Skip to content

Author: scott lazarowitz

Government Central Planners and the Irresponsibility and Misery They Have Wrought

Two related issues are in the news. I must comment. One is the argument over Herr Obama’s dictatorial birth control mandate of employers, including religious and educational institutions. The other issue comes from the article in the New York Times that out-of-wedlock births are at an all-time high.

The moral, social and cultural decline of America that includes the destruction of the family unit is largely a result of State intrusions and infiltration into private relationships, associations and contracts.

The “Sexual Revolution” was never any such “revolution,” but an excuse to live a lifestyle of self-centered immediate gratification at the expense of personal responsibility and the suppression of the natural desire to have offspring. It was also at the expense of sacrificing the natural ability to provide emotional comfort, warmth and personal security for the offspring toward their own growth and development.

What is the largest contributor to such societal decay in America? As with everything else, it’s the State and the social collectivists whose desire it has been to stamp out individualism with their social and economic policies that can be described as “Keynesian,” the policies of immediate gratification, rent-seeking, parasitism and debts, at the expense of others and at the expense of future planning and future generations.

Governments — federal, state and local — have largely taken over everything in the past 150 years, the education of America’s youth, medical care, banking and finance, and people’s hard-earned retirement funding and the will to save from an early age toward one’s retirement. You name it, the government has seized control over it.

What needs to be done is stop encouraging the youth to be irresponsible with their sexuality as well as with their money they earn or acquire. Many people who think they are “liberal” are really just believing in irresponsibility. Children and teens need to be encouraged to practice abstinence. “But that’s not realistic,” some people say. No, only short-sighted and immediate gratification-oriented people think that’s unrealistic. Children and teens are too young to handle the emotional aspects of sexual relations with others. (Weren’t there some studies that concluded that many women whose sex lives in their marriages were unsatisfying had begun to be sexually active at too early an age?)

And also, our culture has developed into one that discourages boys from becoming men. Now we have “zero tolerance,” and “no playing on the playground because you might hurt yourself” rules, families who do not require a boy who got his girlfriend pregnant to get a job to support the child, and helicopter moms following their boys to college. And the girls are being raised to be sluts now, wearing skimpy, revealing little articles of clothing that their parents buy them. If I had a teenage girl at this time and she were wearing something like that, I’d say, “you’re not going out in that, are you?” and no, she would NOT be going out in that. And she wouldn’t risk getting pregnant and either having a baby at such a young age or having an abortion, because, with the “not under my roof” policy, she would know that if that ever happened she’s out of the house and on her own. Good luck, kid.

There are other aspects of this trend of irresponsibility and dependence on government. The youth need to be encouraged to work part-time during their high school years (abolishing all labor laws including “child labor” and minimum wage laws would help them do that). They should also be encouraged to turn that part-time into full-time work after high school graduation, given what a scam college is these days. It would be helpful if the government would repeal the income tax and capital gains taxes as well as Social Security and all other withholding confiscations. These repeals would effect in the biggest expansion of the U.S. economy ever, and millions of new, real jobs would be created for those high school graduates. They should be encouraged to work full-time and take college courses at night or online toward eventually getting an undergraduate degree.

The youth also need to be encouraged to save — put something aside each week and do not take from that savings — toward their retirement so they don’t have to be dependent on a government retirement scheme that won’t be there when they actually do retire. So the government is taking money from them in its promise to provide for their retirement — that’s a fraudulent promise, and the taking is nothing but theft. It is just something you have to deal with in life, until the necessary decentralization process takes place following the collapse that will occur because Leviathan eventually kills off so many of the actual producers that there are no longer any more producers in the society from whom to siphon the wealth that will soon be non-existent.

Also, this idea of employers having to provide health insurance, pensions, etc. — that’s all a bunch of garbage. YOU should provide your own health insurance and retirements, not employers and not governments. This scheme of dependence on employers for those extras in life is another scam that has put America (and Europe) into as much moral hazard as has the aforementioned cultural and social permissiveness.

Now, regarding Herr Obama’s forcing employers to provide birth control against their will, that is a crime. It is yet another of the many crimes that government commits against the people in its intrusions into private contracts amongst the people. Such dictates are aggressions and trespasses, and should be treated as such. The contract is between the employer and the employee, and the terms of the contract are between those parties and not for anyone else to intrude upon. Who the hell is some government bureaucrat to force you to provide ANYTHING to your employees that you don’t want to provide? Such a government bureaucrat is nothing but a fascist and a dictator (hence, “Herr Obama”).

And ladies, if you want to get the birth control pill — regardless of the cancers it might cause you — YOU pay for it! Just as if you want an arthritis pill (even though fish oil would probably be better for you), YOU pay for it! Stop being such dependent babies and do things for yourselves, for crying out loud! (“I am woman, hear me roar, I am strong, I am invincible”? No, not if you’re a dependent schlep you’re not.) Our whole society now is one in which everyone demands that everyone else pay for everything they want in life. I compare that to the men who get their girlfriends pregnant but don’t stay around to actually be a man and raise the child. Have your pleasure but make other people pay for the consequences is the new American way.

So, last week Laura Ingraham interviewed Tiananmen Square heroine Chai Ling, who spoke about the mandatory abortions in China. Please, don’t get me started on the central planning that has distorted their population and what would otherwise have been a natural, unplanned “distribution” of their people. The imbecilic Chinese bureaucrats with their huge ghost cities throughout China, with skyscrapers loaded with vacant condo apartments that no one can afford to buy. And their mandatory abortions and child murders, especially their daughter murders. A truly sick society. And all because of what their selfish, authoritarian rulers desire for control and central planning and the human misery and disaster they have wrought.

There are not enough women in China for all the men there because of the millions and millions of little girls who have been slaughtered in the name of central planning population control. Hey, Planned Parenthood: Are we next?

Who Won World War II?

Jacob Hornberger asked recently, Who Won World War II? Well, it certainly wasn’t Europe. And it wasn’t Americans either. FDR lured the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor as an excuse to drag the U.S. into World War II, because his real intention was, in my opinion, to take over Europe. Maybe he didn’t take over Europe in the sense of conquest. But FDR caused Europe, at least Western Europe, to become dependent on the U.S. government for handouts, as well as for its security (such as it was).

Causing those Europeans to become dependent on the U.S. government (and on U.S. workers and producers, i.e. “taxpayers,”) for their daily sustenance and their security has only discouraged them to provide for themselves and protect themselves from foreign aggressors. Europeans are now extremely vulnerable, as well as living under massive debts. Europeans are slaves of their corrupt governments’ politicians and bureaucrats who are in cahoots with America’s own corrupt politicians and bureaucrats. All thanks to FDR.

The proof I have to show that FDR was motivated to take over Europe in this way and make Europeans dependent on FDR’s government is that FDR forced his own people to be dependent on the government, to be slaves of the politicians and bureaucrats who rule over us. FDR implemented many government mandates and policies, including forcing all Americans to have to participate in the one government-run retirement scheme known as the Social Security fraud.

Who won World War II? Power-hungry and greedy politicians and bureaucrats, lawyers and lobbyists, that’s who.

Doh! Not. Another. Kennedy.

I don’t particularly like writing about political things. I usually prefer writing about matters in history, philosophy, economics and psychology, mainly. But when political items come up in the news that need to be discussed, well, then I’ll discuss them. So here goes.

It appears that yet another Kennedy is about to go to Washington to interfere with and intrude upon our lives along with the rest of the Congresscriminals there, as Joseph P. Kennedy III (1980- ) wants to replace the retiring Barney Frank next year. This Joe Kennedy is the son of former Congressman Joseph P. Kennedy II (1952- ) who replaced the late Speaker Tip o”Neill as the Congressman from Cambridge, Massachusetts, from 1987-1999. That Joe Kennedy is the son of the late Sen. Bobby Kennedy (1925-1968).

Now, if you find all that as confusing as I do, here is some more on the enumeration of these Joe Kennedys. Robert F. “Bobby” Kennedy named his son the former Congressman Joe Kennedy after Bobby’s brother, the late Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr. (1915-1944), who died in World War II near Suffolk, England. And that Joseph P. Kennedy Jr.’s father was the old man, the senior gangster from Boston, Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr. (1888-1969). Don’t get me started on that one.

But I don’t understand how you can have both a Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. AND a Joseph P. Kennedy II. In fact, I recall that the former Congressman from Cambridge, Massachusetts, Joseph P. Kennedy II was known during the 1980s and ’90s as Joseph P. Kennedy III. That’s what I remember. Am I alone in this? Oh, well. These Kennedys keep screwing everything up, so I’m not surprised that they can’t get their numbers straight.

Anyway, the youngest of the Joe Kennedys is moving from Cambridge to Brookline just to be able to qualify to represent the Massachusetts Fourth District which Barney Frank currently and lousily represents. Just as the youngest Joe Kennedy (III) has moved from Cambridge to Brookline solely for political reasons, his father Joseph P. Kennedy II (that I thought was III) also moved from wherever the hell he was living in 1986 over to Cambridge (well, I think it was Brighton, actually) just to run for Tip O’Neill’s seat in the Eight District. I think he was living in Pennsylvania before that. But wherever it was, it wasn’t the Eight District. But the now “elder” Joe Kennedy seems to be the Congressman from Venezuela now (Where did Hugo?).

Anyway, it is my opinion (and that of many, many others as well) that these Kennedys have a genetic predisposition that drives them toward the political means of life, but certainly not the economic means. Can any one of them possibly survive in life without the use of political force? That is, in the private sector? Even as a lawyer, this youngest Joe Kennedy isn’t even a “private practice” attorney, as he works for the Middlesex County DA’s office (after having worked for the Cape and Islands DA’s office).

I see on that this little shaver Kennedy has several Democrat opponents in the September primary election. But we know he is going to take the nomination, despite his inexperience, just as we can predict that Elizabeth Warren will take the Democrat nomination over her party opponents against Scott Brown for the U.S. Senate. If Kennedy is the Democrat nominee from Congress, his Republican opponent will be either Sean Beilat (Frank’s 2010 opponent) or psychiatrist and former state Mental Health Commissioner Elizabeth Childs (Do we need a “Mental Health Commission”? And, Do we need a psychiatrist in Congress? However, God knows there are plenty of Congresscriminals in Washington who could use a good psychiatrist!).

But they are ALL statists, and NONE of them understands what true American principles of liberty and peace are all about. In fact, back in January 2010 at the time of the special election to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (1932-2009), there actually WAS a Kennedy on the ballot, but this time a GOOD Kennedy, another “Joe Kennedy,” the third party candidate against Scott Brown and Democrat Martha Cocoapuffs. No, this Joe Kennedy was not a part of any of the other Joe Kennedys (I know, there are too many Joe Kennedys, I know!). He is not related to the “regular” Kennedy family (which is not to suggest that this Joe Kennedy was “irregular”).

With that election as with most others in the USSA, the news media do not or rarely cover third-party or alternative candidates, especially if they are not the beloved statists that most in the State-worshiping media adore. Candidates who are anti-Establishment, such as Joe Kennedy in the aforementioned Scott Brown election (and Ron Paul as well) are ignored, marginalized, belittled, and just not taken seriously by our high-and-mighty news people and pundits. You see, the statist quo comforts them, no matter how corrupt it is, and we have generations and generations of government-schooled and brainwashed “intellectuals” telling the masses what they want to hear.

Here is an interview by Emily Rooney of that non-relative Joe Kennedy, the third party candidate against Scott Brown and Martha Coakley from the early 2010 election. If you live in Massachusetts and were familiar with that election involving Brown and Coakley, but had never even heard of that Joe Kennedy, then that means the media had not been doing their job. (Currently, not only are the media not doing their job with the 2012 presidential campaign, but even worse, they are actively suppressing the message of the only non-Establishment candidate, Ron Paul. The media act as if they are good little Pravda-propagandists, good little subservient mini-Goebbels, if you ask me.)

But the people of Massachusetts, like the USSA generally, love the statists, and the Kennedys as well. They will probably vote overwhelmingly for Joseph P. Kennedy III (or is it IV?) and for Elizabeth Warren as well.

And, FYI, here is a debate from 2010 with the two statists, Scott Brown and Martha Coakley, and the libertarian-independent Joe Kennedy that very few people in Massachusetts had even heard of.

CPAC: CRAZY Political Action Conference!

I wanted to say that CPAC stood for the Communist Political Action Conference, but I was afraid that, despite its accuracy, it wouldn’t have been taken as seriously as “crazy,” because I know that most people are already in agreement on that. At least, the ones who don’t put themselves in denial of what these people really stand for.

It is time to tell the truth about these literally crazy people who are good at projecting a persona of normality, in their insatiable hunger for more power over others.

These so-called “conservatives” are really nuts now. They really are crazy. We have three socialists (i.e. communists) — Santorum, Gingrich and Romney — appearing at the Orwellian-named “Conservative” Political Action Conference, while the one actual conservative, who really IS conservative, Ron Paul, was cordially excluded. Only in Orwellian Amerika do we have this situation.

Romney referred to himself as “severely conservative,” in his one moment of true honesty in revealing how his destructive socialism is truly a mental illness. We know from actual historical fact that Romney/Kennedy/Obama/Bush socialism has always had destructive consequences. They are literally ruining America with their State intrusions, their confiscations, and their wars of aggression.

And, when Romney said that he was a “severely conservative governor,” even THAT’S not true! He raised taxes on businesses and implemented this failed government-managed healthcare-insurance scheme. No real capitalist would force a government-managed scheme like that on anyone! Talk about Orwellian! He’s nuts! Now, I’ve linked to these videos before, but just look at the way he snubs a medical patient in this one, and showing his love for Ted Kennedy in this one, and his street-performer-like gestures in this one. Willard is just plain nuts!

And Rick Sanitorium. Bob Livingston had this list of Santorum’s socialist positions in Washington, his anti-gun rights intrusions, and his post-Senate lobbying corruption. And here is a video of Santorum from 2006 admitting what a socialist imbecile he was then (and is now).

And here are The American Dream Blog’s 27 reasons why Newt Gingrich would be a really, really bad president.

Ron Paul was excluded from CPAC by childish, sniveling little pricks who are Big Government Republicans who revere the State and are contemptuous of actual conservative values, contemptuous of actual American values. Hypocrites, liars, flip-floppers, and ignoramus warmongers.

Most of all they are crazy people. That means they are not rational. It is beyond just Orwellian. And Paul Krugman has the nerve to refer to Ron Paul supporters as “tinfoil hat” wearers. And the supporters of these socialist (and corrupt as well) GOP candidates are in denial, too. They know that these candidates are all Big Government intruders, but, like good little obedient serfs they will rally around one of them, regardless of his standing by the statist quo Establishment, and they will cheer the socialist GOP candidate right to defeat by the articulate, attractive actor who has swept Amerika off her feet, Herr Obama.

The sheepish followers are afraid of Ron Paul, and his policies of freedom and peace. The obedient deniers-of-reality fall prey to the lies and propaganda of U.S. government bureaucrats run amok, in their cries of “Terrorists!” “Iranian Threats!” and so forth, despite actual facts and evidence, despite how everything the U.S. government bureaucrats and military have done in the past ten (or twenty) years have been central planning disasters and gone against America.

Glenn Greenwald described yesterday and today how dishonest our national MSM are in their merely repeating everything the government tells them without any substantiation whatsoever. And, as with Iraq in 2002-03, the sheeple eat it up like drooling dogs. (Mmmm, would you like fries with that?)

The real tinfoil hat wearers are the masses out there who support these clowns who have done nothing but bring America to ruin.

Hmmm, provoking foreigners is “conservative.” Placing your hundreds of military bases on other peoples’ territories but not allowing other foreign governments to place their military on your territory is “conservative.” Stopping and searching people randomly, arresting and detaining people indefinitely without charges or evidence against them is “conservative.” According to the preaching ignorant, Orwellian blowhards, their moral relativism = “traditional conservative values.”

Whether it is a reelected Obama or any of the three severely socialist GOP clowns elected by the obedient sheeple, the President will use NDAA to turn the military against not just ‘Occupy’ protesters but Tea Party protesters as well, and other critics of government including journalists and bloggers. And when there are more terrorist attacks within the U.S. as retaliation against the U.S. government’s aggressions overseas, especially if the U.S. starts a war of aggression against Iran, you will probably wonder why you supported someone as dishonest, narcissistic and socialist as the three CPAC crazies.

A few weeks ago, Arthur Silber wrote in a post:

Tens of millions of Americans will vote for the Democratic and Republican nominees for president. They will not understand that they are thereby supporting evil. They refuse to consider withdrawing that support…

Most Americans are like badly damaged children: they expect evil to announce itself in advance, with the aid of thundering, ominous music on the soundtrack of their increasingly desperate lives. But that is not how evil most commonly arrives. It comes with a gentle, reassuring smile. It insinuates itself with soothing platitudes. It speaks of “threats” to our “security” that cannot be countenanced. It says it only wants to make you “safe.”

And the murders go on, and they increase in number. Later on, those who manage to survive will be heard to say, “But we never knew it would come to that.” Or they insist that most people “went along,” and ask: Who was I to stand against that tide? Yet they will not be able to say they were not warned, or that no one had ever seen such horrors before…

No, evil does not come to us proclaiming its true nature. Evil is not committed only by screaming, psychopathic maniacs. Most of the time, and certainly in the beginning, it seems completely ordinary. It is, as Auden said, “unspectacular and always human.” It appears to be entirely normal. The greatest danger is not the person whom you view as obviously “crazy.” The greatest danger is the person you regard as normal, thoughtful and well-spoken, the person who claims to be opposed to the horrors and who says he’s on your side. This is precisely why Obama (and the Democrats generally) constitute a singular threat to those of us who genuinely value the sanctity of a single life…

You need to wake up and smell the coffee: Obama, Romney, Gingrich and Santorum are all the same. Narcissistic political opportunists who have no problem with using the armed force of government to impose medical intrusions, their own subjective social views, environmental property violations, and overseas aggressions for the sake of further expanding the power of the DC Regime, further diminishing your liberty, security, and prosperity, until there is none of that left. Don’t be crazy. Don’t vote for crazy people.

Degenerates Rule America

February 13, 2012

(Link to article at Activist Post)

We now live in extraordinarily dangerous times in America. A majority of primary voters support three out of the four remaining Republican candidates for President who believe that the U.S. government may commit acts of aggression and start wars against foreign peoples who were of no threat to us, and who want to use the power of government and police to impose various social views onto others. Only Ron Paul wants to legalize freedom in America, and wants to end our government’s aggressions abroad.

In a recent article on, human rights advocate William Grigg highlighted an Iraq War veteran who can’t comprehend that people in foreign countries don’t like invaders and occupiers on their lands, and why they try to defend themselves, their families and their territories from the U.S. military aggressors.

This veteran is like most Americans, apparently, who believe in American “exceptionalism,” in which our government may commit aggressions and trespass on foreign territories, including placing its military bases there despite the objections of the actual people living there, but foreign governments may not trespass on American lands.

For a century the ruling regime in Washington has abandoned the rule of law, and has acted aggressively overseas and provoked foreigners and murdered countless innocents. They have gotten away with their crimes via rationalization and manipulative, emotionalistic propaganda. Currently, Washington’s degenerate rulers are claiming, falsely, that Iran is a “threat,” despite Iran being surrounded on all sides.

But Americans have naively believed the propaganda, as they did with Iraq.

The professional career politicians and bureaucrats have thus been making Americans less safe and more vulnerable because of the blowback of their government’s own aggressions.

Such a narcissistic attitude of the aforementioned exceptionalist-minded veteran is contrary to the American Declaration of Independence. The Declaration asserts “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

By “men,” the Declaration is really referring to all of humankind, and that all human beings are created equal, and have an inherent right as human beings to life, liberty and the right to sustain and protect their lives.

I think the narcissistic exceptionalists want to suggest that only Americans have a right to life and liberty, but not foreigners. Many people are just incapable of seeing a situation from the point of view of those outside their own personal territories. Believe it or not, the millions of people of Iraq and Afghanistan – the civilians who are just trying to live their lives and who have nothing to do with terrorism – see our government as an invading aggressor (which it is) and for the past ten years they have been trying to defend their lives, families, homes, businesses and sovereignty.

A comparison regarding the self-centered exceptionalists can be made with an entirely unrelated subject, the same-sex marriage issue, which has been in the news again. It is hypocritical of the Republicans and conservatives to object to President Obama’s forbidding private institutions from opting out of the birth control/abortion mandate, while those same opponents support governmental forbiddances of private marital contracts to occur.

Now, if you believe that you own your own life (as opposed to your neighbors’ or the State owning your life), and that you have a right to establish voluntary contracts with anyone else who is also doing so voluntarily, then you have a right to have a marital contract with whomever you want, as long as it’s voluntary, and it’s nobody else’s business.

If it’s none of your neighbors’ business, then it’s none of the government’s business, I like to say.

But if you believe that the State owns you or that your neighbors own you, then you agree with regressive neanderthals that the neighbors and/or the State should have the power to control your private contract-making decisions, and your private relationships and associations. And thus they should dictate to you whom you may or may not marry.

Selfish collectivists and communitarian reactionaries believe in the latter example of collective/State ownership of the individual and one’s private relationships and contracts.

And the same goes for the exceptionalists who believe that they have a right to seize ownership of the lives and property of innocent human beings in Iraq or Iran who have harmed no one. Selfish, narcissistic exceptionalists believe that they have a right to break into the private homes and businesses of foreigners, search and ransack them, and assault, beat, torture and murder their people and get away with it.

That is the primitivism to which America has sunk over the past century, thanks to criminal politicians from Wilson and FDR to Bush and Obama, and the dumbed-down, submissive, gullible and subservient sheeple who support them.

America is characterized now by a severe moral decay and massive, widespread corruption, from banksters and foreclosure fraudsters, to drug-warrior police Nazis on the take, college and high school students and teachers in widespread cheating scandals, FDA and Big Pharma corruption, and TSA perverts and child molesters.

And now, Obama has encouraged local police departments to hire Iraq and Afghanistan War veterans to continue the growing militarization of the police. (It is reassuring that many police departments are only hiring those of lower intelligence levels!) They need their degenerate neanderthal S.W.A.T raids to further terrorize, assault and murder innocent civilians, in order to enforce laws by the nanny State which dictate to private individuals what chemicals they may or may not consume into their own bodies (which the State owns, of course).

And thank goodness Obama has signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act that now includes giving the military (and probably any armed agent of government, including local police) the power to arrest and detain indefinitely any civilian American for any reason according to what the President says, without charges, without evidence brought forward against the accused. (I feel safer now.)

It looks like Dick Cheney and Barack Obama have taken some lessons from the new Sharia-ruling Iraqi regime, as well as the repressive Iranian government, on how to treat their own people. But make sure everyone marries only those the government permits you to marry, and make sure that everyone must support and pay for someone else’s abortion.

Degenerates rule America. (Is there any way to correct this situation?)

Why Are Government Bureaucrats Turning America Into Nazi Germany?

February 13, 2012

Copyright © 2013 by (Link to article)

I’m sorry to put it in such a crass way, but that is exactly what they are doing. Ever since the September 11th attacks, these power-grabbing scoundrels have been putting policies in place that were planned well before 9/11, searching us, tracking, frisking, scanning, taxing and regulating and spying on us.

The War on Terror and the War on Drugs have a combined effect of really being the government’s war on us, the American people, and a war on freedom. The airport TSA is now spreading over to train stations and bus depots, football stadiums and other public places.

While these non-productive bureaucrats are suggesting that their intrusive, Nazi-like policies are to prevent terrorism, they themselves have been terrorizing the American people, and treating us all like criminal suspects, like prisoners.

The latest are the FBI’s wanting Internet café owners to report on “suspicious” people, and the FBI and DHS wanting other businesses to report on people for behaviors that are really normal behaviors. (See here, here, here, and here.)

Paying for things with cash in Internet cafes or other businesses is seen as “suspicious” now. Other behaviors that are suspicious, according to the FBI and DHS, include believing in “individual liberty,” distrusting “centralized federal authority,” and “supporting political movements for autonomy.” Hey! I believe those things! And I pay for things with cash! But why the hell is the government telling the local police or businesses I patronize that because of those things that I am “suspicious”?

What these schmucks are in fact doing with all this is terrorizing ME! When I go into the store and pay with cash, I have to be concerned now that people there will view me with suspicion or report me to police. Just because of paying with cash!

And I also have a blog, and I’ve written quite a lot of articles, most of which promote “individual liberty,” and which express “suspicion of centralized federal authority” (Gee, I wonder why!), and which promote “autonomy,” and which promote getting rid of the Nazi-like, Soviet-like federal Leviathan altogether and letting each state have its independence and sovereignty, which is the right of all people within any given territorial area to have. THAT makes me “suspicious”!

What I don’t understand is, why are there so few advocates of liberty within the government to fight against this turning of America into Nazi Germany? Oh, sure, there’s Ron Paul, and there’s Rand Paul. But why don’t we who actually love America and who actually want freedom here have any real representation in government?

How could 93 out of 100 U.S. Senators vote to give the President the power to have the military apprehend and detain anyone the President labels a “terrorist” or a criminal, without any evidence against the accused? These imbecilic senators have willfully approved of turning America into a banana republic and have turned the presidency into a dictatorship!

And I can’t believe that so many Americans support this police state fascism. Glenn Greenwald notes that 77% of liberal Democrats approve of President Obama’s drone program, and over 50% of them approve of the use of drone strikes on Americans.

I have written a page listing many articles on how America has turned into a police state. LRC published this article by Eric Peters on how a coward cop pulled a soccer mom out of her car during a normal traffic stop, tasered her, threw her onto the ground and arrested her, right in front of her kids! Among the comments on the YouTube page of the video in Peters’s article, the comment, “you deserve to get tazed, you dumb b***h!” received 35 thumbs up.

That’s 35 future American brownshirts now.

Now, regarding the government’s enlisting of private civilians to spy on each other for the government, such spying now reaches into the financial sector. As Simon Black noted,

In the financial system, there are droves of civilian agencies that have been coerced into becoming government spies. As we discussed a few weeks ago, everyone from bankers to brokers to gold dealers are obliged to submit ‘suspicious activity reports’ to the federal government. They even have minimum quotas.

What’s more, these so-called “SARs” must remain top-secret. It’s a crime for your banker to inform you that you were the subject of a suspicious activity report.

Yesterday, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the federal agency which oversees the legions of unpaid government spies, added a few more businesses to the list. Now non-bank mortgage lenders and originators must ‘assist law enforcement’ by submitting suspicious activity reports.

The comparison to Nazi Germany is not at all an unreasonable one. There were many in Nazi Germany who reported on their neighbors and business associates out of fear of the government. That could very well be a major reason here for one’s betrayals of fellow civilians, such as with those new business requirements mentioned above. When we see all the S.W.A.T. team raids and local police abuse and murders of innocent civilians being shown in the news and discussed on talk shows and on blogs on a daily basis, one can see why there is good reason to fear the government.

It may take a large group of businesspeople to organize themselves as a group in their refusal to help the government spy on its own population.

And it also takes courage. A year ago I wrote about a businessman who was accused by the FBI of a non-crime known as “insider trading,” and who had the courage to stand up to investigators. He was asked to wear a wire when meeting with clients to gather evidence against them, and he not only refused but he emailed his clients to warn them of those FBI “fresh-faced eager beavers.” No, he wasn’t trying to warn them to cover up anything; he was protecting his associates from the government’s illicit entrapment.

However, more recently that individual has been accused of making threatening phone calls to the two FBI agents involved in the case. But, according to the Wall Street Journal, “he made the calls to the FBI agents ‘to force public exposure’ of their ‘criminal activities’ and ‘Constitutional violations.’

“In a follow-up email,” continues the Journal, “(he) said the calls were threatening only ‘to the poor FBI agent’s ego, which of course we know is always hugely inflated.’”

You see, these are the ones with a real sense of honesty and integrity, showing loyalty to their clients and customers of their legitimate, aboveboard businesses, and NOT showing loyalty to dishonest, persecuting government bureaucrats. (Further info on that particular case here and here.)

A business owner who is showing obedience and loyalty to a criminal bureaucracy that is run amok is what loyalists of Nazi Germany were in their reporting others to the Gestapo. It wasn’t always out of fear of the government.

But others in Nazi Germany reported on their neighbors because of petty personal resentments, envy and business partnerships turned sour.

We need to protect ourselves and attempt to restore whatever freedom we might have had in America. We need to turn the tables on these bureaucratic egomaniacs, bimbos and Nurse Ratcheds, these people who act like invading foreigners trying to turn every member of the American population against one another.

Given that the government is implementing these policies that are extremely violating of our liberty and privacy, and interfering with our peace of mind and sense of security as well, it is really these government bureaucrats and all their obedient underlings who are committing criminal acts against the people.

If businesspeople such as bankers and lenders are being coerced by the government to file “suspicious activity” reports, they need to organize themselves and together as an entire group they need to refuse to report on their own customers and clients.

Now, I am not involved in any kind of so-called “insider trading,” or any kind of business, and I have no investments or any real wealth of any kind. And I certainly have never engaged in any actual criminal activity. No, I am just some schlep, but because of what these dumb bureaucrats have been doing to America – turning her into another Nazi Germany, another Soviet communist dictatorship – I am concerned about what government bureaucrats, police or military might do to me, or what my neighbors could do. It really is these government bureaucrats who are the real terrorists.

Rather than this trend of overreaching government arresting and persecuting innocent Americans, and spying on them and tracking their every move without any initial suspicion or due process, perhaps it is time to bring criminal charges against the people who are conniving and concocting these schemes.

Perhaps it is time to charge the heads of FBI and Homeland Security (sic) with inciting criminal mischief in their coercing private businesspeople to spy on and report innocent people for no good reason.

Perhaps it is time to charge them with inciting endangerment, as they are literally endangering the lives of innocent people whose neighbors, mortgage lenders or store cashiers may perceive or misperceive their behaviors in a particular way, or even whose neighbors or associates may hold resentments or want to act out of envy or racist sentiments.

Government bureaucrats are turning America into Nazi Germany, because this trend is only getting worse every day. George W. Bush and Barack Obama will be viewed much later in history as the Presidents who took America down this horrible road.

Currently, Obama is still President, and he has the power to end this trend, and undo this tyranny if he wants to be seen more positively by future generations.

As the DC Central Planners Take America Down in Flames, Maybe NOW People Are Catching On That Central Planning Doesn’t Work

Central planning doesn’t work. It just doesn’t. I hope that soon people will finally take their heads out of the sand and face the truth. And it needs to be ended. Soon. Here are some rather important examples.

This morning I linked to Sheldon Richman’s article, Central Planning at the Federal Reserve. Richman notes that, in addition to the central planning nature of the Fed chairman dictating interest rates which everyone must obediently follow, the Fed is now the central planner in allocating credit.

It is standard operating procedure (though of course illegitimate by free-market standards) for a Fed chairman to inflate the money supply supposedly to provide increased liquidity during an economic crisis. It is then left to the market (distorted, to be sure) to “allocate” the money. What’s new is that under the Bernanke Fed’s self-expanded powers, the central bank is allocating credit to chosen financial institutions, including insolvent rather than merely illiquid ones. That is apparently unprecedented in the United States.

Given that central planners lack the necessary information throughout various markets within an entire given territory — and the U.S. is a huge territory with a population of over 300 million inhabitants — there’s no way they could efficiently allocate, or reallocate (or, perhaps more accurately, “redistribute”) credit to where it actually is needed. And, with this monopoly power that the Fed has, the system inherently enables this monetary central planning institution’s bureaucrats to play favorites, regardless of actual needs. That is because “men are not angels.”

I agree with Sheldon Richman in opposing government control in money, investment, banking and credit, when he notes that “in a society that calls itself free, no one should have such power at his disposal. A free economy leaves savings and investment to the uncoerced choices of individual persons, just as it leaves money and banking to the market.”

Not only is central planning impractical and inefficient, but it is immoral. That is, compulsory central planning, in which an entire population is compelled by law to have to follow the dictates of these (imbecilic, corrupt and criminal) central planners. There are a lot of conservatives who say they oppose central planning, but they nevertheless support the Federal Reserve, because they don’t particularly understand the kind of destruction that such an agency has caused in these nearly 100 years since its inception. And they don’t see that the Fed is an institution of central planning, no different, in my opinion, from Soviet-style central planning.

But where is the moral authority of the federal government to forbid banks from competing in a free market of banking? Or to compel 300 million people in the territory via legal tender laws, to have to use the one government-issued currency, the so-called “dollar,” while outlawing any other competing forms of currency that people might otherwise prefer to use. It is the combination of central planning and centralized dictates from bureaucrats who are far removed from the real world — but who like to have a lot of power over others, that’s for sure — that create the moral hazard. This scheme of government-managed money and banking really is immoral, as well as impractical.

For more information on the illegitimacy and impracticality of central planning in money and banking, please see these articles: Monetary Central Planning and the State by Richard Ebeling, The Case Against the Fed by Murray Rothbard, Taking Money Back by Rothbard, Why the State Demands Control of Money by Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

I don’t know why it is so difficult for so many people to see the terrible destruction of central planning. There are many further examples. One is the national health care and insurance problem, that the Left use to seize control over everybody’s private, personal medical and insurance matters, via ObamaCare. What the Left really wants, its ultimate goal, is for a Soviet-like total State control over our medical issues, as well as all other aspects of our personal, private lives.

But for some reason even the Republicans, who want to replace ObamaCare with RepublicanCare, don’t understand that the problems with insurance and the costs of medical care are caused primarily by government interventions in the medical system, with taxation and regulations, licensure, fees, mandates and restrictions. What needs to be done is getting rid of all those interventions, those intrusions, which really are intrusions because they are thefts and trespasses committed by legislators and government bureaucrats who, quite frankly, just like to have a lot of control over a lot of people.

Morally, ethically and economically, everyone has a right to medical freedom. Doctors and patients have a right to establish voluntary associations and contracts that are nobody else’s business but that of those specific individuals. And, like it or not, insurers have a right to voluntary associations and contracts with willing and able consumers, all without compulsion or intrusion by State bureaucrats, and private charities, hospitals, churches and other organizations have a right to provide assistance for those in need (and there should be no HHS, IRS, or other government bureaucrats getting in their way).

For more information and insight on those issues, here are some helpful articles: My own article on Government Medicine vs. Contract and Property Rights, also Subsidizing Sickness by Lew Rockwell, A Four-Step Healthcare Solution by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Medical Control, Medical Corruption by Rockwell, Uncertainty and Its Exigencies: The Critical Role of Insurance in the Free Market by Hoppe, and Rothbard’s critique of Hillary Clinton’s 1993 proposals for government medicine.

The last example of central planning here that I have addressed several times (and will continue to do so) is central planning in national security. Many people don’t realize that the “Defense” bureaucrats in Washington, who are in charge of the security and safety of 300 million Americans, are central planners. The powers that they have, whether instructed by the U.S. Constitution or not, are those of a government monopoly. They have the unchallenged monopoly in territorial protection that is free from any competition, and, as monopolists in security, they are allowed to be above the rule of law (Like the local police, “They are the law,” etc.). And the entire population of 300 million people are compelled by law to have to use their security “services,” without any alternatives allowed; therefore, it is a compulsory monopoly. Has anyone out there ever even thought about that? And as with any other monopolists, especially those whose activities are legally protected from competitive forces, these monopolists are not accountable. That is why they have caused so much trouble.

There are two main problems with this scheme of compulsory monopoly in territorial protection, in my view. One is that this is an institution of central planning. But have these central planners really done any good for us? Look at Vietnam. First, Vietnam was a case of Lyndon Johnson lying his way into war during an election year. (Gulf of Tonkin.) Hmmm. That’s a new one. And then the central planners dug themselves (and us) deeper and deeper into the hole of quagmire, putting America into turmoil.

In 1990, George H.W. Bush started the war against Iraq, a country that had not attacked us. During that war that Bush started, the U.S. military bombed and destroyed Iraqi civilian water and sewage treatment centers, forcing Iraqi civilians to have to use untreated water. And then our central planners’ sanctions and no-fly zones throughout the 1990s prevented materials from being brought to Iraq to repair the damage to Iraq’s civilian infrastructure, and prevented food and medical supplies from being brought in there. All this led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq by the mid 1990s, and another few hundred thousand by the year 2000. It also was a major cause for widespread anti-Americanism throughout the Middle East, and many Americans have no idea about all this, thanks to government schools (another failure of central planning), and they couldn’t understand that this was a main reason the 9/11 terrorists had for their actions on that day. Unfortunately, many people interpreted such conclusions as “blaming America,” when in fact it is our incompetent, corrupt, buffoonish national security central planners who are to blame.

The other main problem with this central planning scheme of compulsory monopoly in territorial protection is human nature (and see Ludwig von Mises’s Human Action on that). When you give professional bureaucrats and politicians that kind of monopolistic control over the lives of 300 million people — we must depend on these clowns to protect us from foreign aggressors with no other choices allowed — it is like giving free toys to kids. The power will go to their heads, and they will want more power. And they will do what they can to expand their powers during their temporary moments in the government playpen. Instead of engaging in peaceful activities and overseeing America while minding their own business, these central planner bureaucrats have been provoking foreigners as a means of justifying these bureaucrats’ further expanded powers, and as a means of justifying ever more powers that they manipulate the citizenry into supporting. What do you think starting wars is going to do? Not provoke foreigners?

So, instead of keeping us safe, the DC bureaucrats’ provocations have been making us less safe, as well as plundering the treasury, making use of the Fed’s monopolistic money-printing powers, and bankrupting the country in the process. And the gullible sheeple continue to believe the lies and propaganda as they support even more war, even more provocations of foreigners, less freedom and more police state at home.

For more information on the destruction of central planning and monopoly in territorial protection, here are some helpful articles: The Production of Security by Gustave de Molinari, Foreign Aggression by Morris and Linda Tannehill, The Private Production of Defense [.pdf] by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, No More Military Socialism and Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy by Rothbard, and my articles on central planning in national security and how the current corporatist scheme is a racket. (And also Gen. Smedley Butler: War Is a Racket.)

The FBI: ALL Americans Are Terrorists!

The American Dream Blog does a thorough job  covering the FBI’s latest demonstration of why we need to abolish government-run schools and privatize it all, as well as get rid of the federal Department of Leviathan Education. But these bureaucrats merely represent the nonsensical thinking on the part of the average American these days, after generations of cumulatively degraded ability to think for oneself and with some common sense.

The FBI wants us to believe that Internet privacy is a sign of “suspicious activity,” and/or one’s being a potential “terrorist.” The American Dream Blog writer gives some examples from the FBI’s latest nonsense, followed by the writer’s own comments:

“Are overly concerned about privacy, attempts to shield the screen from view of others”

Look, if I am doing some online banking or am composing an email to a friend I don’t want someone peeking at my screen.  Aren’t most Americans “concerned about privacy” and don’t most people want to keep their Internet activity to themselves?

“Always pay cash or use credit card(s) in different name(s)”

We have seen the government warn about this before.  It appears that from now on using cash in America is going to get you labeled as a potential terrorist.  How bizarre is that?

“Act nervous or suspicious behavior inconsistent with activities”

Some people are just naturally nervous.  This kind of vague language could be applied to almost anyone.

“Are observed switching SIM cards in cell phone or use of multiple cell phones”

What if your cell phone battery is dead and you need to use your wife’s cell phone?  Does that make you a potential terrorist?

“Travel illogical distance to use Internet Café”

A lot of times people will use Internet cafes when they are out of town on a trip.  Is there something inherently suspicious about that?

“Evidence of a residential based internet provider (signs on to Comcast, AOL, etc.)”

“Evidence of a residential based internet (sic) provider”? So if I have a residential based Internet provider, that makes me “suspicious”? A “terrorist”? I think that whoever would write something like that either isn’t paying attention to what he or she is doing, or is on drugs, or perhaps may even be retarded, I don’t know.

But during all this “War on Terror” stuff, since George W. Bush started such a “war,” and started two military wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, the real terrorists have been our government, as they force travelers to either go through cancer-scanners or get groped and raped at the airport (and now at other places, including train depots and subways, bus terminals and the NFL).

And these dangerous bureaucrats want people to report their neighbors for acting “suspiciously,” they want hotels to report their guests to the government. If anything is an example of terrorism, it is this **** from the U.S. government.

And now our disgusting U.S. Congress has given the president permission to indefinitely detain ANYONE he wants, or anyone some military soldier or general or bureaucrat says should be detained, without EVIDENCE against the accused, while denying the accused and detained access to legal counsel or one’s right to a trial.

Rather than turning what used to be a great place to live, what used to be a free country, into a third world banana republic police state dictatorship, if these damn bureaucrats want to prevent terrorism, they should stop invading and occupying and trespassing on foreign lands and murdering foreigners, which they have been doing for decades upon decades with no end in sight, and stop PROVOKING the damn foreigners! You see, the sheeple all across America have no clue that that is what our government has been doing all this time, not just since 9/11 but for decades before that, because they are products of government-controlled schools, and hypnotized by our degenerate culture now, and they get their news from the drugged-up and brain-dead stenographers of the MSM.

America wasn’t meant to be a third world banana republic police state dictatorship, you know.

America Has Severely Degenerated, Morally, Economically, Culturally, and Socially

There are several articles in the news and in the blogosphere that are showing quite clearly just how much America has degenerated as a society.

Ryan McMaken posts on the LewRockwell blog that conservatives cheer the abduction and theft of children of so-called “illegal immigrant” parents, as the government terrorizes these innocent families. Here is that news story.

But I thought that conservatives were “pro-family,” and didn’t like the idea of the government kidnapping children and breaking up families (for example, in the name of “Child Protective Services,” etc.).

As Jacob Hornberger has pointed out, just as he has in the past, one of the big reasons we have an immigration problem is that immigration into the U.S. is controlled by the federal government. Perhaps if conservatives understood that this is an example of socialist central planning, they might not support such controls, and instead support property rights, economic freedom and the rule of law.

I have already pointed out that this issue is another example of the true communist nature of today’s conservatives. But they are by and large collectivists and exclusionists. As Hans-Hermann Hoppe observed, the right of exclusion is a private property right, not a collective, communitarian right. The conservatives believe in collective, communistic ownership of an entire territory and everything within, and they believe that the majority of a community may claim ownership and control over private property and businesses and they have the right to force exclusion to outsiders, against the will of “private” property and business owners. But this is yet another example of the moral, social and economic degeneracy of America.

Paul Joseph Watson writes on Infowars that the arrogant buffoons of the U.S. government are implicitly warning Iran that if Iran retaliates against an Israeli strike against them, the U.S. military will then get involved and do to Iran what they did to Iraq. Usually, “conservatives” cheer someone’s right of self-defense. When you are attacked by an aggressor, you have a right to use force to protect and defend yourself. Unfortunately, because America has degenerated so much, not just morally and culturally, but intellectually as well, the people who have been cheering on the U.S. government’s aggressions abroad over the past 20 years have been engaging in primitive intellectual rationalization to justify those aggressions against others. In their 21st Century primitive narcissism, the war supporters cannot understand the perspective of the targets of their government’s aggression, and instead have devalued those murdered foreign civilians, and perceive the victims’ retaliations as acts of “terrorism.” The Amerikan barbarians will treat their Iranian victims the same way. The U.S. and British Empires have a history with Iran.

To reinforce the American mindset of rationalization and primitivism, many people have been believing the U.S. government’s propaganda, from Iraq to Afghanistan to Iran. Well, if you really believe that Iran wants to “wipe Israel off the map” knowing full well that if they did anything it is THEY who would get the wiping off, then I have a bridge to sell you. But the sheeple believe the government’s propaganda that these Muslim people are “suicidal.” Some of them are, but so are some Americans, particularly in the military.

Another propagandistic message is that the Iranians are the “aggressors,” merely for possessing weapons for self-defense. Well, what would you do if you were completely surrounded by nukes, by many U.S. military bases and knowing that Israel (in its grossly pathological paranoid state) has hundreds of nukes? Many people actually think that in 1991 Iraq started the Persian Gulf War against the U.S., and that Iraq started the 2003 war against the U.S. That is thanks to government propagandists and their subservient media stenographers, and, of course, government-controlled schools.

But getting back to this arrogant message of “we attack you and you not fight back.” Bizarrely, it is the conservatives who say they believe in the right of people to self-defense. In our backwards, degenerated society now, the aggressors who attack people can sue if they get hurt when their victims retaliate, and the homeowner gets arrested and charged with assault or murder if the burglar, home invader or rapist gets hurt or killed.

The American Dream Blog has this post on how America is going insane. (How could we believe otherwise?) The writer points out that the country as a whole has been “dumbed down.” Many people think that is because of government control over education. The U.S. had a solid #1 ranking worldwide in education, but that started to decline since the federal Department of Education began thirty years ago. (Thanks, Jimma.) All Ronald Reagan had to do was to get rid of that unconstitutional department as promised, but he didn’t do it. What a wimp. Education has declined ever since.

The problem really began during the mid-19th century when the Progressive and anti-Catholic statists began to legislate intrusions into the private educational matters of private families. They “socialized” the concept of learning and that primarily has been what has crushed the critical thinking abilities and analytical skills of Americans. The education fascists love the centralization of everything and oppose localization, local control. They especially do not like the idea of a private family home-schooling the kids, and they have turned the government schools into prisons. No wonder Amerikans have been supporting sleazebag liars such as Willard Romney and Newt Gingrich. Guided mostly by emotion and not rational thought, so many gullible people believe that Romney is a “capitalist” and that he believes in “free markets,” regardless how much he raised taxes and fees in Massachusetts and knowing that he still supports his government-controlled health program, RomneyCareless. And many people are still emotionally fixated on this idea of American Exceptionalism which Romney uses quite a lot to manipulate the voters’ emotions.

The American Dream Blog writer also points out that the “terrorist watch list” has over a million names on it. Only in Amerika. And the writer points out that many people can get their names permanently on that list (including from anonymous tips). In my opinion, only dumb people support all this “If You See Something, Say Something,” and reporting of your neighbors who act “suspiciously.” To some people, expressing disagreement with ObamaCareless, or expressing support for Ron Paul is “suspicious.” I wouldn’t be surprised now if there are many people who understand where this nonsense leads who are scared to death of their neighbors and just don’t talk to people anymore out of fear that a false “tip” could happen to them.

And because of how barbaric and Nazi-like our local police have become, many people who are just going about their lives minding their own business are terrified of the police. What happened to people in America that has caused such small-sized tyrants and terrorists on our local police forces, and in the TSA for that matter? Why do so many of them act like Nazis? Why do they act like they are angry at you for just standing there, or, if you ask them why they are asking a personal question that is none of their business, why do they then accuse you of being “disorderly” or “insubordinate,” or of being a criminal? (Can the police station psychiatrist prescribe them Xanax?)

Yes, America has degenerated into Amerika. Many people now are afraid of their government. Many people fear the police. The people amongst the masses are viewed by many in government and the police as criminals, when in fact it is these government agents who have been committing the real crimes against the people. From illicit laws that persecute innocent people for engaging in activities that harm no one, and the police enforcing those illicit laws with a vengeance, to the police, TSA, DHS and military committing acts of violence against their fellow Americans and against foreigners, as well as against immigrants who thought they were coming to America for freedom and opportunity.

Amerika, the society of degenerates, with governments instituted for some people who get off on committing acts of aggression against others, and get away with it.

It’s depressing.

Economic Freedom, Not Economic Slavery, Is the Only Way Out of America’s Current Crisis

A few days ago I had this response to Paul Craig Roberts’s article, in which Roberts called on Ron Paul to compromise by supporting policies such as minimum wage and other regulations as a meas of attracting more people from the Left. I stated that Ron Paul won’t compromise on such policies which he knows are economically unsound as well as immoral, and I called on the Left to do the compromising. And I also included a list of books with online editions and articles online for people to read to learn more about why freedom and free markets contribute far more to economic growth and prosperity than do government intrusions, and in fact freedom and free markets are more ethical and moral as well.

Here are some additional comments on why the Left (and everyone else) should oppose a regulated economy just as much as they oppose governmental intrusions into their personal lives.

One thing that those who support more regulations of private businesses don’t understand is that, the more regulations (that is, arbitrary rules, mandates and dictates given by government bureaucrats) there are, the more power you are giving to the armed agents of government to enforce those regulations, be they local police, FBI, SEC, FTC, etc. Just look at what Gibson Guitar had to endure, with S.W.A.T. team raids and government theft of the company’s property, and what Rawsome Foods suffered at the hands of the bureaucracy police because some people happen to prefer raw milk rather than the chemical-laden crap we buy at the local grocer.

This fascism of bureaucracy is only getting worse, as that is what can be expected when you abandon the ideas of individual rights, property rights and the rule of law, which is exactly what before-the-fact, presumption-of-guilt arbitrary government regulations, bureaucratic red tape and reporting requirements do. And this applies to the financial sector as well. There is no need for a psychopathic, fanatically bureaucratized, Soviet-like Dodd-Frank monstrosity, when all you really have to do is go by the rule of law.

For the financial crisis that we have had to endure in recent years, if there were actual free markets in banking, financing and housing, and no government mandates and bailouts, and under the rule of law that actually punishes theft and fraud, we would not have the problems our society has now. Some people on blogs and in articles recently have been calling such a situation (a situation that would be approved of by Thomas Jefferson et al. were they around today, by the way) “utopian,” but it actually is those who are calling for more and more nanny-state regulations and intrusions who are the utopians, as though the never-ending growth in regulations and intrusions that treat the population like babies and like criminals in their obedience to dumb, non-productive bureaucrats will finally solve problems.

No, Dodd-Frank and other intrusions calls for more bureaus and more bureaucrats, and gives more power to more police, FBI, and so on. With cases like Rawsome Foods and Gibson Guitars, and various “insider trading” laws and other made-up “crimes,” it only gives the armed agents of government more excuses to get off on their power trips in their raids and their more recent Nazi-like tactics. The police state that we have now isn’t just evident with the ‘Occupy’ movement, traffic fascism and the education system, but with all sorts of businesses in which people are just trying to make a living and have a right to be left alone and a right to be presumed innocent until actually suspected of some actual crime.

Further, the more regulations you have, and the more costly and intrusive they are, the more damaging they are economically to smaller businesses and those just starting out in their fields, and just plain discouraging of those who were merely considering entering the business world. And the more protective such regulations are of the more established businesses who can afford the extra lawyers, lobbyists, and, of course, those campaign contributions for the Congresspeople to vote for legislation to restrict smaller businesspeople and entrepreneurs, and that will help those established businesses in protecting their high profits.

Besides the police state that further regulations enhance, and the government-protectionism of established businesses, on a more fundamental level it is a matter of rights. Individuals have a right to live and right to liberty, and have a right to be free from the aggression and intrusion of others. This means more specifically that individuals have a right “to be secure” in their persons, property and effects from intrusions by others. People have a right to own their own lives, and that includes the right to own their labor, the energy and effort they themselves exert in order to be productive. The individual is the initial rightful owner of one’s labor, until one trades one’s labor with an employer, a customer or client in a mutually-beneficial, voluntary contract.

For some reason, some people seem to think that your labor is initially owned by your community in which you live or by the collective or the population in general. Those are the people who believe that the individual is owned by the collective and exists to serve the collective’s needs. However, the truth is that such a destructive philosophy, on which many of our current “laws” and regulations are based, is directly violating of the rights of the individual: the right of self-ownership, the right to be secure in one’s person, property and effects, and the right to use one’s own labor and productivity as one sees fit to sustain one’s own life.

People have a right to establish voluntary contracts with others, and those contracts are private contracts and they are only the business of those parties involved in such contracts. That applies to employer-employee contracts, private contractors dealing with clients, sales people dealing with customers, etc. For some reason, there are people who don’t like the idea of that kind of freedom, that kind of voluntaryism amongst free, consenting individuals, and that such contracts are really owned by the community and that the community has a right to know what the terms of private contracts are and even have a right to demand specific terms of contracts. And they believe that they have a right to a certain take on those contracts and/or profits from any transactions (via the State). But such demands, such takings are really intrusions into those contracts of others, and really amount to acts of trespass and theft (via the State).

There is also the idea of the government demanding information from you regarding your personal life or your economic life. This demanding of private information comes from the idea that people are guilty until they prove themselves innocent by allowing such governmental intrusions. That goes against the idea of presumption of innocence and the right to be secure in one’s person, property and effects. Intrusions are trespasses. Remember, if it’s wrong for your neighbors to intrude in your private affairs, then it’s wrong for the government to do so.

I know, a lot of people have been indoctrinated for generations and generations to believe otherwise, but no, if you believe in the rule of law, and you believe in true justice and living in a peaceful society, you have to decide whether only some acts of trespass and theft should be considered criminal, or whether all such acts are criminal. Unfortunately, our society has allowed the community and the State to encroach themselves into private people’s private personal and economic matters, in the name of this or that, when in reality, these intrusions are just institutionalized criminality. And at the same time, we have laws upon laws upon laws that make up phony crimes, in which people minding their own business are persecuted by their neighbors via government and police. Amerika has become an inside out, upside down world of a bizarre Orwellian nature.

Now, I would like to address this ignorant ideology of “soak the rich.” For some reason, some people seem to think that an individual’s right to one’s life and self-ownership, including the right to sell one’s labor and property as one sees fit, and the right to the fruits of one’s labor and the right to one’s justly acquired property, become diminished rights the more wealth one has. That is, for example, if someone accumulates $100,000, then one has less of a right to that wealth than someone who has accumulated $1,000. And that the neighbors or the community has a right or ought to be empowered to take more of the first individual’s wealth then the second individual’s wealth.

So the more wealth one honestly accumulates, the less he actually owns it and the more the community, one’s neighbors, can claim ownership of it? No, that just goes against the concept of a society forbidding aggression, and against the moral principles of private property and the rule of law. Just who are the neighbors to make a claim on that wealth without the consent of the owner? What’s the difference between those neighbors claiming such wealth via government force and those people just stealing it themselves by force? A society that says that some taking of private property is allowed by law is a society that is doomed to degenerate morally, and that is what we have today.

There is a control freakishness of some people in society, in which they must give orders and make demands on others, to reveal personal information and to open up bank accounts and businesses to government snoopers, and there are those control freaks who are just compelled to forcibly enter the private homes and businesses of others, this need to be intrusive. There is a covetousness of some people who must have what others have and take it from them by force. All these trespasses and thefts have had their rationalizations throughout the decades, but they are still thefts and trespasses, and it is still covetousness, regardless how it is rationalized.

“But, it’s for the poor,” etc. Actually, it has been these government mandates, regulations, reporting requirements, fees, licensure, minimum wage laws, union protectionism, etc. that have been stealing from the poor, stealing their opportunities by restricting their entering into the work force or from starting a small business, and so forth. It’s not “for the poor,” it’s for the government bureaucrats, and to protect the Establishment.

I hope that Ron Paul does not compromise on his principles of morality, private property, freedom of association and freedom of contract as Paul Craig Roberts requests of him on behalf of getting more votes from the Left. What we need is more freedom. Freedom begets economic prosperity and higher standard of living for the most number of people in a society.

American Exceptionalists Love their Primitive Secular State Theocracy

January 30, 2012

Copyright © 2012 by (Link to article)

At a recent debate when Ron Paul mentioned the “Golden Rule,” that we should treat foreigners as we should be treated, he was booed by a number of people in the audience. This happened at a previous debate. At that previous debate, Paul further questioned how we would like it if a foreign government invaded and occupied the U.S. and set up its military bases here.

How can so many people (and so many popular radio talk hosts and their listeners) condemn the suggestion that everyone must be equal under the rule of law?

The myth of American exceptionalism is that the U.S. is an example of moral progress, peace and prosperity for the rest of the world to follow. But that has not been the case during most of America’s existence.

Perhaps America was somewhat exceptional at its founding, when the ideas of the rights of the individual and private property were taken seriously. But when a Constitution, which limited the rights of the individual and empowered a centralized government, was written and ratified, that was really the end of such moral exceptionalism.

The Founders had the right idea, but the statists, centralists and fraudsters took control, and that was the end of that.

The societal and moral advancement that the Founders took from the Enlightenment has tended to regress backwards, as America’s federal government continually expanded in size and intrusiveness, and its actions overseas became more primitively aggressive.

The moral degeneracy of America escalated considerably when Honest Abe Lincoln waged a brutal and immoral war against civilians in order to compel the population into a life of enslavement by central planners. Woodrow Wilson unnecessarily extended World War I, which contributed to the rise of Hitler. FDR’s New Deal really was the final nail in the coffin for whatever freedom there was remaining in America.

In foreign affairs, for the past century the reality of American exceptionalism has been this: that our government may interfere in the internal affairs of foreign nations, may place its governmental apparatus and military bases on other peoples’ territories, may commit acts of aggression, murder, and property destruction, and get away with it through rationalization and propaganda – but other governments may not do that on our lands or do those things to our people.

American exceptionalism is the belief that our government need not be accountable under the rule of law, while we hold foreigners accountable.

Regarding the current “War on Terror,” yes, real terrorists attacked America on September 11, 2001. But when our government then invades and destroys whole countries that had nothing to do with 9/11, then you should logically expect the targeted innocent foreigners to defend their territories.

One thing that America’s government-controlled schools (both public and private) have accomplished over the past century is the suppression of critical thinking skills. Instead, because the people have allowed the almighty State and its media stenographers and propagandists so much influence and intrusion into the entire education system, the result has been generations of people with an instilled unquestioned loyalty to the State theocracy.

Because of this, America has become increasingly authoritarian and restrictive in its liberty to the point of the police state and non-sustainable, bankrupting empire we currently suffer. Those who question The Powers That Be are themselves stigmatized and marginalized, and in some cases, punished and persecuted. Americans have been cheering their government’s illicit aggressions overseas, and booing those who stand for the Golden rule and the rule of law.

In fact, some of the same people who have been supporting the U.S. government’s immoral aggressions overseas have been those preaching the loudest about “Christian moral values.” Sorry, but when one supports one’s government invading other countries that were of no threat to us, one’s preaching of Christian morality is just hypocrisy.

And when people assert Americans’ right to defend America against invaders, yet refer to foreigners who defend their own lands, their lives and their families from invaders and occupiers as “terrorists,” no wonder Christianity and moral values have declined in America.

The narcissism of modern State worship is such that, when the exceptionalists assert that the U.S government must have a “presence” on foreign lands, it is as though they view those lands as theirs, just like a possessive child would do. It seems more like covetousness, if you ask me.

No, the narcissistic exceptionalists, who pray to the democratic god of the secular State, seem to believe that their government may commit acts of aggression against foreigners, but not the other way around. Praise the almighty State, as it can do no wrong.

Former Senator and current presidential candidate Rick Santorum seems to be one of those more outspoken worshipers of the State and its aggressive expansion overseas. Santorum even believes in the central planning of the almighty State domestically, in the social area.

Santorum wants to use the armed police apparatus of the State to impose his own personal social views onto the rest of the population, much like the Islamists that he ironically criticizes for wanting to impose their Sharia Law onto others.

If we don’t behave in our private lives as Santorum and his beloved almighty State order us to do, then we are infidels, apparently.

And I heard another American exceptionalist recently, Sean Hannity, express total cluelessness in his pushing the anti-Iran fearmongering that is being used to start yet another unnecessary, counter-productive war. In arguing with a caller, Hannity was saying that (and I am paraphrasing) he merely wanted to prevent mass violence and bloodshed that could be prevented by forcibly removing Iran’s nuclear capability. Hannity was referring primarily to protecting Israel (despite the fact that Israel has a few hundred nuclear warheads and Iran knows this).

So regarding the possibility of mass bloodshed, Hannity has apparently been oblivious to the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis throughout the 1990s, killed by U.S. government violence and sanctions, and the further hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis since the U.S. government’s 2003 invasion.

Because of reliance on mainstream news outlets and talk radio for their brainwashing information, most people don’t even know recent history, and they therefore don’t seem to understand Ron Paul’s point about “blowback.”

When dissidents openly criticize the State, its intrusions and its violence, the faithful seem intensely threatened, as though they have been personally harmed. The dissidents must be booed and ostracized, even though here Ron Paul is the one with the sense of morality and he is the one who believes that our government must be accountable under the rule of law as others must be.

But as our society gradually degenerated over the past century in its abandonment of moral values and the rule of law, it should be of no surprise now that the exceptionalists have no problem with their primitive priests of the almighty State apprehending and detaining someone without charges, without even being required to show evidence against the accused, as agents in an advanced society would have to do. The exceptionalists have faith in their beloved State (until they find themselves falsely accused and unlawfully detained, of course).

The religion of State has shown its ugliness with the Bradley Manning whistleblower case. Many people have reacted emotionally to this case, and with much ignorance, that’s for sure. It is as though whistleblower critics have been on a medieval witch hunt with the Manning case.

This young soldier allegedly released “classified” information to WikiLeaks. But, if the chat logs are legitimate, Manning’s motivations were not on behalf of any foreign government, financial interest or any element hostile to America.

On the contrary, Manning’s motive was out of love for his country, and to expose the corruption of our government’s imbecilic bureaucrats and expose the military’s war crimes. If anything were un-American, it would be covering up those crimes.

And despite the government’s hysterical propaganda, the truth is that the release of the classified information probably could not have caused any harm to any U.S. soldier overseas or to any American at home.

Some critics of Manning and WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange have been calling for their imprisonment or death. That is because the critics’ loyalty just doesn’t seem to be as much to their country as it seems to be to the government, the almighty State.

That is what our sick culture has become: an authoritarian theocracy with total rule over us. The Total State seems to be what the primitive-thinking narcissists want, and that is why so many people cheer the State, cheer its wars and the deaths of foreigners, and that is why they boo the ideas of freedom, personal responsibility and accountability under the rule of law.

With our authoritarian culture now, we are definitely surrounded – not by Muslims, but by the almighty criminal State, by federal, state and local government Gestapo bureaucrats.

And we are doomed unless we reverse course – and that means chopping away at the many, many layers of Leviathan, the bureaucracies, the foreign bases and the domestic camps, chopping away until we finally are able to restore the freedom the founders envisioned when they created America.

Don’t Ask Ron Paul to Compromise His Principles – The Left Can Compromise Too, You Know

Paul Craig Roberts has been writing some of the best articles in recent months in defense of government transparency and the truth, and in criticism of government and corporate corruption, criminality and cover-ups. Here are his article archives at

But in his latest column, a further endorsement for Ron Paul as America’s last hope, he calls for Ron Paul to compromise on some basic principles in order to win progressives over. Even that isn’t necessary, because many on the Left are realizing how awful Obama has been on civil liberties, especially with his pushing and then signing into law the unlawful, immoral police-state indefinite detention bill, and what a warmonger Obama has been.

But I do not believe that Dr. Paul will compromise on the issues of government regulation, social welfare legislation, and environmentalism that Dr. Roberts brings up. And it is unfortunate that, in his realistic view of principled libertarians who won’t compromise, Roberts concludes the essay with the statement that “Libertarians will be pure to the end and take the Constitution and the rest of us down with them.”

First, I have read several blogs of the Left in which people praise Ron Paul for his pro-peace and pro-civil liberties positions but say they would have a hard time voting for him because of his economic views. Actually, I think it is these people on the Left who are the “purists,” as it is THEY who will not compromise in order to vote for someone — the ONLY one — who will close the bloated foreign military bases and bring all the troops home, and who will restore our civil liberties that the fascist-police-staters in Washington have thrown out the window.

The uncompromising leftists are not willing to vote for someone they KNOW will address those most important issue, and ASAP. The other economic issues that Dr. Roberts mentioned are actually less important and they can actually wait for now. Dr. Roberts also didn’t mention how Ron Paul is supportive of the progressives and the ‘Occupy’ movement when it comes down to making the big banks and the fraudsters accountable and ending the idea of tax-funded welfare for the banksters. Even Obama is bought and paid for by the banksters!

It actually is asking a LOT of a candidate such as Ron Paul to compromise and say he will support more (counter-productive) regulations and more (unemployment-causing) government-compulsory wage and price controls in order to get more votes. But it actually isn’t asking too much for voters to look at the issues that are most crucially important at this time and to vote accordingly.

After all, if we look at the character of all the candidates out there, and even all the past candidates, which person do you actually trust the most? Who is the one who won’t be on the take for this or that special interest group, or this or that corporate contributor? Which candidate actually wants us to have our freedom?

Now, it is unfortunate that on those economic issues on which people disagree with Ron Paul, a lot of people just happen to be ignorant of actual history and economics. I’m sure that Dr. Roberts has probably read much of Ron Paul’s writing, as well as that of Murray Rothbard et al. But I doubt very much that most people on the Left have even heard of the ideas about which Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises have written, and I doubt that very many people have read or heard of accurate accounts of historical events in American history other than the false accounts they’ve been spoon-fed by biased teachers and their biased textbooks, as well as by the State-stenographers of the mainstream media and pop culture.

So I am going to post links here to articles and books that people can read so that they will understand the actual truths of what real liberty is. The bottom line: It is freedom that has contributed to the most prosperity and the highest standard of living for the most number of people in a society, and it has been the State that kills it.

The Ethics of Liberty, by Murray Rothbard

Outlawing Jobs, by Rothbard

Wall Street Couldn’t Have Done It Alone, by Sheldon Richman

The Minimum Wage Protects the Rich, by Jacob Hornberger

Making Economic Sense, by Murray Rothbard

Free Banking and Contract Law, by Ludwig von Mises

How Unions Scheme to Keep Black Americans Out of High-Paying Jobs, by Walter Williams

America’s Great Depression, by Murray Rothbard

The Clean Water Act vs. Clean Water, by Rad Geek

Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution, by Rothbard

The Socialist Bailout of Wall Street, by Jacob Hornberger

“Living Wage” Kills Jobs, by Thomas Sowell

The Case Against the Fed, by Murray Rothbard

Future of Freedom Foundation articles on Environmentalism

Future of Freedom Foundation articles on Social Security

FFF articles on Regulation Policy and Welfare

FFF articles on Taxation

The Moral Case for Drug Freedom, by Laurence Vance