that the driver himself makes that decision. If this principle didn’t make sense, there would be no way that the roads themselves could work at all.

Think of this the next time you are in a big city zooming around curves and between lanes along with thousands of others, doing top speeds. Here we have 4,000-pound hunks of steel barreling down the road without aids other than a dotted yellow line on the road. These are real-life death machines in which one wrong move could cause a 100-car pileup and mass death. We do it anyway.

What’s remarkable is not that there are so many wrecks. The miracle is that it works at all and that, for the most part, people get to where they are going. And consider too the demographic behind the car: old, young, abled, disabled, experienced, inexperienced. Some people have a facility for driving and others do not. Some people have spatial agility and others do not.

How does it all work? Don’t tell me that it is due to central planning and the police. The police aren’t driving every car and controlling every wheel. Our human volition on the road and the decisions we make that affect other drivers are nearly 100% our own.

And yet it works. Why? The reason is that it is not in anyone’s interest to get in a crash. It is in everyone’s interest to get to where one is going in one piece and to do it efficiently. Roll together tens of thousands of people with the same broad goal and you get spontaneous cooperation. Something that people normally think could not work does in fact work. Looked at from that angle, the orderliness we see on the roads is a general expression of the capacity for human society to work in the context of self-interested individualism.

Now think of this poll showing a widespread opposition to texting while driving. I submit that you would get similar results from a poll that asked people about the right to drive:

Do you support or oppose the right of everyone to own 4,000-pound heaps of steel and control them completely and autonomously at top speeds in the midst of thousands of other citizens whose lives could be in danger with so much as a slight flick of the wrist to the right or left?

That question could elicit nearly 100% negative results. We generally trust our capacity to manage ourselves but we do not trust the capacity of others to manage themselves. And we surely don’t believe that society can generally function well under conditions of freedom. Even though we live in the midst of spontaneous order and use its brilliance every day (grocery store, the world wide web, restaurants, housing developments), we don’t really understand it.

Or how about this one:

Do you support the right of anyone over a certain age to buy and consume as much hard liquor as he wants, even to the point of drinking himself into a life-threatening stupor, neglecting the kids, wrecking family life, and killing brain cells that cannot be replaced?

Probably most people would say no. And yet this is precisely the reasoning behind Prohibition, which most people today regard as a terrible error. Today, we supposedly realize that the social cost of the right to drink hard liquor was greater than the supposed benefit we receive from enforcing Prohibition.

So it is with texting and driving. There are times when it is safe. There are times when it is not safe. The only ones who can really know the difference are the people behind the wheel. These people already enjoy the freedom to talk to passengers, to fiddle with their stereo, to drive following an exhausting jog, to drive while distracted with anxieties over work and marriage, to pray or sing in the car, and do many other things that seem like a distraction from the goal at hand. Somehow it all works, and there is a lesson here. You can count on more order to emerge from trusting freedom than you get from attempting to micromanage people’s lives.

Now, the libertarians among us might point out that these roads are publicly owned and that this is the core source of the problem. Under privately owned roads, there might be intense restrictions on what you can and cannot do and these might be part of the contract you make with the road owner.

The market would take care of the rest. If an owner were too restrictive, drivers would take other routes. If they are too lenient, their insurance premiums would rise and they would pay too high a price. The resultant rules of the road would be a result of this careful calibration, tested constantly by the forces of supply and demand.

Under the existing rules of private roads, we see no evidence of a crackdown on texting. Maybe it would come in the future, but at least there would be a market test. When a rule fails in private markets, the rule is changed.

But it is different with government. No matter how preposterous the rule, it stays and stays, regardless of whether it works to accomplish its end. And there can be no question that a crackdown on texting is coming. Obama has already banned texting while driving for federal workers. A bill that would deny federal funds to states is flying through the Senate. Look for a nationwide ban in the coming months.

The ban says, You don’t know what is good for you so you must be forced to do what the government thinks is good for you. The ban gets support because people generally think that while they are responsible and good at calibrating what is safe and unsafe, others are not. Through this method, all freedoms could be abolished.

It’s a bad way to form the rules of a society.

Originally published November 2009. Author:

Contact Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, and editor of LewRockwell.com.

Be seeing you

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

Surveillance Kills Freedom – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on February 4, 2021

I offer this brief constitutional history so as to address the abuse of the Fourth Amendment, and the consequences of that abuse. Two weeks ago, the Defense Intelligence Agency — an arm of the Pentagon and one of 16 federal entities that spies on Americans — acknowledged publicly that it uses commercial software to monitor the movements and conversations of those on whom it has chosen to spy. And because it does so without warrants, it spies on whomever it wishes.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/02/andrew-p-napolitano/surveillance-kills-freedom/

By Andrew P. Napolitano

“The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man’s spiritual nature, of his feelings, and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone — the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized men.”
— Justice Louis D. Brandeis (1856-1941)

When Justice Louis D. Brandeis referred to the right to privacy as “the right to be let alone,” it was 1928. He was dissenting in a Supreme Court opinion called Olmstead v. United States, in which federal agents tapped the telephone lines of Roy Olmstead and others and recorded their conversations about importing alcohol into the U.S. during Prohibition. They did so without search warrants. On the basis of the tapped conversations, Olmstead and his colleagues were convicted of conspiracy to violate federal law. The Supreme Court upheld their convictions.

The issue in the case was whether the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of searches and seizures without a warrant issued by a judge based on probable cause of crime includes surveillance. When Brandeis dissented in Olmstead, telephones were novel and not in widespread personal use. It would be 39 years before the Supreme Court accepted Brandeis’ dissent as properly encapsulating the understanding of the framers when it characterized surveillance as a search.

Stated differently, the language in the Fourth Amendment, which unambiguously prohibits the government from engaging in warrantless searches and seizures, was not interpreted so as to characterize government surveillance as a search until 1967, when the Supreme Court accepted Brandeis’ rationale. Since then, it is commonplace that the government needs a warrant to engage in surveillance. The warrant is a constitutional bulwark against fishing expeditions, and it requires the courts to defer to privacy.

I offer this brief constitutional history so as to address the abuse of the Fourth Amendment, and the consequences of that abuse. Two weeks ago, the Defense Intelligence Agency — an arm of the Pentagon and one of 16 federal entities that spies on Americans — acknowledged publicly that it uses commercial software to monitor the movements and conversations of those on whom it has chosen to spy. And because it does so without warrants, it spies on whomever it wishes.

It claims that the language of the Fourth Amendment — which protects the right of all people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects — only restrains law enforcement and does not restrain the balance of the government.

Yet, the whole purpose of the Bill of Rights is to recognize that personal liberty stems from our humanity. When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, he referred to our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as inalienable from our human nature, and as gifts of the Creator.

The Bill of Rights, too, articulates that our rights are natural. The Ninth Amendment expressly commands that the enumeration of certain rights — such as the freedoms of religion, speech and press — shall not be construed by any government to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people.

Among the rights retained by the people — never given away to the states or the federal government — and thus protected by the Ninth Amendment, and since 1967 by the Fourth, is the right to privacy. The Olmstead decision focused narrowly on whether listening to someone’s telephone conversations without a warrant is as unconstitutional as rummaging through the person’s papers and effects without a warrant.

Brandeis understood that true happiness can only come from the exercise of personal liberty, and James Madison understood this when he wrote the Fourth Amendment. This understanding, as recognized by the courts today, is that the right to privacy protects intellectual activities, beliefs, thoughts, emotions, sensations, and private communications about them.

Who could be happy under a state of surveillance? Privacy is natural — there are things we all do that are none of the government’s business. Surveillance is totalitarian. It is the manifestation of the tyrant’s wish to know all about a potential opponent.

The whole purpose of the Bill of Rights is to keep the government at bay — off the people’s backs, as Justice William O. Douglas wrote — thereby protecting our natural state of freedom so that we can pursue happiness.

The Declaration of Independence underscores, and the Bill of Rights protects, the right to pursue happiness for individuals, not for governments.

Who can be happy while being observed by the government? A watched person changes behavior and loses liberty on account of being watched. The liberty to make unfettered choices, the right to shake a metaphorical fist in the tyrant’s face, the personal power to ignore what the government expects are all dissipated.

A watched person hesitates to exercise freedom. The more the government gets away with surveillance without warrants, the more people will accept the servitude it brings.

Personal freedom is the unfettered power to exercise natural rights without the approval of the government or the consent of any other person. It is the means to happiness. Yet, because we live in a society in which we need the government’s permission to do nearly anything, is it any wonder that the government wants to know everything about us?

The government that spies continuously has large ears and insatiable eyes. And on its face there is no smile.

The Best of Andrew P. Napolitano Andrew P. Napolitano [send him mail], a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written nine books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent is Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty. To find out more about Judge Napolitano and to read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit creators.com.

Be seeing you

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

Panic in the Imperial City | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on January 23, 2021

Why are the media and congress silent on these war crimes, especially at a time when they will stop at nothing to destroy President Trump?

Because the media is complicit—they exist to serve the empire.

Nothing that substantially challenges the presumption of U.S. global hegemony ever makes the airwaves.

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/panic-in-the-imperial-city/

by Kenny MacDonald

Pexels Jacob Morch 572779

Despite all the lip service about democracy, justice, human rights, freedom, equality and so forth—the entire Washington establishment exists for the sole purpose of perpetuating the empire.

How do I know?

Because the media response to the January 6th attack at the Capitol reveals the Washington establishment’s true nature.

The political class has commenced Operation Destroy Trump. The Washington machine will stop at nothing to expose every character flaw, every incompetency, and every authoritarian tendency of Trump.

Except one thing; if I wanted to prove that Trump was a dangerous racist dictator with no regard for human decency I could do it pretty easily, and I wouldn’t even have to search for subliminal messages in his bumbling speeches.

Trump has been complicit in a genocidal war waged by Saudi Arabia that has killed over 200,000 Yemeni civilians.

Trump illegally assassinated a high ranking member of the Iranian government—a sovereign government that the United States is not at war with—risking a conflict that would certainly produce more casualties than any other war this century!

Trump has dropped more drone strikes on Somalian civilians in 2020 than Bush and Obama did in 10 years combined! He also killed more Afghan civilians via airstrikes in 2019 than any other year in that war!

Where was mainstream media? Where was Congress? they must have been combing through speeches and tweets for racist dog whistles and subliminal calls to violence because they certainly weren’t monitoring the American drones dropping bombs on the heads of black children in Somalia.

Trying to prove Trump is the most dangerous president in U.S. history, while not attacking him on the worst atrocities he has committed is criminal, maybe even slanderous in a morbid way.

Why are the media and congress silent on these war crimes, especially at a time when they will stop at nothing to destroy President Trump?

Because the media is complicit—they exist to serve the empire.

Nothing that substantially challenges the presumption of U.S. global hegemony ever makes the airwaves. Yes, every once in a while the media will toss a low ranking soldier under the bus for war crimes, but those crimes are never presented in a way that challenges the policy. And to their credit, the media did create a hoopla over the assassination of Iranian General Qassam Soleimani, but again, they never asked the critical questions that would challenge U.S. policy in the region.

The mainstream media is state media in all but name. Journalists enjoy relationships with various anonymous sources within the intelligence community who leak cherry-picked intelligence for news rooms to gobble up in exchange for writing news stories that parrot the regime’s official lines.

After the lines are repeated enough times to satisfy Joseph Goebbels, a litany of retired generals who sit on the boards of defense contractors (which is never disclosed) make their rounds on cable news networks as they pass the ready-made sermons of the empire along to the people without a bit of skepticism from the host. In other words, the American people are exclusively inundated with the opinions of so-called experts who all stand to financially or professionally benefit from war.

The formula is rather simple. The think tanks create the policy; congress implements the policy; the network news manufactures your thirst for war; and the defense contractors fasten the weapons and buys everyone else off. Ultimately, money is moved from your pocket and is used to line the pockets of the whole cabal.

That’s why no one on network news, despite their real hatred of him, will ever dunk on Trump with the phrase “Trump is a war criminal.” Because even taking out Trump is not worth the American people wondering for even a second what exactly they mean by war criminal.

The mainstream media is not just complicit with the empire, in fact, their sole job is to protect the empire against any threat to it, such as Trump. Trump was the first candidate in recent history to make it into the Oval Office without the approval of the Washington establishment. He cracked the code of American politics by circumventing the filters of the corporate media and spoke directly to the American people through social media. The recent social media purges against Trump and his inner circle was not spontaneous, it was premeditated. The Washington machine was merely waiting for a catalyst event to occur so it could reassert its stranglehold on American political discourse.

Before Trump broke the system, the presidential primary elections were designed specifically for the corporate media to weed out unacceptable candidates. What constitutes unacceptable? Anyone who opposes the American global empire. The media gatekeepers successfully scuttled every campaign that advocated radical foreign policy change. Tulsi Gabbard spent her 2020 primary season getting ridiculed on TV for allegedly being a friend of dictators, which is an impressive way to spin her anti-war platform. Gabbard was simply getting the Ron Paul treatment, who was also lambasted by the elites during his presidential runs (2008, 2012) for having the gall to point out the evil hypocrisies of American foreign policy. The Washington machine conspired to steal the democratic nomination from Bernie Sanders twice – not because of his democratic socialism – but because he wasn’t an empire zealot either. The message is clear: anything goes in American politics except questioning the empire.

In 2016, on a Republican debate stage Trump openly called the Iraq war a mistake, criticized our wars in Afghanistan and Syria, and questioned our role in NATO. The media worked overtime to ensure a Trump defeat, but Trump proved to be bulletproof because of his cult-like following on social media. Of course, Trump never quite lived up to his promises of an America First foreign policy as he perpetuated the criminal wars of his predecessors. However, it was clear that the Washington establishment was terrified of what he might do, which is why most of his administration was plagued with a ridiculous investigation of a Russian collusion hoax that nobody believed, followed by an impeachment based on the flimsiest of pretexts. They were grasping at straws to get rid of Trump.

Trump’s improbable victory caused a panic in 2016 until the establishment realized that Trump had very little understanding of his own America First ideology. A Trump presidency could be managed by the Washington machine as long as Trump didn’t appoint anyone who could implement his campaign promises. For the most part, the Washington establishment was able to control the Trump administration with well placed neocons such as Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, and Jim Jeffrey who worked tirelessly to undermine Trump’s vision at every foreign policy turn. The only redeeming quality the Washington establishment saw in Trump was his hawkishness on China, which the media has been happy to help propagandize the American people into supporting a trade war and military posturing in the South China Sea.

As the Trump movement comes to an end the chickens are coming home to roost. Washington was so worried about controlling and eliminating Trump that they neglected his base, which has become increasingly radicalized due to the media’s deranged hostility towards them.

The anger of Trump’s base came to head on January 6th when protesters stormed the Capitol building because they believed the election had been stolen from Trump. Of course the violence at the Capitol was inexcusable, but why was the Washington outrage machine cranked up to level 11?

Washington is panicking because they see the unfolding events as an existential threat to their stranglehold on the American people and their global empire. The Washington machine was unable to stop Trump’s 2016 insurgent campaign, and Washington’s damage control strategy only worked to contain Trump’s policies but failed to control his growing popular base. Here’s three reasons why panic is suddenly setting in in the Imperial city.

First, the ruling class recognizes that their power is waning. George Bush’s Global War on Terror was truly a global war fought on two fronts, international and domestic. The national security state was given a shot in the arm with the Patriot Act, and Americans have been taking their shoes off at airports ever since. After twenty years of war, it’s undeniable that the war abroad has been a miserable failure (Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Syria). But despite the empire’s failures abroad, the American people could always be counted on to stay in line. Now it seems the population is spiraling out of control of the Washington handlers.

Second, the violence is finding its target. The ruling elite has always tolerated violence as long as it stays on the peripheral and is directed at factions within the population, such as the Black Lives Matter protests this past summer. Although their cause may be misguided and their legitimate anger has been manipulated, the Capitol protesters have at least identified the proper source of all their frustrations, Congress. Congress has robbed all of us blind in pursuit of their maniacal vision of global dominance, and now—to their surprise—the war has come home.

Finally, whether the claims of the protesters are true or not, this event exposes American democracy for the sham that it is. The assumption of U.S. global hegemony is derived from the belief that America has a uniquely exceptional system of government. When an angry mob storms the Capitol building because 34% of voters believe the election was fraudulent, America’s exceptional system appears to be a myth. Therefore, the foundation of America’s global empire is nothing but a house of cards on display for the world to see.

To the empire zealots, this wasn’t just an attack on a government building, this was an attack on a religious structure, which should raise red flags. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi both referred to the Capitol as a “temple to democracy.” Joe Biden called the process of ratifying the election “sacred.” The Capitol is their vatican, their religion is American democracy, and their salvation is fighting evangelical wars to spread their religion far and wide. To these true believers, only America’s government is sacred. No one was referring to Muammar Gadhafi’s government buildings as sacred when Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden all supported Obama bombing those buildings to spread the blessings of American democracy to Libya. Trump and his supporters have exposed America’s favorite export, democracy, as a rotten product. For Washington’s empire lackeys, such as Republican Liz Cheney, this attack on America’s religion can not be tolerated.

In response, the domestic War on Terror, which previously relied on spying and government psyops, is now being fought in plain sight. Congress immediately moved to impeach Trump with just days to go in his administration to make sure that he never gets near the strings of power again. The Capitol protestors are labeled as “domestic terrorists” to clear the road for a new domestic terrorism bill in the upcoming Biden Administration. Big tech has been co-opted to do the government’s bidding by removing anyone deemed a dangerous subversive from the internet. Take out their leaders, label them terrorists, and disrupt their lines of communication. Sound familiar?

The Republican base, which has always been loyal to the Empire, has lost its faith in American Exceptionalism. The Past 12 months of impeachments, lockdowns, corporate bailouts, left-wing riots, mandatory white privilege training, and censorship has pushed a large segment of Republicans into a corner where they feel like they have nothing to lose. Despite all the nonsense rhetoric about right wing militias, the reason the Capitol police was so unprepared for this moment was because the right doesn’t normally act like this. Now Washington realizes they have a full on insurgency on their hands that isn’t going away no matter how bad they want to wish it out of existence.

It’s tempting to interpret the empire’s employment of its awesome powers against the American people as a sign of its overwhelming strength. But that’s false. This is a sign of weakness. This is how empires die, like a wounded beast lashing out as it takes its last gasps. The war on the home front is failing. The people are rejecting the government which increasingly feels as if it’s being forced upon them. The government response is merely the domestic surge (like Iraq’s in 2007, and Afghanistan’s in 2009) that puts a bandaid over an infection that will continue to spread underneath. That infection is our lack of consent. Washington is now recognized for what it is, an occupying force that hardly anyone consents to anymore. After the last 4 years of the left declaring “not my president,” the right will share that same sentiment for the next 4 years.

People are finally waking up and realizing that the federal government stopped caring about its citizens long ago. The beginning of the end was when President Truman stood up the national security state after World War II and declared that the U.S. government would counter the Soviet Union in every country on the map, including our own. After 70 years, the United States has morphed into a rogue military state hiding behind a facade of democracy that exists only to feed its own lust to dominate the globe at the expense of the American people. While the empire spoiled over $6.4 Trillion in the last 20 years looking for other countries to fix, America was slowly crumbling and stood woefully unprepared to respond to domestic emergencies, such as a pandemic or a fedup American population that has begun to reject government legitimacy.

There is no putting the genie back in the bottle. The system is exposed. The empire can not be reigned in, it’s a cancer that has metastasized to engulf the entirety of the beltway. The only solution is secession and a peaceful dissolution of the federal government. If that sounds crazy to you, consider the alternative: a perpetual cycle of hatred and violence that may end in a bloody civil war.

Kenny MacDonald is a former Navy SEAL and veteran of the war in Afghanistan. He is currently pursuing a bachelor’s degree in history. Follow his Youtube channel here.

Be seeing you

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

Freedom

Posted by M. C. on January 21, 2021

Freedom is a fragile thing and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it only comes once to a people. And those in world history who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again. —-from California Governor Ronald Reagan’s Inaugural Address, January 5, 1967

Be seeing you

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

Face Masks and Freedom: Beware of Skepticism as a Tool of Inaction. – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 16, 2021

Being different is not enough. Seeking truth is the goal, and marshalling your resources accordingly is the necessity. Far from that goal, the contrarian may even be left with a spirit opposed to cooperation with others: one of our greatest resources are the people we are able to surround ourselves with.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/01/allan-stevo/face-masks-and-freedom-beware-of-skepticism-as-a-tool-of-inaction/

By Allan Stevo

We are taught a healthy and critical mind is skeptical. That is not true. A healthy and critical mind is skeptical when appropriate. Skeptical must never be a default, for then skepticism can be as self-sabotaging as apathy.

To be convinced to not care about the outcome of your own actions, or to not believe that your actions bring meaningful consequences, is one of the greatest harms that can be done to you in the modern era. An additional harm is done to an individual in modernity by injection of undue skepticism in his world view.

Libertarians, conservatives, and other heterodox thinkers of our contemporary and overly trendy era are especially at risk of this.

It can be easy to come to heterodox thinking because one is, by default, contrarian rather than insightful. Contrarian is not a synonym for insightful, though it is often mistaken as such.

This desire to be different from others sheds little more light than a default desire to be the same as others. Rather than being the obedient sheep of the herd, you are then the black sheep who dyed his own wool black.

The contrarian behavior lends itself to individualism, but not necessarily to a pursuit of greater truth.

Being different is not enough to be right. In fact, there are many things that the herd does right. Like anyone else living an unexamined life: the contrarian is left with a distorted view of the world and a life full of kneejerk reactions if he can’t recognize and control this tendency.

Being different is not enough. Seeking truth is the goal, and marshalling your resources accordingly is the necessity. Far from that goal, the contrarian may even be left with a spirit opposed to cooperation with others: one of our greatest resources are the people we are able to surround ourselves with.

To innately be hard to cooperate with and to leave yourself in that raw state is self-debilitating.

Unchecked skepticism places itself in a similar position of self-debilitation.

An unfamiliar idea is not then evaluated on its merits. It is evaluated on its novelty.

Skepticism can be the other side of the coin of trend following. It can be mere trend opposing.

Skepticism can be the enemy of faith. It is with great truth that people say faith can move mountains. It need not be a religious conviction. To tell yourself something is possible and to commit yourself to doing that thing makes that thing possible and far more likely to occur than before the person of faith conceived it. The person of faith is required to act in order for creation to occur. If you don’t act, creation cannot occur. If you don’t fight, you can’t win.

He with no faith, moves no mountains.

It is the leap of faith that brings creation, that brings victory, that brings the moving of mountains. No matter how outlandish the aim, the leap of faith is required to reach the goal. Those able to make the greatest leaps of faith, and who find themselves able to commit to the execution, achieve the greatest feats. In contrast, it is the overly skeptical voices around us or within us that prevent creation, that prevent victory, that prevent the moving of mountains.

In whose interest could it possibly be to prevent greatness in our midst? Probably not yours, dear warrior. And certainly not mine.

The skeptical can be easily convinced to focus on that which does not matter. Politics sucks. Fights are brutal. Government is rotten. Life is a drag. I get it: there are lots of bad things in the world. That’s no permission for anyone to be such a wuss. For anyone to be so mentally weak. It’s no permission at all.

Skepticism is a grand tool. Used improperly, like any tool, it can be leverage for such great evil. It is not the tool that is evil or good, it is the behavior of the one holding the tool. To allow unchecked skepticism is a great evil to yourself and all around you. And do you know whose fault it is when you use a tool for evil?

Yours.

You’ll never take back our country with weakness. You’ll never take back your freedom with weakness. You’ll never take back our freedom with weakness.

Lots of things suck.

That’s no reason to leave the fight.

Skepticism is not a tool of action.

That is evil enough, but it is not sufficiently derided in our era. It is worse than a mere tool of inaction. It is a tool of weakness. Skepticism is a tool of weakness.

“The unexamined life is not worth living,” said Socrates.

One of your greatest tools is your ability to do exactly that — to turn a mirror on yourself, to find truth in your search, to exactingly look at the world, and to act in the world, but most importantly to act within yourself and in your own life around you.

Examined skepticism can be such a useful tool, while some of the greatest potential in our present era is lost upon those with unchecked skepticism.

How useful they are to the enemy.

How effectively they have debilitated themselves.

How little faith it takes, how wonderfully powerful you become, if you can take a tiny leap of faith.

A tiny leap of faith.

The unchecked skepticism you proudly welcome into your own life, and nurture, chokes faith out of your life in a way your greatest enemy would never be able to do.

Push away unexamined skepticism and act, for you actions matter. “Face Masks in One Lesson is a tool you can use for exactly that.

The Best of Allan Stevo Allan Stevo [send him mail] writes about international politics and culture from a free market perspective at 52 Weeks in Slovakia (www.52inSk.com). He is the author of How to Win America, The Bitcoin Manifesto, and numerous other books.

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

The Freedom To Pursue Happiness – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on December 31, 2020

SHEEPLE ALERT! Read at own risk.

It is hard to believe that any judge in America would permit a criminal trial of any person for violating a standard of behavior that has not been enacted into law by a legislature. We know this because under our system of representative government, separated powers and guaranteed liberties, only the legislative branch can craft laws and assign punishments for noncompliance. This is Constitutional Law 101.

But under the Constitution, these social-distancing, wear-your-mask, shut-your-business, stay-at-home edicts constitute mere recommendations that should induce rational voluntary compliance, because the government in America is without lawful power to compel compliance.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/12/andrew-p-napolitano/the-freedom-to-pursue-happiness-3/

By Andrew P. Napolitano

The governors of all 50 states, and the mayors of many large cities, have assumed unto themselves the powers to restrict private personal choices and lawful public behavior in an effort to curb the spread of COVID-19.

They have done so not by enforcing previously existing legislation but by crafting their own executive orders, styling those orders as if they were laws, using state and local police to enforce those so-called laws and — presumably when life returns to normal and the courts reopen — prosecuting the alleged offenders in court.

It is hard to believe that any judge in America would permit a criminal trial of any person for violating a standard of behavior that has not been enacted into law by a legislature. We know this because under our system of representative government, separated powers and guaranteed liberties, only the legislative branch can craft laws and assign punishments for noncompliance. This is Constitutional Law 101. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch has written that the executive branch cannot enforce a law that it has written. If it does, we will have approached tyranny.

Have we approached tyranny already?

During the past eight weeks, governors and mayors have closed most businesses, public venues and houses of worship, prohibited public assembly and restricted travel — all of which they have unilaterally decreed to be nonessential.

In his terrifying novel “1984” — which posits a future of total control of all persons by the government and total control of the government by one political party — George Orwell argued that he who controls the meaning of words controls the laws as well.

That Orwellian truism has been manifested like never before here in America, where executive branch officeholders have used state and local police to restrain people from engaging in private and public behavior which they concede was lawful two months ago because today it is not deemed “essential.”

Frankly, I am surprised at the ferocity of police enforcement and the lameness of police compliance. The police have taken the same oaths to uphold the same Bill of Rights — it’s not the Bill of Safety; it’s the Bill of Rights — as have all other officeholders. The police also know that it is unlawful for them to obey an unlawful order, particularly when they use force.

The lockdown orders are all unlawful because none of them — none — has been enacted by a legislature, and all of them — all — interfere with fundamental liberties, each of which is guaranteed — guaranteed — by the Constitution.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I recognize the scientific value of personal efforts to control contagion. But under the Constitution, these social-distancing, wear-your-mask, shut-your-business, stay-at-home edicts constitute mere recommendations that should induce rational voluntary compliance, because the government in America is without lawful power to compel compliance.

The governors complain about resistance. They need to know that Americans will resist efforts to interfere in behavior that remains as moral, natural, lawful and constitutional as it was 60 days ago.

Last week, President Donald Trump, sounding fed up with gubernatorial lockdown orders, declared that religious worship is essential — meaning, in his opinion, all houses of worship should be opened — and he offered that he was prepared to “override” any governors who disagreed with him.

When he realized that he lacked any authority to override even unlawful gubernatorial decrees, he dispatched the Department of Justice to begin filing challenges to governors in federal courts and to argue that constitutional freedoms are being impaired by the states.

I applaud this, but it is too little, too late. Where was the DOJ when Catholic priests were threatened with arrest for saying Mass or distributing palms and when Jewish rabbis were put in COVID-19-infested jails for holding funerals? At all these religious events, folks freely chose to exercise their freedom to worship; and to take their chances.

These DOJ interventions provoked the question: Who should decide what goods, services or venues are essential — the states or the federal government? The question is Orwellian, as the answer is: neither of them. The government in America — state or federal — has no power and no right to determine what goods, services and venues are essential.

Those determinations have been for individuals to make since 1776, and those individual choices have been constitutionally protected from the feds since the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791 and from the states since the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868.

What is essential to the laborer or student or housewife may not be essential to the former Goldman Sachs partner who was elected governor of New Jersey, and who decreed last week, “It shall be the duty of every person or entity in this State… to cooperate fully” with his orders, or essential to the ideologue who is mayor of the Big Apple and who, for all his professed liberality, threatened to close permanently — permanently — businesses and houses of worship that flaunt his guidelines.

A duty is undertaken voluntarily or by nature, not by executive command, Governor Murphy. And the government cannot take property away from its owners except for a legitimate public use and only for just compensation, Mayor de Blasio.

Governors and mayors can make all the dictatorial pronouncements and threats that they wish. But they cannot use public assets to enforce them. And when they seek to use force, those from whom they seek it should decline the offer.

In America, we decide for ourselves what produces happiness. We have never delegated to the government — ever — the power to make personal choices for us.

And some of us are willing to take chances and even do “nonessential” things. The essence of the freedoms for which we have fought since 1776 is the liberty to be ourselves.

Be seeing you

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