Skip to content

Category: Private property

Election 2020 in Third World Amerika

So, last week was the Democrat convention. I only heard excerpts of the speeches on the radio. The Obamas, the Clintons, Cruella Harris, John Kerry, Cory Schnooker. Oh, they were inspiring, all right.

But did anyone there mention how Barack Obama and his VP Joe Biden continued the fascist drug war viciously, and that they went after medical marijuana people even in states that legalized medical marijuana? What about the drone strikes that murder mainly innocent civilians overseas that Obama escalated after Bush?

Did they mention how as a U.S. Senator Joe Biden wrote or sponsored legislation hardening the drug war, and in fact gave us drug-related asset forfeiture? Just look at all the awful fascist laws Biden gave Amerika. Many of those laws have negatively affected black people much more than whites. But remember, if you don’t vote for Biden, “you ain’t black!”

Sadly, Donald Trump agrees with the fascist drug war, and in fact he has said he wants to militarize it! Doh!

So far, the Republicans have begun their convention with speakers who are trying to give people “hope,” but they are nevertheless fellow fascists, neocons, drug warriors and regime-change warmongers. Oh, well.

Trump was correct toward the beginning of the scamdemic that the hysteria and panic was unwarranted, until the bureaucratic swamp that surrounds him in the White House gave him a good psy-opping. If Trump isn’t going to tell the American people that the CDC and NIH and Fauci have been lying to us about the “virus,” then he is one of them, as far as I’m concerned. He’s a liar, too. And a swamp creature as well.

We know that “175,000” people “killed by COVID-19” is a lie, because CDC and most of the states’ “public health” bureaucrats are counting heart disease deaths, diabetes deaths, stroke deaths, accidental deaths, gunshot deaths, etc. as “COVID-19 deaths,” simply if the deceased person had tested positive for coronavirus. We know that most of the “COVID” patients put on ventilators die, and probably because of the ventilator. And we know that COVID-19 has a .1 to .2% infection fatality rate, just like seasonal flu. So given that the COVID-19 is no more deadly than the seasonal flu, not only is “175,000 people killed by COVID-19” a lie, it’s not even close to that.

The panic-inciting bureaucrats and their co-conspirators in the media have been engaging in such Orwellian fear-mongering for what reason? Are they trying to terrify the masses into not wanting to physically go to the polls to vote in primaries or in the November election? It wouldn’t surprise me. The Trump haters lied about “Russia collusions” for 3 years, and Adam Stiff and Jerry Noodler conducted Spanish Inquisitions to try to get Trump but they failed. We see how corrupt these people are, and their cohorts in the media.

Look, if you can go to the grocery store, the bank and other places as people have been doing, then you can go to the polls and vote. That will ensure that your vote will be counted.

However, if you vote by mail, there is a very good chance that your vote won’t be counted. Given the cancel culture and the censorship and shame crusade against Trump supporters, if you’re a Trump voter do you really want the election workers who open those envelopes to see your name and know that you voted for Trump?

No, I’m not a Trump supporter or voter, I wouldn’t even vote for the joke of a “Libertarian” Party, with that sheeple Jo Smorgasbord, wearing the mask of submission to the State that symbolizes serfdom and suppression of dissent. And standing with the Marxists of “Black Lives Matter,” who don’t give a damn about the many more black lives being murdered by other black people than by police (and the “blacks and browns” being murdered by U.S. CIA drone strikes overseas, quite frankly). And besides, Jorgensen only won 5,000 or so votes in the states’ primaries for 2020, while Jacob Hornberger won some 9,000 votes, yet the convention partiers decided to go with Jorgensen!

Speaking of “Black Lives Matter”/Antifa, why do media and Democrats refer to rioters, looters, vandals, arsonists burning down businesses, people throwing rocks and bricks at others, as “peaceful protesters”? What about the marauders going into quiet, suburban neighborhoods to wake up the “white, rich people”?

You probably heard about the “white, rich couple” in St. Louis, the McCloskeys, who brandished their firearms when a large group of marauding terrorists broke into and trespassed on their property and threatened to burn their house down. The corrupt DA is investigating the couple for defending their home and their lives! They are actually Democrats who spoke at the Republican convention. Go figure.

But I digress. Regarding the mail-in cheating, if that gets imposed in many states for November, and for no good reason except as a means for people to cheat more easily, then we are going to see contested state election after contested state election, lawsuits galore, with voting challenges stuck in the courts for weeks, even months. This will not only apply to the Presidential election but to Congressional races as well. It can only be chaos, and may not be resolved by early January because Congressional races will not be resolved, and by January 20th Nancy Lugosi will be sworn in as President. Hooray for “democracy”! Don’t you love it?

Promising Mask Protest in New Hampshire, the “Live Free Or Die” State

I happened to find this post that features a mask-mandate protest in Keene, New Hampshire. There were supposedly over 100 people there and most of them were maskless. Hearing what the people had to say about all the COVID hysteria gives me hope that there are still informed people with reason in the Totalitarian Amerikan State.

Republican candidate for governor of NH was there, Karen Testerman, who is challenging Gov. Chris Sunono in the September 1st primary (as is Nobody). Fascist Sunono has got to go.

You can see the videographer’s full almost 2-hour-long video at that link, but I will post the shorter version here.

Like Baker in Massachusetts, NH’s Sununu Big on COVID Fascism

The worst governor in the history of the “commonwealth” of Massachusetts, Charlie Baker, has expressed concern over a recent “uptick” in COVID-19 cases, that is, positive coronavirus test results not exactly people actually being sick. So he is now “indefinitely postponing” “Step 2” of “Phase 3” in the return to normal business as determined by Herr Charlie.

The positive test rate has skyrocketed from 1.7 percent to 2 percent! (Ooooh.)

According to Baker, outdoor gatherings are to be reduced from the allowed 100 to now 50 people. Indoor gatherings it depends on what they’re doing. For instance, “activities with low potential for contact (batting cages, driving ranges, go karts, bowling alleys),” that’s allowed.

But, “activities with greater potential for contact (laser tag, roller skating, trampolines, obstacle courses),” NOPE!

Premier Baker is also going after bars. According to WCVB, Baker said that “conversations with local municipalities and the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission alerted him to the fact that some bars were serving snacks like potato chips and pretzels in order to justify staying open.” He is accusing bars of “masquerading as restaurants,” because pretzels and chips don’t count as “food.” That is because “restaurants are defined as businesses that prepare food on-site and under a retail food permit.”

Excuse me, but how are you and your fellow gubmint apparatchiks more informed to “define” what a “business” is better than the actual business owners and their consumers?

And why the hell do we have an “Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission” in what is supposedly a free society?

Baker is also like other fascists in the other states restricting travel coming into the state, making incoming visitors and returning residents quarantine for 14 days, or pay a $500 fine for each day the unconstitutional order is violated.

I am convinced that this guy is just a psychopath control freak who gets off in pushing his weight around and imposing his little Soviet planning diktats on the serfs.

It’s a little better in New Hampshire, but not that much. In the “Live Free or Die” state (There’s a knee-slapper!), Gov. Chris Sununu, son of a previous NH governor, imposed stay-at-home orders that went from March to mid-June.

So much for “live free“…

In this NPR list of the Eastern Bloc states reopening rules, it states for NH: “Beginning June 1, fitness centers can resume small-group fitness classes with occupancy limits and social distancing requirements. Use of gym equipment is only allowed in one-on-one personal training sessions.”

So much for “live free“…

So, another control freak fascist, Chris Sununu.

And: “The state issued guidance for places of worship to resume in-person services at 40% occupancy.”

Okay, exactly which nitwit moonbat believes that there is some sort of harm that can be done by having worshipers in church? Is there that much of a risk when the COVID infection fatality rate is only a tenth of one percent? And when most of the people who get COVID have mild or no symptoms. And when asymptomatic carriers are not infectious, according to the World Health Organization.

I think these people are literally crazy people in government. The governors murdering innocent people in nursing homes, and now trying to make people sick with forced-mask-induced oxygen deprivation and forced inhalation of one’s own previously inhaled toxins and gases with the fascist face mask orders.

The bureaucrats are ignorant buffoons and literally crazy people, in my view.

And what they are also doing in their wreaking havoc and causing unemployment putting people out of work and disrupting people’s lives for no good reason, they are violating the private property rights of the people in a most extreme way. In their ordering businesses closed down and then micromanaging how each business is to be run, these fascist imbeciles are “taking” income and wealth away from the people. They are stealing from the people! Why am I not hearing about all the lawsuits of these thieving fascist governors like there should be?

By the way, while this year is not a governor’s race in Marxachusetts, it is in the People’s Republic of New Hampshire. Rethuglican Gov. Chris Sununu is being challenged in the primary by two people. “Nobody” and Karen Testerman.

Conservative social activist Karen Testerman has a long list of accomplishments and activities. She was a “military wife,” and her sons “flew combat missions over Kosovo and Iraq for the Air Force and Navy…” Ouch.

We can try to forgive all that militarist stuff, I suppose. On her activism Testerman is or has been involved with these organizations (with some added comments by me in parentheses): Coalition NH Taxpayers, NH Firearms Coalition, NH Alliance, NH Right to life, Abstinence Advisory Committee (Now that takes a lot of guts, in the baby-killing cult society we live in.), School District Governance Association of NH, NH Secure The Grid (Watch out — there’s a crazed Frank Gaffney involvement there.), Life member of the Gun Owners of NH, Laura Bush Helping America’s Youth (Yech.), Founder & Executive Director Cornerstone Policy Research (Focus on the Family-associated, anti-drug legalization, anti-medical marijuana legalization, anti-gay marriage, opposed to repealing law against adultery.), Founding of Natural Heritage Center for Constitutional Studies, and Franklin City Councilor.

Okay, some very good, some not so good. No one’s perfect. But it may be that we need someone who’s “ultra-conservative” in a leadership role to counter the Cultural Marxism that’s unfortunately sweeping the country, no?

Although, I did like this column by Karen Testerman:

Is It 1984?

Today, Republican Candidate for Governor, Karen Testerman stated, “Governor Sununu is drunk with power. His Emergency Orders following his Executive Orders are so detailed and controlling that he cannot reverse himself, even if he tried.”

“Furthermore, with the signing of HB1639, he has extended his control in a subversive move. Today patients undergoing same-day surgeries requiring a general anesthesia cannot have an advocate in the performing facility with them. This removes the ability of an advocate to question actions by any medical personnel during the patient’s stay. Just as newborns are whisked away from parents who want to delay vaccinations only to have the vaccine administered, so HB1639, now law sets the stage for unconscious patients to be given a “COVID” vaccination without authorization from the patient or the advocate. This is immoral and wrong.” Testerman commented.

His Emergency Orders are being extended and re-extended. Sununu admits “Emergency orders will likely be in place until slightly after we have a vaccine.”

“Is the Governor preparing Granite Staters for a mandatory vaccination program?” questioned Testerman. “As your governor, I will inform you so that you can make your own fully-informed decisions without mask mandates or restrictions on businesses or schools.”

So Sununu is a vaccine Nazi? Why are these people so ignorant and obsessed with vaccines?

Is there any way we can get Karen Testerman to run in Marxachusetts? Sorry.

And the other one opposing Gov. Fascist Sununu in the NH primary for governor is the mainly libertarian “Nobody,” who had his name legally changed to “Nobody,” so we can say “Vote for Nobody for Governor.”

And I wrote about Nobody here. Obviously, I agree a lot more with Nobody on most issues. But the reality is that New Hampshire, formerly the “Live Free or Die” state, needs to return to actually standing for just that. If the Rethugs can oust Sununu in the primary, then it seems to me that Testerman would probably have a better chance than “Nobody” in defeating the Democrat in November.

And yes, there is a Libertarian Party candidate on the ballot for November, Darryl Perry, who I praised in this article in 2016 when he ran for the LP nomination for President. Perhaps NH Republican voters can oust fascist Sununu in the primary, but vote for this LP candidate in November. Although, I know that’s less realistic.

But in Marxaxhusetts, there needs to be some coalition of business owners who can get together and class-action sue the crap out of comrade Charlie Half-Baker. Why isn’t that going on now? They really need to take Herr Charlie to court! Maybe we can try to impeach him for constitutional violations especially private property theft, as well as being a public nuisance.

COVID Fascists Aiding and Abetting Marxist Lives Matter Against Civilized Culture

Now that I’m seeing more info on the classical music venues continuing to be canceled and for no good reason, it is becoming more clear to me how the “Black Lives Matter”/antifa vs. civilized life is closely linked to the COVID situation and associated fascism.

The fascists ordering businesses closed down and ruining the economy and causing unemployment and unproductivity are no different and no better than the communists and Marxists burning down businesses or looting from the ones still in existence.

The official organization “Black Lives Matter” itself and its little robot followers do not care about all black lives. Why don’t they scream about the black lives being murdered by other black people especially in the cities, such as Chicago? (Brainwashed loony-tunes call it “racist” to point that out, because they are not rational. But don’t tell them I said that.)

And then if someone says, “All lives matter,” they are also called “racists,” and in some cases fired from a job. That is how irrational and hypocritical these social movements are.

They do not believe in “inclusion,” that’s for sure.

If it’s about “police brutality,” then they should look into de-monopolizing community policing away from government control. Not the kind of criminal racket that thugs have set up in Seattle, but an unorganized system of freedom in which whoever wants to patrol neighborhoods can do so. Nobody is above the law. But when government has a monopoly on community policing and security, those government “officials” are above the law, because they ARE the law. Only obedient sheeple would promote that government monopoly system in an otherwise free society.

But this would mean that because everyone has a right to defend oneself from the wanton aggression and violence of others like rioters and looters and arsonists, the free society would not infringe on the right of the good people to keep and bear arms.

And it’s not even about “racism,” this hypocritical, irrational movement. It is not about “black lives.” It’s about power and control. The Marxist youngins are being brainwashed to believe that they are entitled to other people’s wealth and earnings, and that they have a “right” to take stuff from others. For whatever reason, whatever made-up reason.

Just listen to the brainwashed True Believers.

The brainwashed youngins believe that they are justified in committing acts of violence, looting, and burning down businesses. They believe they have a “right” to steal away the livelihoods of entrepreneurs who spent a lifetime building such livelihoods.

I guess you would have to be brainwashed to really believe that you have a “right” to steal from (i.e. enslave) some guy or gal who never harmed anyone, and in fact someone who employs young black people.

The rioters, marauders, looters, thugs, arsonists and barbarians in Minneapolis and other cities remind me of the criminal psychopaths of the U.S. military invading and bombing and destroying Iraq in the early 1990s, a good 10 years prior to 9/11. They are brainwashed, too, but with a slightly different ideology. The militarist sheeple psychos of the U.S. military are brainwashed to believe that the U.S. government rules the rest of the world and has a “right” to criminally invade and bomb other countries with impunity, steal their wealth and natural resources and murder millions of foreigners.

In 1991 the crazed criminals of the U.S. military intentionally bombed Iraqi civilian water and sewage treatment centers and caused the Iraqi people to have to use untreated water which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents. Psychopath President George H.W. Bush started that war of aggression and imposed those sanctions and no-fly zones for no good reason.

The entitled American political class and all its obedient underlings and followers having the power to enslave the rest of the world, and enslave the workers and producers of their own society, is an ideology shared by both the U.S. militarists and America Firsters, and the communist-Marxist thug psychopaths who are burning down whole cities.

And regarding those communist-Marxist thug psychopaths, the cultural stuff goes with all this. Tearing down statues and burning down historic buildings is just as ISIS would do.

Centuries ago, much of the world was barbaric. The “Enlightenment” period developed.

The concepts of individual freedom, individual rights and individual dignity were becoming prominent. Those concepts included freedom of voluntary association, voluntary contracts and voluntary trade, the recognition of property rights, including the property right of the individual in one’s person and labor. The freedom of self-ownership.

While chattel slavery was ending peacefully all over the world, many people still really believe that the “Civil War” “ended slavery.” Well, “slavery” actually did continue 50 years later with the imposition of the income tax in Amerika. The government is the slave master, in which the obedient sheeple must do a certain amount of labor, involuntarily, to serve the master in Washington, state capitols and City Halls. And that’s basically what we have now.

The Marxist movement we have now, “Steal from the honest working folk, steal from the productive, i.e. enslave the productive,” is not that different from the political class all across Amerika. The Heritage Foundation, National Review, The New York Times, The DNC and the RNC are no different. Do those influential organizations ever call for the elimination of the income tax-theft and the IRS? Do they ever call for the most evil organized crime racket ever, the U.S. government, to be decentralized? Of course not. They thrive on tax-redistributionism just as the Soviet rulers thrived on living off the labor of the workers and producers.

In the ongoing scamdemic, the brain-dead government bureaucrat rulers such as governors and mayors have ordered businesses shut down to try to put a stop to whatever economic progress was happening (that Trump’s tax cuts and deregulation contributed to). Unemployment was way down including and especially among black people and other minorities and women. The Marxists and communists (a.k.a. “socialists”) would have none of that.

First, seeing that many more black people being employed and more able to provide for themselves went against the “Whitey is keeping black people locked out of the economy” narrative.

And second, the economy showing just how most of the population benefits from a more freed market was refuting the Marxists’ brainwashed beliefs in the “centrally-planned Almighty Government being the caretaker of the people” crapola. (Even though they can just look at Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea, and worse, the U.K., to see that communism “socialism” doesn’t actually work in practice, but brainwashed morons choose not to do that.)

I think the Marxism ideology that the modern “revolutionaries” seem to want to implement is not to do with State worship, because we already have State worship in Amerika. It’s to do with people wanting to have a system in place that allows them to get away with wanton aggression and violence against others. A criminal, violent society, in other words.

And the cultural artifacts being torn down now. With the COVID scamdemic we have music cancellations, especially classical music, which unfortunately is very “historical” and represents the human progress that was made especially since the “Enlightenment,” as well as being great music. Maybe that’s why the government schools have been dropping classical music references from their music programs, and might be another explanation why the symphony orchestras don’t seem to have that many black musicians. It’s not because the musical organizations are “exclusionary,” or racist. The schools prefer to encourage cRAP music along with rock music which isn’t nearly as inventive, intellectual, or emotionally wide-ranging as classical music.

Yes, “cRAP” music. It is crap, quite frankly. Nothing racist about that. The “Rap culture” (if I may call it that) includes a lot of utterances of the “N word,” which is encouraged by this nasty, thuggish, culture that promotes violence against innocents (like the Bushes and Clintons and their fellow psychopaths Obama and Trump, and all points between and their wars overseas and war on drugs, etc.). Yet, when a college professor reads Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail out loud in class, that includes the “N word” (that King wrote in the letter himself, HE is saying it, not the professor), that professor gets investigated by the university! This kind of irrational, hypocritical crap is going on ALL the time now!

But with the “Black Lives Matter”/antifa criminality, hypocrisy, Marxism and brainwashed loony-tunes taking down historical artifacts, the COVID fascists are causing various classical artistic organizations to be cancelling whole seasons. And whatever the venues can attempt to save, they are trying to implement “social distancing” measures, which in some venues is impossible. So, some of them or many of them will go bankrupt. And this might very well be on purpose. Without the New York Philharmonic and the Met, how will New York residents expose their children to great music that goes back centuries? And in every other city?

And with the COVID scamdemic as the excuse, those of us who are not bamboozled by the mainstream media, know that all this COVID fascism CRAP is for no good reason. The masks which are harmful to your health, the “social distancing” lunacy, hand sanitizer to ruin your skin,  the restaurants having to seat people 18 yards apart. It’s for NO GOOD REASON! And the “stay-in” orders by fascist governors and mayors have been causing more harm than good.

The best thing for our society is decentraliztion, getting rid of Washington, D.C. completely, at the very least. (And restoring the right of the people to keep and bear arms, of course.)

End Government-Imposed Restrictions and Central Planning in Immigration

The U.S. Supreme Court blocked Donald Trump from dismantling the “DACA” program, or “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals”, which exempts immigrant children from some immigration restrictions. It is not a legislative act, but an unconstitutional executive “memorandum” imposed by Premier Obama. So, it can’t be repealed via legislation, although the legal restrictions being waived could be, I supposed. Premier Trump wants to have another try at dismantling the program.

My view on all this, if you don’t already know, is to repeal every immigration restriction legislatively or by executive order, or just not enforce them, and dismantle ICE and the IRS (and DHS, TSA, FBI, ATF, and all the rest of those fascist agencies that are unbecoming of a free and civilized society).

One of my main points on the immigration issue is regarding this false belief or assumption that many people seem to have that there is some kind of common ownership of the territory as a whole. That is just a myth, an “old wives’ tale,” and not backed by any legal or constitutional basis. It is based on emotion and collectivist ideology, not morality or rationality.

So, there is no such common ownership of the territory because in our society we have something called private property.

In April of 2019 I posted a compilation of excerpts from my past posts dealing with the immigration issue, and I will repost most of that post now because the immigration problem will never be resolved in the U.S. as long as the control over such matters continues to be seized by the idiot moron central planners in Washington.

Here is that earlier post:

In the post, Freedom Matters, I wrote:

In the article, titled “Culture Matters,” the writer Jim Cox compares the U.S. territory and its public or collective ownership to a condominium made up of several buildings with commonly owned areas, in which the condo owners “own the land between the 27 buildings and the pavement in common and own only our individual units separately.”

And he continues: “This is a very analogous situation to US citizens owning private property as well as public property via government. The condominium association has rules about people coming onto the common property.”

In Cox’s example, each condo owner buys one’s own unit with the rules of the condo association in mind.

Already Cox confuses private and public property. The entire territory of a country is not a commonly owned parcel of private property and can’t be compared to that.

Outside of each individually-owned unit, the property of the condo buildings and real estate is commonly owned by the condo owners. But it is still all private property.

In contrast, “public property” is supposedly publicly owned. Actually, as Jim Davies pointed out, public property is unowned. Either no one has actually legitimately homesteaded or honestly acquired it, or it was owned but the bureaucrats of the State have seized and occupy it.

Many individuals, groups and business owners own individual parcels of private property. But it’s more difficult to define who the actual owners of public property are. An intruder onto the condo property is trespassing onto private property. But if the “public” supposedly owns non-privately-owned public property, just which part of the public can be considered an owner or an “intruder”? “Citizens” or non-citizens? Taxpayers or non-taxpayers?

As I asked in this critique of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, what about non-taxpaying citizens, such as those who work but don’t earn enough to be required to pay income taxes? Are they less owners of the “public” property? Are they “intruders”? What about working, taxpaying non-citizens?

And what exactly is a “citizen”? As Carl Watner notes, a “citizen” is a “member of the State.” Other sources define citizen as someone who is legally recognized by the government. But who is the government to “recognize” or authorize someone as legitimate?

Sadly, statists look to the ruling government bureaucrats for validation. But just who exactly are the ruling bureaucrats, and what exactly is the State?

As Murray Rothbard has pointed out (.pdf) in his Anatomy of the State,

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.

And, in his great treatise The Ethics of Liberty, Rothbard asserts,

Thus, the State is a coercive criminal organization that subsists by a regularized large-scale system of taxation-theft, and which gets away with it by engineering the support of the majority (not, again, of everyone) through securing an alliance with a group of opinion-moulding intellectuals whom it rewards with a share in its power and pelf.

But there is another vital aspect of the State that needs to be considered. There is one critical argument for the State that now comes into view: namely, the implicit argument that the State apparatus really and properly owns the territorial area over which it claims jurisdiction. The State, in short, arrogates to itself a monopoly of force, of ultimate decision-making power, over a given territorial area — larger or smaller depending on historical conditions, and on how much it has been able to wrest from other States.

If the State may be said to properly own its territory, then it is proper for it to make rules for anyone who presumes to live in that area. It can legitimately seize or control private property because there is no private property in its area, because it really owns the entire land surface. So long as the State permits its subjects to leave its territory, then, it can be said to act as does any other owner who sets down rules for people living on his property.

So what we have from Cox is the collectivist notion of a common ownership of a territory. He writes: “Until we can shift to a Private Property Society we are stuck with a government handling immigration.”

Unfortunately, “government handling immigration” is the police state that we have now. Bureaucrats empowering border control agents to violate due process rights, arrest innocent people who have not harmed anyone, arresting employers for not getting government permission to hire a worker, arresting workers who are peacefully making a living, an out-of-control “ICE” working to take citizenship away from naturalized citizens, storm troopers ripping whole families apart. All this because the people have gullibly empowered a centralized government to decide who is and who isn’t on the premises legitimately.

And Cox lists “negative cultural traits” of possible immigrants that people wouldn’t want to invite in. He neglects to mention, however, that it’s the government planners (that we are “stuck with”) who are responsible for bringing in the violent criminals he mentions.

But the collectivist-minded writer is putting ALL immigrants into one big group, the “undesirables,” the riffraff and the actual violent criminals, all lumped together with the peaceful people, the hard-working laborers, the honest folks.

Whatever happened to the individualism and free markets that used to be associated with libertarianism? Whatever happened to presumption of innocence? If you don’t suspect an individual of something, leave him alone.

And why would libertarians want bureaucrats to control markets, labor and employment? “We’re all socialists, now”?

Regarding the crime problem, the rapes and assaults, murders, etc., why are the anti-immigration crowd so bent on being dependent on centralized bureaucrats and government police for their protection from criminals? Why don’t they ever bring up the right of the people to keep and bear arms? They only seem to bring that up when the gun control debate is in the news.

When criminals know ahead of time that their prospective victims are armed there would be far fewer rapes, assaults and murders, and attempted rapes, assaults and murders. That would be the same with violent foreigners entering the territory, no?

Is the “culture” stuff actually more important to these immigration critics than their security? So instead of promoting the right of people to keep and bear arms and use the arms to protect themselves from actual criminals, the anti-immigration crowd are more concerned with promoting government-controlled social engineering.

And to say that someone not violating the person or property of another, who is peacefully exercising one’s freedom of movement to find a better life for himself and one’s family, is a “criminal,” is to not understand the libertarian non-aggression principle.

***

In the post, Walter Williams on Immigration: Very Collectivist-Minded, I wrote:

Walter Williams has been considered very “libertarian” in his thinking and his writing, although a conservative libertarian. He has been great in his essays raking the political correctness crowd and the college hystericals over the coals, and his books Up from the Projects and Race and Economics should be read by everyone, especially the youngins in college if they want to get a dose of reality in life.

However, when it comes to nationalism and immigration it seems he is less libertarian and, unfortunately, extremely collectivist, and his latest article on that subject is no exception. So, I feel I must fisk Dr. Williams on this one, because clarification of the issues, ideas and principles is necessary here.

First, Williams asks,

How many Norwegians have illegally entered our nation, committed crimes and burdened our prison and welfare systems? I might ask the same question about Finnish, Swedish, Welsh, Icelanders, Greenlanders and New Zealanders.

How many U.S. citizens who are here legally commit crimes against others? And who has committed more crimes against the American people, immigrants or the government in Washington (and the bureaucrats of the state and city governments)? (Answer: It’s governments, no contest.)

Williams continues:

The bulk of our immigration problem is with people who enter our country criminally from Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, Africa and the Middle East. It’s illegal immigrants from those countries who have committed crimes and burdened our criminal justice and welfare systems.

No, the bulk of our immigration problem is that immigrants from those “undesirable” countries are brought in under the control of government bureaucrats in Washington. The bureaucrats have no incentive to strive for better outcomes in their policies because government bureaucrats are not accountable. They have a monopoly in their control over immigration, and monopolists are not accountable.

In the debate about illegal immigration, there are questions that are not explicitly asked but can be answered with a straight “yes” or “no”: Does everyone in the world have a right to live in the U.S.? Do Americans have a right to decide who and under what conditions a person may enter our country? Should we permit foreigners landing at our airports to ignore U.S. border control laws just as some ignore our laws at our southern border?

“Does everyone in the world have a right to live in the U.S.?” This is not a “yes” or “no” question. Everyone has a right to live wherever one finds it to be a better place for oneself and one’s family, as long as one doesn’t violate the persons or property of others. I know, some people have the mistaken belief that the U.S. territory is “our” property, and outsiders entering the territory sans authorization are “trespassing.” Nope. The territory contains many, many parcels of private property. The owners of the private property have the ultimate right to decide who enters and who does not enter their private property, not the community, and not the government. This applies to people’s homes, their businesses, churches, and so on.

“Do Americans have a right to decide who and under what conditions a person may enter our country?” Again, not a “yes” or “no” question. Many people believe that Americans as a group, by majority rule, have a right to decide those things, and that the government has the authority (constitutional or moral) to implement those decisions, regardless of a private property owner or employer’s decision to invite someone. If the collectivists’ vision were the case (as it currently is now), then we don’t really have private property rights, and the majority of the territory’s population and the government really are the ultimate decision makers of who may enter private property.

“Should we permit foreigners landing at our airports to ignore U.S. border control laws just as some ignore our laws at our southern border?” Why is there “U.S. border control”? That’s referring to U.S. government border control, which is a police state now. A “100-mile Constitution-free zone”!

And then Williams gets into the cultural aspects of the problems of today:

People who came here in the 19th century and most of the 20th century came here to learn our language, learn our customs and become Americans. Years ago, there was a guarantee that immigrants came here to work, because there was no welfare system; they worked, begged or starved. Today, there is no such assurance. Because of our welfare state, immigrants can come here and live off taxpaying Americans.

Then get rid of the welfare state! THAT’s the answer to that problem. It’s the welfare state that FDR and LBJ (and Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama, et al., ad nauseam) have forced on us. Dr. Williams has many times written in his articles that it is immoral to take earnings from one person to give to another, by force. Why doesn’t he say outright here that involuntary contracts and theft (i.e. taxation), Social Security, Medicare and all their spin-offs should be abolished?

There is another difference between today and yesteryear. Today, Americans are taught multiculturalism throughout their primary, secondary and college education. They are taught that one culture is no better or worse than another. To believe otherwise is criticized at best as Eurocentrism and at worst as racism.

Well, that’s because governments in the U.S., federal, state and local government, control education in America! Get the government out of education, completely! And THAT’s the answer to that problem, this “multiculturalism” crapola. You think that an all-private schools system, without any government handouts and without the imposition of monopolistic government bureaucrats’ sick, irrational, kooky claptrap would survive in an educational free market?

Very unfortunate for our nation is that we have political groups that seek to use illegal immigration for their own benefit. They’ve created sanctuary cities and states that openly harbor criminals — people who have broken our laws.

That’s because “sanctuary cities” are run by city governments — THAT’s the problem! Bureaucrats should not be empowered to get involved in bringing in foreigners, unless those actual bureaucrats invite the foreign visitors or workers to live in their homes, the bureaucrats‘ own homes, and they pay for their visitors, not the taxpayers. Sadly, government bureaucrats mainly just want to have as much welfare parasites (and voters) brought in, because getting reelected and expanding their tax-funded racket is what bureaucrats really care about.

And also, it’s not really about “legal” vs. “illegal” with many of today’s anti-immigration conservatives, unfortunately. A lot of this anti-immigration stuff is just coming from a collectivist, nationalist anti-foreigner mentality. “We are all one ‘family,’ and we don’t want ‘them’ invading ‘our’ home,” and all that. I’m hearing that on a constant, daily basis from the conservative talk radio personalities and their dittohead followers calling in.

This immigration stuff is mainly to do with a collectivist nationalism, which is not what “America” is all about. America was all about individualism and private property, NOT collectivism and collective ownership of a territory that overrules the will of the private property owner.

And “America” is also not about central planning as well. Most of the early Americans who founded the country would not have agreed to empowering central planning bureaucrats to have authority over controlling immigration matters. Leave those matters up to Americans themselves, not the government.

***

And finally, in Immigration and Private vs. Public Property, I critiqued a speech by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, in which I wrote, among other things:

Unfortunately Hoppe gets into some confusion between private property and “public property,” and some of his “rights to exclusion” seem quite collectivist, in my view. He seems to advocate a public, collective right to exclusion, whereas the only legitimate right to exclusion is the private property owner’s right to exclusion, and the individual self-owner’s right to exclusion, and the right to inclusion as well.

For instance, Hoppe states: “In a fully privatized libertarian order there exists no such thing as a right to free immigration. Private property implies borders and the owner’s right to exclude at will.”

But he goes on to say that “’public property’ has borders as well.” Wait a minute, the “public property” borders he’s talking about are government-drawn borders, therefore they are not legitimate.

Hoppe states that public property “is not unowned. It is the property of domestic tax-payers and most definitely not the property of foreigners.”

I have some questions here, using the U.S. as an example. Just how did the taxpayers come to own such “public property”? Did they inherit the property? Was it by way of a voluntary contract? Or was such ownership imposed on them involuntarily along with the tax-thefts that were imposed on them involuntarily?

My answer is that, if there is any ownership at all of so-called public property, and he suggests the owners are the taxpayers, then of course such ownership is involuntary just as are the tax-thefts imposed on them. Therefore, such ownership is lacking in any moral justification.

Some further questions: Millions of undocumented workers’ presence and labor in the U.S. have not received proper bureaucrat-parasite authorization, but they have paid billions of dollars in federal taxes. And while some of their legitimate, honest earnings are withheld by employers to pay the feds the demanded booty, they are nevertheless ineligible for Social Security from those earnings. But they are “taxpayers.” Do they thus share in ownership of U.S. “public property”?

And also, do you divide ranks in “public property” ownership”? For instance, do very wealthy people have a higher percentage of ownership than lower-class workers, and thus have more ownership rights of control than the others? What if many wealthy progressive thinkers have a larger percentage of ownership/control, and want to have marijuana dispensaries, abortion clinics, etc. on “public property,” but a minority of the tax-payers disagree with that scheme? Is that legitimate?

When Hoppe says that public property is the “property of domestic tax-payers and most definitely not the property of foreigners,” what about domestic non-taxpayers? What about “citizens” (non-foreigners) who do work for a living, but don’t make enough to be required to have to pay income taxes? Are they denied rights of exclusion or inclusion because of this? So in other words, those who don’t pay the feds anything in tax-thefts should have the same denied rights of access to public property as the foreigners/non-“citizens”?

And also, it seems here in Hoppe’s justification of taxpayers’ involuntary ownership of public property he apparently, at least for this topic, accepts the State’s existence. Although he does admit that “the State is a criminal organization,” but its inaction regarding border control “will lead to even more and much graver injustices, in particular to the domestic citizenry.” Does Hoppe here seem to abandon his description of so-called “fake libertarians” at the very beginning of the speech, in which he says a “fake libertarian” is one who “affirms or advocates” “the necessity of a State” or “of public or State property”?

Now back to Hoppe’s recent speech (as shown at the top), he states that “immigration must be by invitation only,” and that “immigrants must be productive people and hence, be barred from all domestic welfare payments.” But he gets into a lengthy discussion of his proposed rules that seem very central planning-like, in my view.

For instance, immigrants “or their inviting party must place a bond with the community in which they are to settle, and which is to be forfeited and lead to the immigrant’s deportation should he ever become a public burden.”

And with whom in the community will such a bond be placed? Who is to be in charge of that? What if a foreigner peacefully travels to the community and doesn’t give anyone a bond?

So are you saying that the immigrant is morally obligated to pay some third party some payment, without any voluntary, mutually-agreeable contract? What if he finds a room to rent or buys a home, who is it that owns the property? Does the individual landlord or property seller own the property, or does the community share in ownership of those properties? Is the entire community collectively owned by its inhabitants (regardless of separate private property parcels)?

It seems to me that Hoppe is suggesting that the community shares in ownership of property within the community. Not good.

In the just society, each property owner has full, 100% sovereignty over one’s property and its property title that he and only he may decide to whom to transfer, and he and only he may decide to whom to rent, and for whatever reason.

Hoppe continues: “As well, every immigrant, inviting party or employer should not only pay for the immigrant’s upkeep or salary, but must also pay the residential community for the additional wear and tear of its public facilities associated with the immigrant’s presence, so as to avoid the socialization of any and all costs incurred with his settlement.”

Who is going to decide how much “wear and tear” one immigrant has caused or might cause in the future? Who has the authority to charge the employer such a fee and decide how much to charge? Sounds very central-planning, if you ask me.

This all sounds very communal or “private club”-like to me, and seems to abandon the principles of private property and freedom of association. My neighbor doesn’t own my property and has no authority to dictate to me whom to let on my property, quite frankly.

And Hoppe continues: “Moreover, even before his admission, every potential immigrant invitee must be carefully screened and tested not only for his productivity but also for cultural affinity (or ‘good neighborliness’)…”

“Carefully screened”? By whom? The employer? Landlord? Prospective home seller? The community? Who will be in charge of this? Who owns the lives of the immigrants? Do they lose their self-ownership when moving to a new territory, even though they are peaceful and there’s no reason to think they might be a burden on the public? What if some family from a different area just moves into a home they’ve bought or rented and they don’t submit to screening, and there’s no reason to suspect them of not having “good neighborliness”? How about just letting property owners, businessmen and home sellers make those decisions, not by some some preset rules but by random events that take into account multiple, spontaneous factors? Whatever happened to Hoppe’s promotion of “Natural Order”?

So Hoppe’s “right of exclusion” seems to mean that the collective public may decide who gets in and who stays out. But how? By some sort of democratic vote? How else could a large group, such as U.S. taxpayers who supposedly own the public property, be able to come to a decision regarding who gets in and who stays out?

The true free market way is when an individual anywhere in the world who wants to make a better life for himself and his family travels to wherever he sees an opportunity, as long as he doesn’t violate the persons or property of another. He can rent a home or purchase one from a willing landlord or seller. And the property owner who rents out or sells a home is the owner, not his neighbors or the community.

I don’t see any moral obligation to pay the community some advance tribute, as the aforementioned family never entered into any contract with the “community,” only the employer, landlord or home seller, etc.

The end.

Informative and Enlightening Articles

John Whitehead: This is not a revolution. It’s a blueprint for locking down the nation.

Greg Mitchell: The truth about Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Vasko Kohlmayer: America is not a racist nation.

Laurence Vance: The Wisconsin model.

Dave DeCamp: The danger of sending in the troops: the killing of David McAtee.

Matt Agorist: Cops across U.S. hiding badges and covering IDs shielding themselves from accountability.

John Vibes: In one state hundreds of criminal cops agree to give up badges in exchange for not being criminally charged.

Jon Rappoport: Nurse at COVID epicenter hospital: “It’s murder.”

Wendy McElroy: Native American boys: forgotten victims.

Walter Williams: The true plight of black Americans.

Trevor Timm: Who’s attacking journalists at George Floyd protests? Overwhelmingly, it’s the police.

Adam Dick: Welcome to college, now wear your mask.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.: The brave new world of Bill Gates and Big Telecom.

Richard Ebeling: Tragedies of our time: pandemic, planning and racial politics.

Jacob Hornberger: Economic nonsense in the New York Times.

Doug Casey: Rent strikes, the erosion of property rights and what comes next.

David Henderson: Health professionals show what matters. Hint: it’s not health.

Glenn Greenwald: The abrupt, radical reversal in how public health experts now speak about the coronavirus and mass gatherings.

Allan Stevo: Public health is another term for Marxism.

Jacob Sullum: The attorney general’s overblown fears about scrapping qualified immunity.

Kerry McDonald: Compulsory schooling laws aren’t progressive — they’re inhumane.

Becky Akers: The gospel according to Marx.

Thomas DiLorenzo: Which side committed treason in the “Civil War”?

John Daniel Davidson: The media are lying to you about everything, including the riots.

Bonnie Kristian: The war on terror comes home.

My Earlier 2012 Article Covering “Civil Unrest” Events Similar to Now

Because of the recent events, the race stuff and rioting and the economic collapse, I was reminded of an article I wrote that was on LewRockwell.com in 2012, asking, Civil Unrest: Do Our Rulers Actually Want It To Happen? So I wanted to repost that here now because of some similarities from that period to what is going on now. There are maybe a few little things in there that I might not write now, but most of it is relevant, I believe. Any links that weren’t working I either replaced with Wayback Machine version, a different but similar page, or removed completely.

Civil Unrest: Do Our Rulers Actually Want It To Happen?

September 18, 2012

Copyright © 2012 by LewRockwell.com. (Link to article)

There have been several different predictions and scenarios involving how inflation and austerity measures in the U.S. could bring about food shortages and other shortages, food riots, looting, violent protests, flash mobs, and martial law.

All these things can be prevented, of course, if more people could wake up to the fact that government central planning in money and economic matters is inherently flawed and doomed to failure, societal self-destruction and collapse.

Some people see the recent German court decision to approve German bailouts of irresponsible European governments as a new dictatorship for Germany and a boon for investors. And there are others who see this new scheme as the beginning of runaway hyperinflation in Europe that will spread to the U.S.

Following this decision by the high German court, the U.S. Federal Reserve has announced a new round of quantitative easing (QE3). Some people believe that QE3 will cause more economic instability, and further destruction of the dollar.

Eventually the austerity measures we have been seeing in Europe will reach the U.S.

Austerity measures will hit public employee benefits and pensions, and welfare and Medicare recipients (but not the bloated salaries, benefits and pensions of Congressmen and their beloved bureaucrats).

But it seems that the U.S. government has been pushing hard to get as many people dependent on government as possible. Food stamps spending has more than doubled since Barack Obama became President, although the number of Americans on food stamps almost doubled from 2001 to 2009 during the presidency of George W. Bush as well.

And the Obama Administration has gone so far as to push U.S. food stamps onto Mexicans! (And Mexicans can’t even vote for Obama this November – theoretically, that is.)

Also distressing is how private corporations profit from the government’s exploiting the population’s vulnerabilities that the government’s own interventions cause. One example is JP Morgan Chase’s shamefully profiting from the food stamps program.

Incidentally, employees of JP Morgan Chase donated over $800,000 to Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and, so far over $155,000 to Obama’s 2012 effort. (There certainly has been no quid pro quo here, as former President George Bush the Elder might say.)

Now, regarding eventual shortages, austerity and civil unrest in America that would involve the unavailability of Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) payments, in large part affecting food stamp recipients, one scenario I’ve seen details how rioting and turmoil could unfold, mainly beginning in the cities, but eventually flowing out into the suburbs. It is not a pretty picture.

One would think that the government bureaucrats who control these social programs could see ahead what would happen when withholding such benefits, especially with millions of people dependent on them for their daily sustenance. So, in the case of possible future EBT cards not functioning followed by rioting and violence, one has to wonder whether such an action by the government could be purposeful.

In the aforementioned scenario, the writer emphasizes urban minorities as the ones mainly perpetrating the flash mob rioting and violence. But, in 2010 34% of food stamp recipients were white, 22% black and 29% Hispanic, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

However, the flash mobs committing acts of violence in the cities in recent years do not seem to be associated with government austerity measures, food stamps, hunger, etc. In some instances, such violence has been racially motivated, black against white, as witnessed in this account, for example. Unfortunately, the mention of such a modern social phenomenon in the U.S. is politically incorrect, as many newscasters and newspapers reporting on those events censor the race of the perpetrators and that of victims, as author Thomas Sowell has noted. Race demagogues such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Shrapnel have gained much fame and popularity from such “race-hustling.”

So are the Chicago-Washington community organizers and agitators trying to promote race riots? Obama and his “social justice” cohorts do not seem to have any comments on the violence committed by inner-city punks. The Holder Justice Department has refused to prosecute black against white voter intimidation cases. And Obama wants public schools to stop disciplining misbehaving black students. Hmmm.

And why have U.S. military recruiters allowed so many white supremacists to join the military?

It appears that the efforts of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and now the election of Barack Obama as President do not seem to have healed the friction among the races in America.

So there seem to be extremists on both sides, and the rest of us are caught in the middle.

But when there will be government austerity and EBT card non-functionality, the flash mob violence we have seen recently will probably be much worse, regardless of race or ethnicity.

But, racial conflicts aside, why have the Bush and Obama Administrations increased spending on food stamps so much? Social programs such as food stamps rob people of their incentive to provide for themselves, and they become serfs to bureaucrats.

It is as though these imbecilic bureaucrats are encouraging the masses to get dependent on these bureaucrats, and for devious purposes.

No, they wouldn’t do that. Not that there hasn’t been enough information about Obama and his immoral, unconstitutional acts as President to indicate any sort of deviousness, no.

With the moral hazard of government bureaucrats’ luring people into this kind of dependence and serfdom, QE3 will cause further economic instability, part of the inherent moral hazard of having a central bank and lack of freedom and competition in money and banking. Such Fed policies continually rob the people through inflation, particularly the lower and middle classes.

Added to those moral hazards of these professional bureaucrats are Congress’s raising the debt ceiling, Washington’s lack of prosecuting criminally irresponsible banksters, the 2008 extortion-like bankster bailout, and foreclosure fraudsters.

And Obama’s pushing through Congress the bill allowing for indefinite detention of Americans without charge or evidence, and his signing it into law, followed by his appealing the judge’s striking it down – there probably isn’t any deviousness behind that, and probably won’t be any targeting of political dissenters during future civil conflicts in America, no. (There certainly hasn’t been any of that, not in America, no.)

All these acts of government criminality could be leading America into a total breakdown of society.

So these people in Washington are either extremely clueless and don’t know what they’re doing, or they are doing these things intentionally, in which case they are just plain evil.

So, could the ruling elites be purposefully trying to cause so much massive dependence on government and such massive weakening of the financial and monetary systems, followed by a false-flag type economic collapse and sudden withholding of government benefits and unavailability of our own money in the bank, to intentionally bring about rioting and violence?

And, if Romney is elected in November, would he be any different from Obama?

And so, if these scenarios play out, and there is indeed massive civil unrest in America, we already know that various federal agencies and local and state police as well are preparing for it. The police state that J. Edgar Hoover, Oliver North, and Dick Cheney put in place is being fully embraced by Obama, the Department of Homeland Security, the TSA, FBI and CIA, as well as many local police neanderthals all across America – it is as though they are drooling for some action, and for a chance for them to show the rest of the world just how tough they are.

Can you imagine people with the kind of extremely questionable character and level of dishonesty and untrustworthiness as Obama and Romney presiding over a situation of military martial law?

In addition to all this, the Obama Administration has allowed foreign troops onto U.S. soil. NATO troops were in training in Tampa just prior to the Republican Convention. They now have Russian soldiers training in the U.S., and some insiders believe that these foreign troops are joining with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security toward some sort of illicit action against Americans under the pretense of “peacekeeping” during a time of civil unrest in America.

In my opinion, having foreign troops coming into the U.S. for any reason is dangerous, and Sheriff Richard Mack agrees with me.

And now, because of inner-city gun-related crime rates, and recent isolated shootings and mass killings, the emotionalistic calls for gun control have been on the increase. This despite violent criminals who disobey laws against assault, rape and murder probably are not inclined to obey gun laws as well.

And, as John Lott has noted, would-be assaulters, rapists and murderers are less likely to commit their crimes when they know their prospective victims are armed.

But because of the emotionalism surrounding certain tragedies, even Republicans such as SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia, radio host Michael Savage and TV host Bill O’Reilly have shown irrationality on the matter. How will Americans, in their cars stuck in busy intersections when flash mobs rampage and attack them, be able to defend themselves if they have been disarmed by the government? When looters and burglars break into their homes and businesses, how will disarmed homeowners and businesspeople protect themselves?

And you can say what you want about anti-UN “conspiracy theories” and so forth. But, mirroring a zany 1961 U.S. State Department call for complete civilian disarmament, the 2012 UN Arms Trade Treaty would require signing member nations to enact much stricter national gun ownership restrictions. That was up for a vote in July but has been postponed until probably later this year. Some analysts have interpreted Article 15 of the Treaty to allow for foreign troops in the U.S. to confiscate guns from Americans in their homes. Even having U.S. troops going around door to door to search for and confiscate firearms is itself illegal and unconstitutional, but foreign troops?

It should not be difficult to believe that not just local police but our own U.S. troops would go door to door to seize Americans’ means of self-defense, when we know that they have much experience in doing just that in Iraq, a country in which U.S. troops had no business or reason to be, violating private Iraqi civilians’ own right to bear arms and defend themselves.

As the people’s right to defend themselves against looters, rioters, rapists and killers, as well as against government tyranny, is being criminally whittled away by the degenerates in charge, those same degenerates are arming themselves up and preparing for something that could be interpreted as outright treason.

I have already expressed concern about martial law and explained that U.S. military and other federal armed goons and local police, who have all sworn to obey and defend the Constitution of the United States, are obligated to disobey unlawful orders by commanding officers including the U.S. President.

Unlawful orders include those in which a soldier or an officer is ordered to violate a presumably innocent civilian’s rights to free speech, protest, dissent and criticize the government, right to bear arms and defend oneself against criminal assailants including government criminals, right to due process, and “right to be secure” in one’s person, home and effects. If the officer or soldier does not suspect a civilian of some actual crime, then that agent of government is obligated by law to leave the civilian alone, no matter who ordered otherwise. (The Oath Keepers have made a list of orders they will not obey.)

Further treasonous is the rulers’ inviting foreign troops in to aid in the rulers’ abuses.

And, given the criminality of monetary easing to enrich bankers while creating inflation that robs the poor, one might very well describe those actions as treasonous as well.

If only Americans had listened to the American Revolutionaries’ warnings about paper money and tyranny, wealth redistributionism, and their warnings against foreign entanglements.

Treasonous Donald: Unleashing Military Against the People

Donald Trump has threatened to send the U.S. military into the cities to deal with the rioting and looting going on by antifa and other elements in this apparently planned nationwide coordinated event that is supposedly in the name of George Floyd the victim murdered by a cop in Minneapolis.

Trump stated: “If a city or a state refuses to take the actions that are necessary to defend the life and property of their residents … then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them.”

As Jacob Hornberger pointed out, U.S. military are trained to shoot to kill, which they will do if ordered to do so. They do not question the orders. Unfortunately we have a very authoritarian President who doesn’t understand the Bill of Rights and due process even though he himself has been the victim of government apparatchiks violating his rights to due process!

We already have had many constitutional violations against the people committed by the governors and mayors who have ordered businesses shut down without any due process or any good reason, and dictated many other intrusions into the lives and economic activity of the people. Now a military invasion of the cities?

Military are trained to shoot to kill and are trained to leave their consciences at the door. And these days local and state police and other policing agencies have shown their lack of understanding of due process and the very freedom that America is supposedly all about.

For instance, Target Liberty reposted a tweet and video from Jack Posobiec, an alleged “alt-right” “Republican political operative,” who had posted the video from tweeter GoodNightHarlem. The video is by some people filming from their own home, just outside on their front porch, supposedly. And a bunch of supposedly Minneapolis National Guard (but looks to me like local police) go by on the street, supposedly enforcing a government-imposed curfew even though there is obviously no protest activity going on in that presumably quiet neighborhood. The government nazi goon thugs then order the people who are on their own property to go inside. The loudmouth government scum are yelling at them to get inside. (One says, “Light ’em up!”) And then the nazi neanderthal thug goons start shooting at the people! Wenzel at Target Liberty says those are “rubber bullets” (and the original tweeter, GoodNightHarlem, says it’s “paint canisters”) like that justifies the street criminals’ unwarranted violence against innocent people.

I went to that Posobiec tweet to see the comments by the people who read Posobiec’s Twitter. It was unbelievable just how ignorant some of the commenters are in their assuming that the people being fired upon were a part of any protest or rioting. KSauce writes: “think everyone had their chance to protest peacefully. They blew it” And Mrs. Horton writes: “Good that is what needs to happen. Saving lives.”

And we see just how the authoritarian people on the “right” are just like their counterparts on the left. Red-Pilled Dark Helmet says: “Got what they deserved.” Kelly T cheers: “About time. Good. There is NO RESPECT for rules or laws. This needs to change.”

Well excuse me, Kelly T, but the people who have no respect for rules or laws (such laws being the U.S. Constitution) are those violent antifa-like government goons, nazis and marauders who swore an oath to support and defend said Constitution.

But at least some people have some understanding and some level of decency, including Libertarian Redhead, who writes: “It shouldn’t have happened but those Jewish people should have just gotten on the cattle cars like they were told the first time. This is what you sound like.”

Exactly, Libertarian Redhead.

Continuing with the ignorant, authoritarian sheeple. Joshua says, “If you listen carefully you can hear ‘light em up’ we’re finally getting some law and order.”

Obviously, Joshua’s view of “law and order” is the antifa view. They lit up the stores and businesses in the cities with their arson crimes. And U.S. military lit up Iraqi cities and towns and murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. So let’s have that here in US of A as well! Yayyyyy!

But when officials like the President order the military to go after their own people, and fire into crowds or shooting at peaceful people on their own property, such officials are acting treasonously.

Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution defines Treason:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

While authoritarians view “Treason against the United States…” as citizens acting disloyally against the government and disobeying government and police orders, the Founding Fathers wrote in the above definition of Treason as the opposite of that: government officials and their enforcers acting disloyally and making war against their own people.

More specifically, if the enforcers or soldiers of the government use the apparatus of war (i.e. guns here) against the people (as seen in the video above), that is an act of Treason as defined in the Constitution. In the above video, we are not talking about government enforcers or soldiers firing upon dangerous criminals, we are talking about people standing on their own property acting peacefully.

If Trump uses the U.S. military for domestic purposes, he will be unleashing murderous brutality and Treason like we haven’t experienced in America, at least not since the time of Lincoln.

And by the way, as Jacob Hornberger noted in this past article, the Founders were opposed to having a standing army, because they knew that would be the apparatus of tyranny by future authoritarian anti-liberty Presidents. And instead the Founders wrote the 2nd Amendment into the Constitution to protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms not just to protect themselves from criminals like arsonists burning down their businesses or murderers, rapists and marauders, but to resist government tyranny.

For Equal Justice Under the Law, De-Monopolize Government Police

I wanted to write my response to the recent “Libertarian” Party shenanigans, but it’s going to have to wait now. After 2 months of “COVID” imprisonment and fascist business closures, mask orders and socialist distancing, and my having to write about those things, now the narrative managers have abruptly changed the subject to the RACE crap, out of no where!

The RACE crap and “racism” here, there and everywhere coming out of the woodwork after a long time that we haven’t had to hear that, and the recent police brutality incident in Minneapolis which has little to do with race or racism.

America is NOT a “racist country”! The U.S. over 50 years ago installed the “Civil Rights” Act and nationwide abolished Jim Crow laws and made it a crime to “discriminate” against people based on race, especially in businesses, schools and “public accommodations.” Many businesses and educational institutions have “affirmative action” programs for people of color.

And prior to the past 3 months scamdemic Wall Street panic-selling and governors-forced business closures, by the end of last year the unemployment rates for black and Hispanic Americans and women were at their lowest ever in history. Thanks to Trump signing those tax cuts and the deregulation he imposed.

But the scamdemic political scammers and Trump haters took all that away now. And the rioters are helping the self-destructive cause even further.

And this certainly isn’t a defense of Donald Trump, who continues to prosecute the racist drug war in which black Americans are incarcerated at much higher rates than whites, and Trump who continues the drone strikes which mainly murder innocent civilians in the Middle East and Asia.

Nevertheless there was Plan A to get rid of Donald Trump, “Russia collusions” that didn’t work. And then Plan B, the made-up Impeachment fiasco (that also didn’t work). And then Plan C, as soon as the Impeachment failed in February, the obsessed Trump haters then exploited a “virus” and imposed their fascist orders on the people to cause economic devastation, which they did.

And now it’s Plan D, exploit a nazi cop in Minneapolis murdering a black suspect, and use that one incident to engage in more economic destruction, theft, and falsely claim there’s an epidemic of racism in America.

So the rioting and looting, burning down buildings and cars and hurting people has nothing to do with racism. (Unless you want to refer to black-instigated anti-white racism…)

If the “Black Lives Matter” or antifa “protesters” cared in the least about the plight of black people, they wouldn’t have destroyed the minority-owned businesses in Minneapolis and other cities. And further, many of those small businesses are local grocers and gas stations, the destruction of which leaves lower-income residents at a further disadvantage in their providing for themselves. Thanks, “protesters.”

And those governors, mayors, or police chiefs who told local police or National Guard to “stand down”? Useless tax eaters, all of them.

Much of this is not to do with race, but is mainly to do with the people on the left carrying out their anti-capitalism political agenda.

In 2009-2010 were the Tea Party protests and rallies, especially after ObamaCare and other further centralization and tax-theft policies, because those protesters don’t like more of their income and earnings and freedom taken away from them. They cleaned up after themselves after their rallies and they didn’t destroy property. And then in 2011-2012 there were the Occupy Wall Street protests, in which property was destroyed and protesters left disgusting messes. There was a stark difference between the two groups. The Occupy Wall Street crowd wanted the government apparatus to be used to “take from others,” and get their “fair share,” if you know what I mean.

More recently, there have been crowds of people protesting peacefully against the fascist government-ordered shutdown of the businesses and fascist stay-at-home orders. Those protesters have gone to state capitols with their signs and chanting and giving public speeches, but by and large they were not violent.

The current return of protests, in which many of the “protesters” are not protesters but are criminal marauders and monsters, are not acting out any legitimate form of protest. They are burning down businesses and stealing from them, setting cars on fire, and hurting people.

They are merely acting out the same anti-capitalist mentality (.pdf) of the same people of the white-collar variety who had been panic-selling on Wall Street and ordering businesses shut down.

But the main issue with the police murder of a black man in Minneapolis is not to do with the race of victim or perpetrator, but was yet another criminal act of government violence against a civilian.

The answer to THAT problem is to de-monopolize community policing and security. Abolish government police. No one should have legal authority over anyone else, in which if the “civilian” does something criminal he goes to jail but if the “authority” does something criminal he does not go to jail. That is not a free society or a civilized society. That’s a criminal society, in my view.

As I wrote back in 2013, “No more police socialism.” Here is an excerpt:

So the way I see it, theoretically, police or “law enforcement” socialism is when government bureaucrats possess the ownership of the means of production and provision of community policing and security while outlawing (at least implicitly) any competing agencies to do the same.

But a more honest assessment of police socialism is this: The people of a community already possess or could possess the means of providing their own security themselves. Those interested in doing so already have the natural right to establish private policing firms or voluntary groups and have a right to possess whatever armaments they wish to carry out such endeavors.

But in the current situation of police socialism, government bureaucrats have stolen from the people their ability to provide their own security, by making such attempts artificially unlawful and through disarmament schemes weakening the people’s abilities to physically defend and protect themselves when their lives and property are threatened.

The government bureaucrats have usurped and forcibly monopolized the means of production in security provision at the people’s expense. That, in a nutshell, is what police socialism is.

So what do these bureaucrats and monopolists do with their monopoly power, enforce the law?

Well, they enforce the thousands and thousands of made-up laws on the books which make artificial criminals of totally innocent human beings, that’s for sure.

Okay, but is such a government-monopolized system efficient? I’ll bet Murray Rothbard would answer in the negative.

Do the government police protect people from the aggressions of others? (Hmmm. I hear snickering out there.)

As CopBlock’s Peter Eyre noted recently, the government police have no legal obligation to protect anyone.

So why the hell do they exist?

As the late William Norman Grigg correctly pointed out, government monopolized community policing and security is a “protection” racket.

And more recently, Ryan McMaken at the Mises Institute addresses the uselessness of the government police racket in Minneapolis.

Government police are useless. That is why the business owners in Minneapolis and elsewhere need to exercise their right to keep and bear arms, and to use them if necessary, to protect their businesses, to protect their lives and their livelihoods, like the Korean business owners did in the “wild west” of L.A. during the 1992 Rodney King riots.

And I am not suggesting that citizens just go and shoot people, obviously. But people have a right to self-defense. If someone is breaking into your home you have a right to exercise self-defense to protect yourself and your family. The same right applies to your place of business, which is your livelihood, your means of providing sustenance. Anyone directly invading and physically wrecking such means of sustenance is literally threatening your life.

But such rights of self-defense also apply to when the government is threatening you.

And no, I am not suggesting that people go and shoot police either! BUT, theoretically, people have the right to defend themselves against anyone who directly threatens their lives. Larken Rose controversially addressed that issue in this article.

As Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote a few years ago,

The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, thus, with the same instruments they would use upon us. If the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had had the firepower and ammunition that the Nazis did, some of Poland might have stayed free and more persons would have survived the Holocaust.

Speaking of Jews, see this article on Jews and “gun control,” on the website of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.

And by the way, while Ronald Reagan, the NRA and the KKK all tried to legally prevent black Americans from owning and possessing firearms, it was the Black Panthers of the 1960s and ’70s who were gun rights biggest advocates, wrote UCLA law professor Adam Winkler.

I know, a lot of this is “10 foot pole” stuff, but there is a lot of ignorance and simple-mindedness out there. Certain ideas must be discussed.

If you are interested in all these ideas, and I hope you are, for further info see these important and enlightening articles:

From Murray Rothbard’s book, For a New Liberty, Ch. 12, “Police, Law and the Courts.” (Here is an excerpt by Murray Rothbard reprinted in Reason magazine, 1973.)

Hans-Hermann Hoppe on the idea of a private law society in these videos and the text version, from May of 2011.

Robert Murphy: But wouldn’t warlords take over? and The possibility of private law.

Per Bylund on competition in private justice.

And William Anderson on the State courts where the Duke lacrosse case is concerned.

Gov. Ron DuhSantis: A “Reasonable Fascist”

Laurence Vance on the “reasonable fascist” ruler of Florida:

In a recent interview on Fox & Friends, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said regarding the actions of other state governors to the coronavirus: “If you look around the country, clearly there have been examples of really draconian, arbitrary restrictions that have nothing to do with public health.” To these governors he said: “You’re not a dictator, you don’t have unlimited authority, and people do have rights. I don’t think any governor has the authority to restrict anyone unless there’s a direct relationship to combating this virus.” He thinks that “absolutely it’s gotten out of hand.” In Florida, “we did not do that. We were reasonable,” he said. “We trusted the people to act appropriately and we’ve had better results than some of the states that you’ve seen.”

Not so fast, Gov. DeSantis. As a resident of Florida, I strongly disagree. To cover up your really draconian, arbitrary restrictions, your exercise of unlimited authority, and your violation of people’s rights in Florida, you try to point to other states that did these things to a greater degree. I don’t buy your argument. You spooked the churches into closing. You ordered businesses to close that you thought were unnecessary, you issued decrees like a dictator, and even now you are only allowing restaurants to open at 25 percent capacity. DeSantis is a mini-Mussolini like all of the other state governors that shut down their states. He is just a reasonable fascist. All hail the few governors that did not do so.