Servant to Master; Revolutionary to Tyrant

When I started reading this, I was chafing that he was missing what I thought was clearly the point. Yes, I was just being impatient; he was holding back, saving the truest for last.

This is a great article: Rappoport on the big turnaround. This excerpt is where I realized that, as usual, Rappoport is very nicely on target:

The political Left promoted rebellion against the State as long as they saw themselves outside in the cold. But when they began to realize that they were, in fact, becoming the State, with all the power of the federal government, they dropped the idea of genuine rebellion like a hot potato. They praised big government, they assured everybody it was the solution, not the problem.

This is hopeful statement, explanation, and cautionary tale; as the freedom movement expands and begins to return freedom and constitutional lawfulness to America, let's all make sure that it really is freedom. As I've implied before, I am quite concerned at the narrow-mindedness that some of the liberty movement comes with. There are some "blind spots" that need taming.

Anatomy of One Kind of Psy Op

Anthony Martin Describes Propagandistic Diversion Tactics

I don't want to belabor this with much else to say, except that what he describes is a tried and true depredation on the public, a method for sidestepping public opinion and moving forward with disgusting, illegal action.

As far as I am concerned, every action by a politician that attempts to sidestep the Constitution, is to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the Constitution (if not to be a direct enemy of the Constitution) and is impeachable on grounds of treason. It may not be the hangin' offense of High Treason, but it's certainly impeachable and jail-able.

Ah, the Mockingbirds...

The SPLC Release that started the mockingbirds screaming 

------

MSNBC's Hardball: Right-Wing Extremist Groups On The Extreme Rise with Mark Potok of SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) and Brian Levin of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at the California State University at San Bernardino. Notice how, even though Levin is mostly of one mind with Potok and Matthews, they treat him as if he were a right wing shill--probably because he's not as "married" to his hate for Middle America as they think he should be: he's actually interested in thought! Heaven forfend! Get with the PROGRAM, Brian!! Brian just didn't understand that he was supposed to support the meme!

A disgusting echo from the Los Angeles Times  Mockingbird Media indeed...

...or are those magpies?

When the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) speaks, the MSM listen... or... rather, they mindlessly parrot and parrot and parrot. Oh, and sometimes they embellish.

I went looking around SPLC's web site. There are a lot of themes that I resonate with. There are themes about freedom, themes about bad treatment of workers, and many others that really get ya right there. Even I, after knowing for years--no, it's decades--about SPLC and its manipulation of public opinion about guns and freedom, wondered if there wasn't something redeeming about the organization, based on the good stuff they put out there as, "See what good we do!"

One might even be inclined to think that SPLC could be a great ally of those of us who demand our rights and freedoms, and who really want to bring the country in line with its promises of freedom and of equality of all people before just and reasonable laws.

Not so quick, though... consider these:

When a Protection Racket Turns Tail

I have said before that even good government is little else than a tamed protection racket. "Tamed" because it were principled: uses and enforces the non-aggression principle; forbids and punishes human-on-human predation; regards all persons as equal before the law ...and thus is not allowed to have an interest of its own, a mind of its own, or to favor some members over others.

This, of course, is quite different from an admittedly criminal protection racket, which is exactly "us vs them," and cronies vs commons, or "elites" (kings, lords, etc) vs The People. The problem is that everyone in a system of a tamed protection racket has to watch it closely and tirelessly, because there is always a risk of its going feral and thus criminal.

The idea of a tamed protection racket is exactly defense of the rights of the people: the natural rights which, when violated, are the basis of the breakdown of society, of the end of cohesiveness, of the end of the ability to live in proximity to one another in relative harmony and a respectable peace. By establishing tamed protection, we create a means for the people to deter, detect and respond to those disruptions.

And then we have this:

They Live ... ... ??

Ehehehehehehhhh... sometimes, one just has to wonder...


If you wanna buy the whole thing,

Mitt Romney Claims to Differ...

Yes, this is quite old now, with the election behind us. But I still chuckle when I watch it. So... enjoy...

Obama Deigns to Brag to Jefferson?

Well, this has been out there on youtube for some time, but just now getting around to posting it here.

A re-mix is in the works, slightly expanded and higher definition.

I hope you enjoy the real Jefferson!

Hang Together for Freedom? Or Hang Separately?

One message I've wanted to get out there for some time is that all of us who want particular freedoms must understand that we must scratch each others' freedom-craving backs if we want to succeed in protecting that, or those, freedoms.

Yes, I'll put it another way: I support protection and restoration of freedoms that I don't personally care about. It's  because I understand that if I don't help you maintain your freedoms, why should you help me with mine?; if I want freedom but want to lay some authoritarian horse manure on you, how could I expect you to do any different with me?

Most people just want to be left alone by "society." That doesn't mean they're hermits; no, they just don't want someone in their business unless invited. This was the Jeffersonian message to the world, that a society that systematically refuses to intrude into private matters is a sustainable society, a working community, and a force to be reckoned with should anyone attack: specifically because they are not at odds with one another and will therefore stick together! That may seem counterintuitive, but that's the way it works.

Put another way: empathy breeds in a non-coercive environment. If empathy has been eroded in a community by capricious, controlling and insulting rules and laws, the community won't hang together unless something horrific occurs. They won't help one another unless it's life and death, and maybe not even then.

Let that digest for a minute. A key to societal success... to a community's or even country's ability to hang together... is to leave each other alone, not meddle in private affairs, NOT to try to standardize or legislate or regulate beyond a few key matters, to let people handle their own affairs as they see fit and still be held accountable for harm. This is societal sustainability.
---

"I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

Thus spake Zara.... errrr.... Jefferson. I'd ... call that... pretty... anti-authoritarian.

Monetary High Jinks

JS Kim wrote a useful article for today's Goldseek.com page. Therein, he explains what happened (and happens) when fiat currency (money that's money because "the government said so," i.e., counterfeit money backed by nothing) takes over in a country. That is how it is in the U.S. today and since 1933, having gotten its first vestiges in 1913 with the illegal Federal Reserve Act.

If you are unaware of how real money got swapped for fiat currency in the U.S., or if you aren't sure you are aware of the terrible economic results of such changes, please read the article. It's really quite good, comprehensive enough that one who is as yet uninformed on the matter will come away with a respectable overview.

The link takes you to part 1 of the article; there is a part 2 due presumably soon. Watch goldseek for the second part, or I may post it here.

Excerpts:

How the Market Isn't Free

D'Amato on Economic Fascism and the Power Elite:

"In the present day, following the maturation of the connections identified by Mills, Rothbard, Higgs and others, the economy has been “centralized . . . into a highly structured bureaucracy under the effective direction and control of leading business interests.”[11] We can in no way be said to have a free market, as the ties between powerful interests and the federal government are as strong as ever. Politics is an expensive, high-stakes game of favors and bribery, a fact that libertarians like Comte and Dunoyer saw clearly hundreds of years ago."


This is the summation of what he wrote in the rest of the linked article. Informative, useful reading for those who need to demonstrate that we do not have a free market economy.

What we have may be called "capitalism," but this is a word that has too many meanings. I prefer "free market" to describe a free market, because using the C word doesn't really clarify.

I hope you enjoy the article, and find the references useful!

Obama's Track Record

This needs to go viral, folks:

Washington's Blog, Obama's Track Record

As far as I'm concerned, most of this belongs in an indictment. It's time for Congress to grow a backbone and impeach this monster, this guy that's poking at tigers everywhere, hoping for worldwide and national upheaval (?) for... hmm... I can only suppose it's the end game for world depopulation and world government.

Why else would he repeatedly and viciously poke tigers domestically (attacking every protected and unprotected right of the American people) and worldwide (sabre rattling at China and Russia, drone attacks absolutely anywhere and everywhere, illegal wars overthrowing governments that are not doing us harm, etc., etc., etc.)? He could only want a ferocious response. And there could only be one explanation for wanting that response: he's doing the bidding of the would-be worldwide absolute masters. I wonder what his 30 pieces of silver is supposed to be, and whether he'll get it should he succeed. Is this .. effort ... what all that "Yes we can!" crap was all about? Is it really, "Yes, we can indeed throw the world into total chaos so that the masters can finally realize their world government ambitions"? Is that it?

That Awful Sequestration

Enough of this apocalyptic talk of sequestration!

For starters, Cato provides a look at what's real...

Now the The Gaslighter in Chief wants to pretend that sequestration wasn't his idea in the first place, as he tried (and continues to try) to set budget hawks in Congress at a disadvantage.

Well, the budget hawks in Congress are better described as chickenhawks. In fact they're more like pigeons, "rats with wings," as they talk big cuts and push none of it. This reduction of increase isn't a cut at all, so what's all the hullaballoo?

Worse, the budget hawk poseurs are usually also war hawk neoconnish folk, which means they have no intention of getting the country out of feckless imperial warmongering--where we're wasting $kazillions for... for what, actually? I wouldn't condone it if we were plundering countries conquered, but I'd understand it better.

The country has lots of cause to keep our aerospace and other weapons manufacturers in business, even if we don't have wars. Of course, executive bonuses might fall a bit short, but that's not a reason to keep the spending up at this dumping rate by blowing things and people up all over the world. No, national defense is the key function of a proper government...

...not this acquisition and spending and use of...