Skip to content

Category: Private property

Leftists and Conservatives All Agree: Against Freedom!

We’re getting it from both sides, the leftists and the conservatives. And frankly, I’m really fed up and sick and tired of all this.

Both sides want to control the lives of others, throw people in jail who disagree or who dissent, or who do business in a way that’s not in accordance with the control freaks, or who eat or consume chemicals not approved by the gubmint, or who come from outside the territory and are not approved by the immigration commissars.

People on both sides just don’t want to leave others alone.

The “Green New Dealers” say they want to eliminate airplane travel, as well as all fossil fuels and cars. They want just electric cars? How will you juice up the cars? What will power up the electric cars? So they just want to outlaw travel, basically.

I guess they are like the conservatives who want to prevent people from traveling into the U.S., as well as harass Americans who want to travel outside the U.S. and return without harassment. Good luck with that.

The “Green New Dealers” also want to retrofit all buildings in the U.S., including houses, apartment buildings, office buildings, schools, churches.

To make it easier for them to make sure that all the buildings in America are getting rebuilt, what they really want is to eliminate all privately owned property in America. They want the government to seize the property, the homes and businesses. The government and its bureaucrat overlords will be the owners of the property.

In our homes the government overlords will be our landlords and we their obedient tenants. They must also take over all the buildings of churches or any houses of worship to make sure that they, too, will be rebuilt to the satisfaction of the “Green” dictators. And naturally that will give them more power to control religion (i.e. abolish it, like in the Soviet Union).

And their real intention is to nationalize the industries, just like in the Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela.The people on the left want to take over all industries and will try to impose bureaus with commissars who will attempt to run the industries, as though they can do better than the actual people who currently own and operate their businesses.

So in the process of their taking over industries, they will be stealing businesses that many people worked long and hard to build, all the labor and effort they put into it, now to be enslaved by those who will take it over.

For example regarding the “Green Wheeling and Dealing” “Green New Deal” “democratic socialists” real intention of government takeovers of private industries, here is Marxine Waters letting the cat out of the bag:

Because of their narcissism and arrogance many of them really believe they have the ability to run industries better than those currently doing so. As Thomas DiLorenzo referenced F.A. Hayek in today’s article, the leftist activists have a “fatal conceit.”

But really it’s a control freak issue that these people have. They just like to have a lot of power and order others around. All these bossy little “green” dictators.

Here is Congressman John Dingell, the one who just died, on how we need ObamaCare (or, later on, single payer, “Medicare for All,” etc.) to “control the people”:

So, how will the “Green New Dealers” or “democratic socialists” administer over the forcible taking of all that property in the United States? Many sheeple will swallow the propaganda in which bureaucrats and their minions will convince them it’s for their own good, and that Mr. and Ms. Government Agent or Enforcer knows what’s best for them. Anyone who resists will be arrested or shot. That is how they did things in past socialist societies.

And here is the late Larry Grathwohl who as an FBI agent had infiltrated the Bill Ayers group Weather Underground in the 1970s, detailing how his interactions with those commie wackjobs and college professors (sorry for the redundancy) went, in this interview excerpt:

But the conservatives are no better. There are millions of them all over America who really believe that a government Wall on the border will solve the immigration problem. Like the leftists, the conservatives are also afflicted with short-sightedness. I think that their motivation is mainly out of hatred of foreigners. They are obsessed with discussing the victims of crimes committed by “illegals,” but do not seem to care about the many more victims of crimes committed by their own fellow Americans.

It’s all about foreigners, and keeping out foreigners. But it isn’t just keeping out foreigners, and this is where there is a connection between these nationalist conservatives and the leftists. With the conservatives, they believe that people who are not “citizens” should have restrictions imposed on their lives if they dare to set foot in America, or the non-citizens should be kept out, and with a Wall if necessary. What matters here is this “citizenship” thing, which really means government authorization.

The conservatives are really just as authoritarian and socialistic as the leftists, in which for an individual to have legitimacy one must have government authorization or approval (“citizenship”).

And regarding this obsession that Donald Trump and his sheeple followers have with a government Wall like that will cure any problems society might have, I have a feeling that Trump is acting on behalf of the people on the left, like helping them to set up the closed-in society for them in advance. But I could be wrong.

Like the commie thugs on the left, the conservatives and ditto-heads just don’t want to leave people alone. The conservatives want to harass, molest, kidnap and throw into a cage any travelers who are not authorized by government bureaucrats in Washington, regardless of whether the travelers are peaceful. The conservative thugs want to arrest businessmen who hire non-government-authorized workers. And again, it has nothing to do with being “concerned” that immigrants are committing crimes against Americans, because if so then they would be expressing equal concern about Americans committing crimes against other Americans. But no, the conservatives are not doing that. It has to do with hating foreigners, quite frankly. It has to do with their brainwashed nationalism and tribalism.

And also, the real causes of the immigration problem have to do with the drug war and U.S. government interventionism and funding in Central and South American countries, such as Honduras. But the conservatives are too short-sighted to see that. Which they don’t WANT to see, by the way, because they support the drug war. The conservatives support government goons harassing and throwing in a cage those who might have ingested or might be in possession of some government-disapproved chemical or plant.

Honestly, between the power-hungry leftists and the conservatives and nationalists, FREEDOM is under attack from all sides!

What we really need is a free society. Just leave people alone, and liberate them, and let them have their freedom, for crying out loud.

A free society in which everyone comes and goes as they please, no showing ID or papers, no being stopped by goons. And America is supposed to be a society of individualism, in which each individual is left alone by gubmint unless one is actually suspected of violating the person or property of others.

And people come and go as they please as long as they don’t use aggression or coercion against others, as long as they don’t steal or defraud, as long as they are peaceful. And don’t trespass on private property, or else they could get hurt by a private property owner exercising one’s right to keep and bear arms (that no one would be interfering with because it’s a free society).

And no, traveling along “public” property (i.e. unowned) is not “trespassing,” because there’s no such thing as some sort of common ownership of “public property” by the “citizens” that conservatives try to promote. That would be very communistic or socialistic. Any common ownership of the territory as a whole would really negate the concept of private property within the territory. But sadly, conservatives have as much a hard time understanding private property as do the leftists.

In a free society all trades, transactions, contracts are voluntary, and would be only the business of those who are parties to such contracts, trades and transactions. The trades of labor and employment and goods and services would not be interfered with by third parties. And no one is allowed to steal anyone’s earnings or wealth away, including the government! And people consume whatever they want, healthy or harmful.

But we have these people on the left and the conservatives who obediently love and worship their government overlords to decide for them what’s best for them, and to protect them from “bad guys.” And both sides want to usurp control over private property and contracts using armed powers of government to do it. Both sides want to control the lives of others, but they shouldn’t be allowed to do these things.

Trump Says America Will Not Go Socialist, Like Venezuela

I wanted to comment on Donald Trump’s state of the union, but I just don’t have time to go over the whole thing. However, I will say that Trump’s reference to Venezuela as gone socialist and then saying that America will never go socialist shows his ignorance and lack of self-awareness.

Trump’s typically nationalist anti-foreigner immigration policies are socialist policies. When business people have to get government’s authorization to employ people, or when government can throw you in jail for hiring a non-government-approved worker, when the government is the ultimate authority on whom you hire or not hire, that’s socialism. It ain’t free market, mister. When workers must get authorization from a bureaucrat to work, yes, that’s socialism, NOT capitalism.

A government wall on the border is a product of socialism, not capitalism. Private property walls are different because that’s private property. We’re talking about a government wall surrounding a supposedly FREE society! (Orwellian much?)

Real free-market capitalists do not build government walls! That’s what socialists do!

I know, a lot of people are brainwashed to have this simple-minded and short-sighted view that a government wall will “keep out the bad people,” which it won’t do. (How is a government wall on the southern border going to keep all those bad people in Washington from harming us as they continue to do? Should we put up a wall completely surrounding Washington?)

Trump is also a drug warrior. He believes very strongly that the government must have the final authority on what chemicals people may put into “their” bodies, or what plants, substances or other materials people may possess. More socialism. When the government claims ownership of property, and of the people’s own bodies, that’s socialism. It’s not adhering to private property principles. It’s not the “private ownership of the means of production.” And it isn’t freedom.

Trump also believes strongly in the government-run retirement scheme, Social Security, as well as Medicare and Medicaid, all thoroughly socialist schemes.

Most telling that Donald Trump is a die-hard socialist is his love of government central planning. He LOVES it!

The State of the Union

Apparently Donald Trump has been permitted by the high queen of botox to give his State of the Union this week. I hope that Rex Reed and Jaye P. Morgan don’t come along and gong him. But here is my take on the “state of the union.”

As I’ve written before, the territory of America is just too big a territory and too big a population to be all one single country or culture, all ruled over by one bureaucracy in Washington. It needs to be decentralized.

On the one side, we have the mystical nationalists who want that single nation and culture, from coast to coast, border to border. And their tribalist mentality, endorsing the police state and government wall to lock out foreigners. Many of these same people who say they are against the killing of unborn babies, couldn’t give a damn about babies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and so forth.

And on the other side, we have the leftists who want to kill babies, steal money and property away from people and who want the government to be in control of taking in foreigners, mainly to have new voters to help further empower Democrats.

Many on both sides are lacking in moral principles, and are in contempt of freedom, individualism and private property, the very principles upon which America was founded. I’m really getting tired of all this.

The latest controversy is Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam who admits to being in a yearbook photo in which 2 people are shown, one wearing “black face” and the other in a KKK shmata. The news articles aren’t saying which one is Northam. But this is coming up at this time because of further scrutiny of Northam now that he has expressed the sentiments of abortion-promoting Democrats and Planned Parenthood.

In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if it was Democrat strategists who found the yearbook and brought that to people’s attention, just to take attention away from Northam’s quote in an interview on abortion.

The recent abortion controversy has been revived by New York state whose anti-freedom governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law a much loosened abortion policy, in which non-doctors may perform abortions, and if the baby is “not viable.” (A lot of born babies and young kids are “not viable,” because they are dependent on their mommies for feeding. Should it be legal to kill them, too?)

And then in Virginia this House delegate Kathy Tran introduces a “partial-birth abortion” bill, to allow the killing of a baby just as it’s being born. Now, some talk radio people have been saying that Tran’s bill would allow the killing of the baby after the baby is born, which would be murder. However, there is not much difference between killing a baby just as it’s being born and killing a baby after it is born.

But Gov. Ralph Northam was asked about the bill in an interview and it is really this quote that Democrats are trying to sweep under the rug. Northam misunderstood what the actual bill would allow, but obviously he gets what the pro-death activists and the abortion industry really intend. Here is the quote, according to the Daily Caller:

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

Like the narcissism of the social activists who want to compel others to have to use certain pronouns that are incorrect or accept as truth that someone is a male even though he is a female just because he says he is a male, narcissism is what abortion activism is all about. “The baby is inconvenient for me, so kill the baby. I can’t be bothered to go through 9 months of pregnancy and childbirth. I can’t be bothered with using birth control, etc., etc.”

Related to all this, Democrats want “Medicare for All” or “single payer,” but most important is that the government has complete control over our medical matters, has complete access into our private medical and personal information. The anti-freedom socialists don’t believe that people have a right to privacy (except when it comes to abortion!). They don’t want a society of private property, so your home is not yours, and your private medical matters are not for just you to know, or just between you and a doctor. The socialists will want to know everything about the people among the population. They especially will want to know who might be a Christian or a conservative, or who homeschools their kids, or who owns firearms.

So with the abortion issue we have had a good idea of how some people really think, such as when we heard that Planned Parenthood was selling body parts of aborted babies. That is how some people think of their fellow humans.

And there is the narcissism and economic covetousness of many of the same people.

Elizabeth Warren says that billionaires should “stop being freeloaders,” even though probably in most cases billionaires became billionaires by way of consumers voluntarily paying their money for products or services those billionaires are offering.

Why does Elizabeth Warren want to steal even more income or wealth from people than the government already steals from them? And yes, when the government orders someone to hand over one’s earnings involuntarily at gunpoint and with the threat of being thrown in a cage, that’s stealing.

Warren stated:

“All I’m asking for is a little slice from the tippy, tippy top. A slice that would raise — and this is the shocking part, Jim — about $2.75 trillion over the next 10 years … That’s money we need so that every kid in this country has a decent child care opportunity, has an opportunity for pre-K, has an opportunity for a decent school.”

Barf. Me. Out.

But the federal, state and local governments have been throwing more and more money into government-run education, and the schools are producing dumber and dumber, and more and more ignorant graduates. What about that, Pocahantas?

And Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to tax, i.e. steal, a much higher percentage of people’s earnings as well. Some people have been referring to her as “AOC,” but that reminds me too much of “AOL,” which I had from 2001-2005 and that ruined my then-computer with a terrible virus. So AOL sucks, and I will not refer to “AOC,” and just type out her name.

Steal 70% of someone’s earnings? Will it ever be enough? And for what? What exactly does the government in Washington do that is worth ANY of the money it steals from us? NOTHING!

And now the new congressperson from Detroit Rashida Tlaib wants to seize GM’s closed plants using eminent domain, and use such places for the “Green New Deal.” She’s the degenerate who spewed a most profane and disrespectful tirade at a bar recently.

Nothing about paying GM for the use of the closed plant, or offering to buy the closed plant from GM with funds from the philanthropists who generally seem to agree with these crazy clucks and their environmental fanaticism, such as Bill Gates or George Soros.

Nope. their mentality is “let’s steal property and confiscate wealth,” robbing and thieving, make use of other people’s hard work and labor to serve our own narcissistic agendas, etc. “All these producers and creators of wealth in our society are too ‘rich,’ so because of our own selfish envy and covetousness we must take it all away form them and steal their property.”

And kill babies just before they’re born (or after they’re born), because they are inconvenient.

But the people on the other side, such as conservatives, talk radio ditto-heads, nationalists, are just as bad. They don’t believe in private property and free markets, and they also believe in stealing private wealth, imposing fines on those who trade with non-government-authorized producers or sellers, jailing employers and laborers who do not comply with orders to get government authorization to exist, in their trade idiocy and their anti-foreigner immigration collectivism and tribalism.

I’ve heard plenty of the egalitarian “everybody has to pay their fair share” crapola from the talk radio ditto-heads and so forth. They do not get what America is all about: private property, free markets and voluntary trade, individualism and freedom.

Each person is an individual. If you don’t suspect an individual of violating the person or property of others, then you leave him alone. An employer wants to hire a worker the employer thinks is most qualified, so he hires him, and you leave them alone. No going to Mommy and Daddy government for permission or authorization to work somewhere or employ someone. But the dittio-heads don’t get that. For them, freedom stops at the border, and outsiders may not come into “our home” without a bureaucrat’s authorization.

So, both the leftists and the other side are for the police state, government intruding into people’s private lives, and, most of all, government central planning.

It’s enough already.

Pompeo and Trump Examples of Bureaucrat Devotion to the State, Not to Freedom And Free Markets

To show how devoted to non-interventionism Donald Trump is, he now wants the U.S. government under his leadership to impose a coup in Venezuela. Trump is also backing down on his promise to take troops out of Syria.

So Secretary of State Mike Pompeo now wants to throw his weight around with this interventionist coup in Venezuela. He has appointed Elliott Abrams to be a “special” envoy to Venezuela. I guess Pompeo is influenced by Abrams’s experience as a Bush-pardoned Iran-Contra criminal, as well as his general foreign interventionist mentality with Israel and Latin America, and being an advisor to Bush the Younger’s “Global Democracy Strategy.”

If you’re an opponent of free markets, individualism, private property and voluntary association then you probably love “Global Democracy.”

Talk about “birds of a feather.” Mike Pompeo and Elliot Abrams. They join fellow neocon interventionist John Bolton, who never met an intervention or a war he didn’t like.

Wait, did they really mean Elliott Abrams the AccuWeather meteorologist? We could only hope.

As a Reagan administration minion, Abrams (the neocon not the meteorologist) would cover up the war crimes committed by the Latin American regimes Reagan aided and abetted.

So, like Trump Pompeo is clueless as to the American founders’ foreign policy of non-interventionism. Trump, Pompeo and the neocons and liberals all seem to believe in myths about the U.S. government’s role in other countries’ affairs, even though just about all if not all of U.S. government’s past interventions have gone badly or have had worse long-term consequences, certainly worse than had these bureaucratic morons not imposed their fantasies on the rest of the world.

To show that these clowns are clueless about freedom and are really just concerned with further empowering the State and especially the U.S. government (and call it “democracy”), and clueless of the importance of free markets, Pompeo stated in an address to the UN Security Council, “We’re here to urge all nations to support the democratic aspirations of Venezuelan people as they try to free themselves from former President Maduro’s illegitimate mafia state.”

Pompeo seems to think that “freeing themselves” is by way of “democracy,” by way of elections, politics, government. Well, that sure isn’t helping us here in the U.S. For 200+ years the U.S. government has added more and more bureaucratic and police state intrusions into the lives and property of Americans. Income tax. New Deal. “Great Society.”

There are many brainwashed Americans who think that those intrusions are a good thing. And now we have delusional “Democratic Socialists” getting into power in Amerika, who want to steal even more from the American people and expand governmental powers even more over their lives. Thanks, “democracy.”

So Pompeo sees “democratic” aspirations as the priority, like “democracy” will cure the Venezuelans’ lack of food and their starvation and impoverishment.

And Pompeo went on, “Just this morning, we tried to find a way for this Council to speak in one voice in support of the Venezuelan people and democratic ideals through a presidential statement of this Council.”

“Democratic ideals.” No mention of “free market ideals.”

So Pompeo, just how will 51% of the people having power over the rest of the people via elections resolve their food and hunger issues? He doesn’t know. These statists have no clue about why the people are starving. He probably believes that the U.S.-backed “President” of Venezuela Pompeo now supports will come up with a better “plan” for the government to oversee food production and distribution, much like the Republicans in the U.S. Congress push their RepublicanCare, their own version of ObamaCare. No mention of freedom and free markets.

The statists’ priority is not freeing the people. No, it’s “democracy,” majority rules, elections, politics, government!

Venezuelan President Maduro and his military state have seized the means of production and distribution of food in Venezuela. When government bureaucrats and their enforcers take over industries, because they have no idea what they are doing (in Venezuela just like in the U.S.), those industries will have distortions, overstocks or shortages. In this case, shortages, empty store shelves, long lines, mass hunger, violence, chaos.

As I have mentioned before, here in America with private ownership of food production and distribution, we have fully-stocked store shelves, many varieties and choices as well, and not really very much long lines, and not the kind of starvation and chaos that we see in Venezuela.

The answer is to restore private ownership of the means of production. Restore freedom. The government has to let go of its power and control.

And it would be helpful if our representatives in Washington such as Pompeo would say these things explicitly! That is what we really need to hear from U.S. “leaders.”

But I don’t think Pompeo the statist understands, because all they seem to care about is government intervening and bureaucrats imposing their interventionist fantasies. And much of this power wielding is also based on EGO. Pompous Pompeo acts like his ego is as big as his weight. (He could lose a few pounds, really.) These government bureaucrats and interventionists love to impose their powers onto others!

And speaking of my reference to restoring free markets and private ownership of the means of production in Venezuela, the immigration issue is another example of how “conservatives” are against free markets and private property. These conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and nationalists like Trump want to arrest peaceful non-criminals who are traveling to find a better life. They would arrest private church officials for taking in immigrants, and they would arrest private businessmen for hiring those without government authorization to work and sell their labor or services to willing employers and consumers.

Anyway, with Syria and now Venezuela, because of Trump’s low-IQ and incoherence he is showing how malleable a puppet he is, of the national security state, and how easily psy-opped he is by the CIA racket.

Enough of the Control Freaks and the Covetous (the Ocasio-Cortezes, Tucker Carlsons, et al.)

Sometimes all this is so frustrating. That is, advocating for freedom. The free America that the Revolutionaries founded has slowly and gradually become a place in which criminals and parasites can rob their neighbors and get away with it.

The biggest mistake committed by the early Americans was to create an apparatus with compulsory control to rule over the people.

And now we have generations of brainwashed serfs who comply obediently, and really believe that the racket in Washington is something that shouldn’t be completely dismantled.

On the Hill there is a poll showing that majorities of Americans support raising the top income tax rate to 70%, including people identifying as Republicans.

Meanwhile, appearing on 60 Minutes was Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who, regardless of her denials, promotes the socialism of Soviet Union, Cuba and Venezuela and not the “socialism” of Sweden, Norway and the U.K. The latter group are capitalist countries (private ownership of the means of production) with a welfare state, not socialist countries.

Now, a lot of people, for example this Fox News commentator, think that Ocasio-Cortez is the voice of an ignorant generation. But the above poll suggests that much of the entire population is ignorant of economics and history.

Regarding her proposal to tax high incomes at 70%, Ocasio-Cortez said, “That doesn’t mean all $10 million are taxed at an extremely high rate, but it means that as you climb up this ladder you should be contributing more.”

Oh, yeah? “Contributing” to what? Most of what the federal government is unconstitutional, that is, unauthorized by the U.S. Constitution.

And “contribute” usually means to pay into something voluntarily. But who would voluntarily pay to keep U.S. armed forces overseas? Such invasions and occupations mainly have resulted in provoking foreigners into retaliatory actions against us, and trillions wasted.

And who would voluntarily pay into a scheme of molesters, gropers and thieves, also known as the TSA?

The list goes on and on, totaling more than 4 trillion dollars, much of it needless, useless crap.

But Ocasio-Cortez says that “there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.”

Morally right? Now, there’s a knee-slapper. On the social spending side, Ocasio-Cortez wants to spend other people’s money, stolen from their paychecks and other income, on “free health care, free education,” free stuff, free this or that.

I think she’s one of those True Believers who really believes that everyone has a “right to health care,” or a “right to education,” even though there are people who do not take care of themselves, eat terrible foods, drink like fish or smoke like chimneys. Those people, quite frankly, should not be considered to have a “right” to force a doctor to have to treat them.

Redistribution of wealth schemes, especially when made involuntary on the people, encourage people to not take care of themselves. Why bother being conscientious with eating habits or avoiding poisonous drugs and booze when someone will be right there to involuntarily treat you, and it’s all paid for?

Unfortunately, as those polls suggest, conservatives have been bitten by the tax-theft bug as much as “liberals,” for decades now. The envy and covetousness is equally spread on the left and right, and all points between, especially since so-called conservatives caved on FDR’s New Deal and more so LBJ’s “Great Society,” with Social Security, Medicare, etc.

Tucker Carlson of Fox News is himself quite ignorant of economics and history, and has been showing an anti-capitalistic covetousness in his talks recently. Shame, shame, shame on anti-free market “conservatives.”

Carlson feels the Bern, last August (and more recently last week).

Regarding Carlson’s slipping into anti-capitalist socialist rants, Tom Mullen points out,

It’s hard to believe Carlson could get so many things wrong in under five minutes, starting with his general premise. He and Bernie argue the problem is the corporations not paying enough, resulting in taxpayers having to pick up the slack. But business enterprises in a free market are supposed to seek the lowest prices they can find for labor and other inputs. That’s how market economies drive down the costs of consumer goods and make all members of society richer.

Carlson does not seem to understand that about the free market.

More recently, in a not-particularly-coherent rant, after noting the decline of American society and the importance of marriage, Carlson states:

Under our current system, an American who works for a salary pays about twice the tax rate as someone who’s living off inherited money and doesn’t work at all. We tax capital at half of what we tax labor. It’s a sweet deal if you work in finance, as many of our rich people do.

Republican leaders will have to acknowledge that market capitalism is not a religion. Market capitalism is a tool, like a staple gun or a toaster. You’d have to be a fool to worship it. Our system was created by human beings for the benefit of human beings. We do not exist to serve markets. Just the opposite. Any economic system that weakens and destroys families is not worth having. A system like that is the enemy of a healthy society.

But he never really seems to get what might be the root cause of so much societal decay. In my view, it is the institutionalization of theft, a.k.a. “taxation,” and the population allowing bureaucrats to impose intrusive policies into the private lives of the people.

Involuntary redistribution of wealth schemes empower parasites in central bureaucracies to wield control over others, a control which should not exist in a free society.

If there weren’t an income tax which is imposed coercively and with threats, then many of the power-wielding tyrants would otherwise be sweeping floors in the local Wal-Mart. That is because if there were a genuine free market and no government monopolies over a population compelled to support them, such skill-less bureaucrats would never be able to find actual work, in my view.

But, like Carlson, many people don’t seem willing or able to look at the income tax itself, or understand that it is a scheme of involuntary wealth confiscation via coercion and threats (otherwise known as “theft”).

The income tax-theft has been the underlying basis that has enabled and empowered criminals and gangsters to commit their crimes against their neighbors and get away with it. (For example, would the FBI, CIA, and DOJ have been able to do their dirty deeds had they not been involuntarily financed with the coercive tax-thefts? Nope.)

On the tax-thefts, Murray Rothbard wrote in his Ethics of Liberty,

For there is one crucially important power inherent in the nature of the State apparatus. All other persons and groups in society (except for acknowledged and sporadic criminals such as thieves and bank robbers) obtain their income voluntarily: either by selling goods and services to the consuming public, or by voluntary gift (e.g., membership in a club or association, bequest, or inheritance). Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion, by threatening dire penalties should the income not be forthcoming. That coercion is known as “taxation,” although in less regularized epochs it was often known as “tribute.” Taxation is theft, purely and simply even though it is theft on a grand and colossal scale which no acknowledged criminals could hope to match. It is a compulsory seizure of the property of the State’s inhabitants, or subjects.

It would be an instructive exercise for the skeptical reader to try to frame a definition of taxation which does not also include theft. Like the robber, the State demands money at the equivalent of gunpoint; if the taxpayer refuses to pay his assets are seized by force, and if he should resist such depredation, he will be arrested or shot if he should continue to resist…

And on the State, Rothbard wrote in his Anatomy of the State (.pdf),

The State, in the words of Oppenheimer, is the “organization of the political means”; it is the systematization of the predatory process over a given territory. For crime, at best, is sporadic and uncertain; the parasitism is ephemeral, and the coercive, parasitic lifeline may be cut off at any time by the resistance of the victims. The State provides a legal, orderly, systematic channel for the predation of private property; it renders certain, secure, and relatively “peaceful” the lifeline of the parasitic caste in society. Since production must always precede predation, the free market is anterior to the State. The State has never been created by a “social contract”; it has always been born in conquest and exploitation. The classic paradigm was a conquering tribe pausing in its time-honored method of looting and murdering a conquered tribe, to realize that the time-span of plunder would be longer and more secure, and the situation more pleasant, if the conquered tribe were allowed to live and produce, with the conquerors settling among them as rulers exacting a steady annual tribute.

What has been lacking in America for over a century is freedom, economic freedom including the freedom to keep everything you earn (or otherwise honestly acquire) and do with it whatever you want. Americans used to have the freedom to save, invest, spend, contribute to charity, start businesses without government permission or government stealing from the people.

If there is to be an “America,” people need to know that it was founded to be a place of freedom, in which people are protected from others taking their earnings or property by force.

And an America in which people can come and go as they wish. No government permission, no visas, no passports, no being questioned by goons at the government border.

And early on the Revolutionaries who founded America recognized that it was the right of the people to keep and bear arms, not the right of the government to keep and bear arms. A free society is one in which people have whatever means of defense they wish to have. No government permission, no license, no registration, etc. That is actually a safer society.

I think the masses now for generations have been so brainwashed with propaganda, they really believe that it is right that they be subjugated by government authorities, that they must seek bureaucrats’ permission to do this or that, that they must submit to government rulers and enforcement goons stealing their money away, and accept all the other totalitarian, police state crimes that government criminals commit against the people.

We need to change that.

Freedom goes with free-market capitalism, while socialism and government theft of private wealth and property are anti-freedom, a police state, and a life of serfdom.

Further reading:

Economics in One Lesson, by Henry Hazlitt

Taking Money Back, Making Economic Sense (.pdf), Free Market, For a New Liberty, and The Case Against the Fed by Murray Rothbard

And Soak the PoorTaxation is Robbery, and The Income Tax: Root of All Evil by Frank Chodorov

Socialism Is Not Good for You

Zero Hedge with an article on a Venezuela Supreme Court judge fleeing and defecting to the U.S. and denouncing Venezuelan president Maduro. (But will Trump have the guy arrested and charged as an “illegal” immigrant? Probably.)

Related: James Bovard writes about Karl Marx and the great socialist revival. A lot of today’s sheeple youngins are taken in by the utopian vision of “from each according to his means to each according to his needs” (by force, subjugation, coercion, and violence, that is).

Hans-Hermann Hoppe: The Libertarian Quest for a Grand Historical Narrative

Hans-Hermann Hoppe gave a very thought-provoking speech recently, The Libertarian Quest for a Grand Historical Narrative, at the annual meeting of his Property and Freedom Society. It would be very difficult for anyone to match Hoppe’s expert defense of freedom and property, and his exposing the State for what it is. Video below.

Here are some excerpts from Hoppe’s speech.

Early on in the speech Hoppe clarifies the truth about free market capitalism versus socialism.

Contrary to still popular myth in leftist circles, then, capitalism did not cause misery, but it literally saved the lives of countless millions of people from death by starvation and gradually lifted them up from their previous state of abject poverty; and labor unions’ and governments’ so-called “social policies” did not help in this regard but hampered and retarded this process of gradual economic improvement and were and still are responsible for countless numbers of unnecessary deaths.

Hoppe gives some historical perspective and references the Ten Commandments.

And here is then another quote I wanted to provide here:

For surely, slavery and serfdom have not disappeared in the democratic world. Rather, some increasingly rare ‘private’ slavery and serfdom have been replaced by a near-universal system of ‘public’ tax-slavery and serfdom. As well, wars have not disappeared, but only become of a larger scale. And as for excessive punishments and witch hunts, they have not gone away either. To the contrary, they have multiplied. Enemies of the State are tortured in the same old gruesome or even technically ‘refined’ ways. Moreover, countless people who are not a murderer, a thief, a libeler, an adulterer or a rapist, i.e. people who live in complete accordance with the ten biblical commandments and once would have been left alone, are nonetheless routinely punished today, up to the level of lengthy incarceration or the loss of their entire property. Witches are no longer called that way, but with just one single authority in place, the “identification” of anyone as a “suspect of evil-doing” or a “trouble-maker” is greatly facilitated and the number of people so identified has accordingly multiplied; and while such suspects are no longer burnt at the stake, they are routinely punished by up to life-long economic deprivation, unemployment, poverty or even starvation. And while once, during the Middle Ages, the primary purpose of punishment was restitution, i.e. the offender had to compensate the victim, the primary purpose of punishment today is submission, i.e. the offender must compensate and satisfy not the victim but the State (thus victimizing the victim twice).

Hoppe then goes on to comment at length on Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker’s book The Better Angels of Our Nature. It appears that Pinker doesn’t get it as far as the distinction between aggressive violence and defensive violence is concerned. Pinker also seems clueless about the ideas of private property and property rights, as well as the big picture of basic moral scruples.

Property and property rights do not systematically figure in his analyses. Indeed, the terms do not even appear in the book’s 30-page subject index. For Pinker, violence is violence, and the reduction of violence is progress, regardless of whether this reduction is the result of the successful suppression and resignation of a people by and vis-à-vis another, conquering people, or the result of a people’s own successful suppression of aggressors and conquerors.

Pinker does not follow his own logic to the bitter end, but it deserves to be pointed out to reveal the full depravity of his thought. According to him, a smoothly run concentration camp, for instance, guarded by armed men who do not murder the inmates and prevent them from killing each other, but who supply them with “happiness drugs” to keep them quietly working on for the benefit of the guards until their natural (non-violent) deaths, is the perfect model of peace and social progress, while the violent overthrow of the guards by the concentration camp inmates is, well, violence and de-civilization.

Hoppe continues at great length to analyze and criticize Pinker’s cognitive dissonance and moral depravity. Hoppe really goes in depth on this subject.

After demonstrating the relationship between the State and violence, Hoppe asks,

But how much evil can a single, deranged individual do without the institution of a centralized State? How much evil could Hitler have done within the framework of a State-less society such as the Middle Ages? Would he have become a great lord, a king, a bishop, or a Pope? Indeed, how much evil could he have done even within the framework of a thousand mini-States, such as Liechtenstein, Monaco or Singapore? Answer: Not much, and certainly nothing comparable to the evils associated with WW II. It holds not, then: ‘no Hitler, no Churchill, no Roosevelt or no Stalin, and then no war,’ as Pinker would have it, but rather: ‘no highly centralized State, and then no Hitler, Churchill, Roosevelt or Stalin.’

The above is quoted from the transcript from Hoppe’s recent speech at his Property and Freedom Society, which meets annually.

Here are Parts 1 and 2 of the whole speech:

In the “Capitalism vs. Socialism” Debate, Freedom Is Found in Capitalism, Not Socialism

George Reisman has 13 illustrations of the benevolence of capitalism. It is a must read, in my view.

It is quite lengthy, but here are some excerpts that caught my eye:

(6) … in a market economy … private ownership of the means of production operates to the benefit of everyone, the nonowners, as well as owners. The nonowners obtain the benefit of the means of production owned by other people. They obtain this benefit as and when they buy the products of those means of production. To get the benefit of General Motors’ factories and their equipment, or the benefit of Exxon’s oil fields, pipelines, and refineries, I do not have to be a stockholder or a bondholder in those firms. I merely have to be in a position to buy an automobile, or gasoline, or whatever, that they produce.

Moreover, thanks to the dynamic, progressive aspect of the uniformity-of-rate-of-profit or rate-of-return principle that I explained a moment ago, the general benefit from privately owned means of production to the nonowners continually increases, as they are enabled to buy ever more and better products at progressively falling real prices. It cannot be stressed too strongly that these progressive gains, and the generally rising living standards that they translate into, vitally depend on the capitalist institutions of private ownership of the means of production, the profit motive, and economic competition, and would not be possible without them. It is these that underlie motivated, effective individual initiative in raising the standard of living.

(10 ) … capitalism is in actuality as thoroughly and rationally planned an economic system as it is possible to have. The planning that goes on under capitalism, without hardly ever being recognized as such, is the planning of each individual participant in the economic system. Every individual who thinks about a course of economic activity that would be of benefit to him and how to carry it out is engaged in economic planning. Individuals plan to buy homes, automobiles, appliances, and, indeed, even groceries. They plan what jobs to train for and where to offer and apply the abilities they possess. Business firms plan to introduce new products or discontinue existing products; they plan to change their methods of production or continue to use the methods they presently use; they plan to open branches or close branches; they plan to hire new workers or layoff workers they presently employ; they plan to add to their inventories or reduce their inventories.

Ironically … socialism, as Mises has shown, is incapable of rational economic planning. In destroying the price system and its foundations, namely, private ownership of the means of production, the profit motive, and competition, socialism destroys the intellectual division of labor that is essential to rational economic planning. It makes the impossible demand that the planning of the economic system be carried out as an indivisible whole in a single mind that only an omniscient deity could possess.

What socialism represents is so far from rational economic planning that it is actually the prohibition of rational economic planning. In the first instance, by its very nature, it is a prohibition of economic planning by everyone except the dictator and the other members of the central planning board. They are to enjoy a monopoly privilege on planning, in the absurd, virtually insane belief that their brains can achieve the all-seeing, all-knowing capabilities of  omniscient deities. They cannot. Thus, what socialism actually represents is the attempt to substitute the thinking and planning of one man, or at most of a mere handful of men, for the thinking and planning of tens and hundreds of millions, indeed, of billions of men. By its nature, this attempt to make the brains of so few meet the needs of so many has no more prospect of success than would an attempt to make the legs of so few the vehicle for carrying the weight of so many.

But as Dr. Reisman notes at the beginning of the essay, freedom is the essential element in free-market capitalism. So, I will add that besides economic freedom which is necessary to raise the standard of living for all, there also needs to be personal and political freedom as well. The freedom of speech and the Press, freedom of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to due process, and the right to be secure in one’s person, papers, houses and effects are important freedoms for a prosperous as well as free and civilized society.

In the U.S. we seem to be losing more and more of those personal and political freedoms, as well as the economic freedom that existed here prior to World War I and the imposition of the income tax-theft.

In Orwellian China, what they have now is some sort of “Social Credit Score,” in which almost everything the people do is monitored by the government. Their traveling behaviors, the trains they take or their behavior as a pedestrian following or not following the street lights, their social media expressions, and so on.

If they get a score of “untrustworthy,” those people are barred from trains and planes, and are “unable to move even a single step,” as the bureaucrats have stated. So I assume that the people of China are not or will not be able to “vote with their feet,” if they are not physically able to travel out of the country. How will they be able to travel out of such a tyrannical dictatorship hellhole? The former East Germany would shoot people trying to escape. Those trying to leave the former Soviet Union were considered deserters and traitors, according to Wikipedia.

Hmm, not being able to “vote with their feet” to leave tyranny reminds me of the uncapitalistic national socialist Donald Trump, except his restrictions and the government Wall he wants to surround his utopian closed society are presumably to keep people out and prevent foreigners from going to a better place as they attempt to flee tyranny. (But what will future Washington administrations use the Wall for, Donald? Hmmm?)

So, despite whatever capitalistic reforms China has attempted to make in recent years, it seems to want to become more like North Korea, rather than more like the U.S. (I want to say, “the former U.S.,” given how down the totalitarian drain Amerika has gone. Oh, well. We have the college campus craziness with the suppression of dissent from PC idiocy, and the Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezes of the world who want to turn America into a socialist utopia, which, if you read the above Reisman article you will understand how such a utopia is literally impossible and historically always failed.)

If Donald Trump really wants to have the U.S. compete with China, he should dismantle all impediments to Americans’ freedom, especially economic freedom, not increase such impediments as he keeps threatening to do. Dump the tariff-taxes, get rid of the unconstitutional bureaucracies whose purpose is mainly to live high off the hog on the wealth those bureaucrats suck away from the workers and producers of society. Just as the area around Washington, D.C. is the wealthiest part of the country (because of all the parasites associated with U.S. government and all the wealth they siphon off the actual producers of America), the bureaucrats in China are also of great wealth.

As far as the increasing Orwellian government surveillance and molestation of the people and their private lives and movements in the U.S., what we need to do is have some sort of private agency, or agencies, to make government bureaucrats, including all lawmakers, law enforcers, judges, and executives like governors and Presidents, report all their activities and submit to 24-7 monitoring by the people, rather than the other way around. We really need to make it very uncomfortable and unprofitable for anyone to be a government official of any kind, which should help to ensure a freer and healthier society.