In case any reader still clings to the platitude that the American political system is based on the proposition that ours is “a society of laws, and not of men,” I urge you to pay close attention to the events of recent years. Political behavior does not exist in abstractions, such as the “state,” or the “government,” or a “constitution,” but is activity engaged in by such men and women who find the machinery of state power a useful device for accomplishing ends that they value. Those who desire to control others through access to the tools of violence that define the state, have rationales to convince their intended victims of the “rightness” of their rule.
Better off Stateless: Somalia before and after government collapse Author: Peter T. Leeson George Mason University. MSN 3G4. Fairfax, VA 22031), USA Received 22 May 2007; revised 30 September 2007 Could anarchy be good for Somalia’s development? If state predation goes unchecked government may not only fail to add to social welfare, but can actually […]
For too long now, the American people have allowed themselves to be persuaded that the government’s job is to take care of us: to feed us, clothe us, house us, educate us, raise our children, heal our infirmities, manage our finances, protect us from our enemies, guard us against all dangers (real and imaginary), and provide for our every need.
Where Americans go wrong is in failing to recognize that there’s always a catch to such devil’s bargains purportedly carried out for the good of all society.
Politics and religion are highly interesting topics; but unlike other interesting topics, such as science, we don’t need to appeal to authorities when defending our basic beliefs in these fields. We can think for ourselves from the ground up in politics and religion, and when we do—when we actually take the time and effort needed to arrive at reasonable beliefs in politics and religion—the results may qualify as legitimate accomplishments in which we should take pride.
This morning I’ll be heading for my designated polling place. Only one person gets my vote, while all the rest will get “None of the Above”. There is NOBODY in America who can (and WILL) fix the mess which our Rulers have burdened we Humans with, which makes “voting” a useless waste of time.
There will be no vote available for Dissolution, but I’ll work that onto my ballot anyway. For human beings to be truly Free, Dissolution must apply to every GOVERNment at every level!
The rest of this page is devoted to some good links of the day.
Politics is the theory and practice of government. It concerns itself with how force should be applied in controlling people, which is to say, in restricting their freedom. It should be analyzed on that basis. Since freedom is indivisible, it makes little sense to compartmentalize it; but there are two basic types of freedom: social and economic.
According to the current usage, liberals tend to allow social freedom, but restrict economic freedom, while conservatives tend to restrict social freedom and allow economic freedom. An authoritarian (they now sometimes class themselves as “middle-of-the-roaders”) is one who believes both types of freedom should be restricted.
But what do you call someone who believes in both types of freedom? Unfortunately, something without a name may get overlooked or, if the name is only known to a few, it may be ignored as unimportant. That may explain why so few people know they are libertarians.
Jack Perry: “I suppose we’ve all overdosed on hearing “Freedom isn’t free!” for the past few days. Your humble scribe is pleased to report that freedom actually is free. It’s government that isn’t free. Yes, there is a difference. Even the founding documents of this nation agree that freedom isn’t bestowed upon us by the government via human sacrifice in some orgy of blood and violence, but from God. My Bible does not say that God received a purchase order from the United States government that sets them up as a vendor to sell freedom to us….”
Robert Gore: Beggar, thief, or trader? The choices are narrowing.
There are three ways for a person to obtain something of value from another person: receive it as a donation, steal it by force or fraud, or exchange for it. It’s not much of an oversimplification to say that the advance of civilization has hinged on its movement from the first two methods to the third. The right to exchange, and the right to promise as part of a future exchange—the right to contract—are now taken for granted, but those rights are delicate and a whole complex of rights, assumptions, and obligations are subsumed by them. Their intellectual foundations are being undermined as the equality of rights implicit in contract and exchange gives way to a regressive inequality of rights: servitude.
By Doug Casey on LewRockwell.com May 9, 2016
Rousseau was perhaps the first to popularize the fiction now taught in civics classes about how the government was created. It holds that men sat down together and rationally thought out the concept of government as a solution to problems that confronted them. The government of the United States was, however, the first to be formed in any way remotely like Rousseau’s ideal. Even then, it had far from universal support from the three million colonials whom it claimed to represent. The U.S. government, after all, grew out of an illegal conspiracy to overthrow and replace the existing government.
I’ve liked Robert Ringer from way back when I read his first book Looking out for #1. In this post, while perhaps Insurrection is possible, I believe that:
1. Far too many “citizens” have become too fearful to dare stepping off the yellow path to resistance, and
2. It seems far more likely that governments across this planet Earth are headed for bankruptcy and will thus be “Out of Business”, leaving mankind free at last to continue Not being Governed.
A Voluntary system will then get it’s chance at last!