Fear and the Consequence of the Mob

From economic calamity to terrorism, societal fears engender the very events we abhor within the constructs of our imagination. What we fear beget the product of our fear. Societal fear is the architect of superstition and the resulting institutions of control. These superstitions and the institutions built upon them engender irrational behavior within society as well as within the governing bodies of society; the harmful effects of these irrational human behaviors multiply geometrically through these institutions.

The products of fear range from the seemingly benign fear of the dark and the paralysis it creates in the child, something that most people are able to overcome by adulthood, to the more malignant fear of bogeyman, and the resulting institutions of war and so-called security. It is interesting that a society of critical thinkers may regard these two systems as homogenous; government propaganda contorts the meaning of war and security into a singular means to the promise of peace and prosperity. This train of thought is an obvious contradiction, but the fears and collective rationale of these institutions of thought and the mob-like nature of so-called democracy render these facts a distortion and create enemies of those who question the ‘authorities’ on such subjects.

This brings us to the powers of democracy and the mob-like dangers it engenders. The resulting fear of a mob renders any real debate or argument against such institutions a dangerous affair for those who may attempt any argument against such institutions; placing these institutions of thought in perpetuity and out of harmony with any real sense of freedom or liberty.

Perpetual and fixed fears rely upon ignorance and the manifestations of the human imagination. These fixed manifestations of the majority eventually acquiesce into the hands of the state and the institutions of warfare and into a police state as exemplified in America and Europe especially since the events of 911.

From government to religion, the institutions of man rely upon fear to control society. To control the masses. To stabilize, control, manage, administer, police, rule, govern, etc. Stability is an anomaly in of itself when considering subjective societal affairs such as economy and value. See Mises on Stability, part#4 of the link page.

Fear is of course a natural condition of man, and many fears are rational and understandable. If it were not for fear man would have died off a long time ago; e.g., fear of where his next meal will come makes man go out and find a way to get it. This is a very simple and real example and needs no further explanation to the critical thinker.

But irrational fear as a mechanism employed by the state is another situation. Fear of economic disaster, a fear coddled by the very institutions which have attempted the stabilization and control of economy, is for the most part an irrational behavior when studied in a specific light. This is a bit complicated and I’ll explain in brevity. Contemporary society fears economic disaster, but clamors to the very institutions which have ‘regulated’ and attempted control of economy for more than a century: government and incidentally the central banks and the corporate entities which follow. Unable to see that it is the result of this intervention and attempt at controlling economy that is the cause of its current failings and ultimate demise. See my other article Laissez-Faire Hallucinations.

If you read the link provided above “Mises on Stability”, you can see the problem with this thinking on any control of economical means, but I’ll expand in my own words. Human action and society is a perpetual system of change. A system engendered through the necessities of every day life and the desires of people who have a need to make their lives better. This is a right conferred upon humanity by the immutable reality of everyday Human life and living, this unchangeable part of society’s perpetual change. If society stifles in a system of so-called stability, change in accordance to economic necessity cannot occur naturally. This seems like a contradiction, and I agree, but it ought to exemplify the need for a very limited government, as government has no way of dealing with these realities without introducing corruption and despotism into the so-called order of all things Human. It is this “stability” socialism so strives for, and this is a futile and dangerous mistake; it procures unnatural obstacles to everyday Human life and economy and is completely unsustainable. Laws ought support the right for people to change their circumstances due to their needs, under the understanding that these changes are not at the cost of other lives or future lives. But also, this “cost” cannot be arbitrarily dictated by representatives who are not held to the same standards and provisions of such laws and customs.

Again, none of this is to say that much of what contemporary man fears is completely irrational and unsound in principle. The results of the reaction to these fears as well as their origin are the main focus here. The laws which attempt stability and control based upon such fears. Are they the result of propaganda, i.e., exaggerations of a media system designed to perpetuate the powers of the state?

One question of many is, are these manifestations creating a mob nation? Searching the world over for monsters? Turning the entire world into a police state? Where the so-called “security” system implicates the very people who buy  the idea of security; -or in the least, pay for this system, one way or another through coercion, whether they “buy” into the idea or not- as this system places focus on them, the masses, who pay for this “security” through taxation and the loss of dignity, liberty and property.

All the while the corrupt nature of world leaders and politicians becomes more and more obvious and undeniable with every passing news day. Man is not infallible, and majorities even less so, therefore this is but another example of the need for very limited government. It is for this reason that what America had been once, a Constitutional Representative Republic, as opposed to what we have today: a socialist democracy on the verge of collapse. Never mind the corrupt political acts employed around the world through the behaviors of corporations, banks and government acting in concert on their own behalf under the guise of benevolence, safety and security; the Orwellian perpetual warfare of the last hundred plus years and the countless economic depressions, wars, manipulations and interferences of the most basic and fundamental requirement of Human activity: economy. The plethora of news stories of molestation, drugs, infidelity, prostitution, lewd behavior, etc., by political and world leaders are an everyday news flash. And these are the people in control of your safety, security, prosperity and peace?

Seems these leaders have made you and I the focus of suspicion and of assumed criminal behavior. Big Brother, the ubiquitous government doing surveillance on every physical and non-physical move you and I make. And the corporate institutions which make big money supporting such activity. Your movements, your banking activities, transactions, email, digital phone use, etc., all acts of which undermine several parts of the Bill of Rights expounded within the very contract which lends American government the ability to govern, the Constitution for the United States of America. Does this mean that we are no longer a party to the constitution? Are our governments incrementally taking our rights away? Who does this government represent now? Who is afraid of who? And this would be my real question: Who is watching the obvious crooks who run this whole show? This creature is only in its embryonic stage, and it is already rearing its ugly monstrous head, and yet we do nothing.

This situation, doomed to miserable failure as none of this activity is economically and socially sustainable in the long run, will more than likely eventually culminate into war.

Seems to me this government is aware that its “plans” are not going to make a lot of people very happy. This, in my thought process, is the very reason so much emphasis is now placed upon so-called security. The government is protecting itself from you and I. Fear.

I digress, but what do you think public employees unions protect government employees from? The voters, you and I. But we depend upon these state and federal employees to build bridges and roads and schools, right? I ask, why? This line of thinking precludes the free market from entering into these lines of work. Business has built within it requirements of getting a job done efficiently, otherwise the business will fail, the State has no such mechanisms. My contention has merit simply by looking at the protections the government has safeguarded against the governed,  you and I (the real free market), right under our noses all along.

Fear and irrationality do their bidding, and we give tacit consent by allowing such infringements upon us. And we understandably do so out of fear of the mob institutions created by this so-called democracy. The IRS, DEA, ATF, USDA, CPS, FDA, TSA, Homeland Security, etc., are the agents of this mob democracy and you would be hard-pressed to argue otherwise with all these and many other institutions of control in place by government. These few mentioned institutions of government act in an arbitrary manner and are seemingly above the constitutional laws which lend them their “limited” powers. But overcoming this fear is the only way to turn things around.

Sooner or later Human Action must and will prevail. But will it be at the cost of much bloodshed and decimation of our environment? Or do we posses the capacity to revolt without violence? Have we evolved enough, or has God created an intelligent enough species to use our intellect to tear away the institutions of fear once and for all? Evolution, creation, alien infiltration,whatever your beliefs, do we posses the capacity to set aside our normal and perpetual superficial differences and truly adapt to our ever-changing environment? Or do we intend to annihilate ourselves in some perverted hope to start all over again? I have my doubts either way. But I also do have hope that we can flourish beyond a planet of Waring races through patience, critical thought, understanding, empathy and wisdom.

In conclusion, what right have we to permanently force our protracted fears into the institutions of government and onto posterity based upon what we fear now? The manifestations of the multitudes, the mob. Expounded upon the future by corruptible men, to extinguish the flame of Humanity and relegate all to a future of imprisonment and desolation. What right have we to do such a stupendous and horrendous act upon posterity? In the name of peace and security? Current rationale dictates and perpetuates the duplicitous results of fear, and we act as a mob to the future of all Humanity. Who are we to do such a thing?

Some may read this and say that I am using fear as my guide, or that I am using fear as the template of my conviction, that I contradict myself. I will preempt this possible conjecture and state with profound passion that it is the courage of my conviction that fuels these words and that fear would delay or prevent my doing so!


On Socialism in America

In the last few years I have participated in many discussions about American style  socialism. I have argued what I think is a very plausible case that American government is very much a socialist government, and that it is slipping further into the very dangerous clutches of socialism. I also argue the case against socialism in general, but that argument against socialism is not necessarily the reason for this particular article.

I have encountered a plethora of confusion and misunderstanding on the subject of socialism in many of these discussions and hope to address it here. In one such instance there was this suggestion that America is not truly a socialist country by the real definition of the word, but that though we have many “socialist-like programs”, America’s system of government does not fit the true definition of socialism. It is not my intention to attack those who support this point of view, I simply want to make an attempt at clarifying this misunderstanding. This suggests to me that I should expand on socialism and its definition and show further evidence in support of my argument. This claim of defining socialism, and that America does not fit the definition, is an error in opinion that I find shared with many others within these discussions. I hope to clarify any confusion about my perspective on the matter.

Though these are my opinions, and my points may seem a bit pedantic, I think that the evidences I present within these opinions are real and I hope that it fosters cognizance in support of my contention on this subject. I hope to solidify my presentation of this matter against any confusion or misinterpretations. In other words, I am selling my point of view by backing it up with provided evidence which also supports my attitude toward socialism and the reality that it is very much alive here in America and very much at the core of America’s decline, the outcome of which we are witnessing today. Whether or not you buy my explanations and examples is of course also dependent upon your belief system and how flexible you are in those beliefs.

Due to the myriad of writings on the subject (and some of those writings are mine, here in this blog) I don’t feel a need to write a tremendous amount on the subject on my own, I’ll mainly use definitions as my approach. I hope my brevity and use of links is an acceptable and effective means of support for my contention.

Note to the reader: It is interesting to me that there exist so many political obscurities and ambiguities within the contemporary definitions of our language. I think it is important to point out the harmful effects of political stress on language through legal perversions as well as political misinterpretations and propaganda; that this is a mechanism employed to deceive and confuse the public’s knowledge of any form of government manipulation of various matters of acting man. Politicians rearrange words to suit their political ends, and as history shows, government expansion is usually the result. Confusion is a powerful mechanism of control. One of several such examples of language manipulation is so-called political correctness, this machination allows the government “experts” to come out from their proverbial political hole and formulate public opinion. Interestingly, some words are very elusive in finding definitions for as they are no longer shown in the dictionary.

The case of language manipulation could also be considered a form of PSYOPS. For just one example on the PSYOPS subject and the government involvement of business watch this video.

For an interesting read on a related subject, click “Brainwashing” below:


A Synthesis of the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics

I digress…But I do so to illustrate the need that care be taken when studying the contemporary definitions of our language. Our thoughts as well as our belief systems are vulnerable to the many suggestive signals we receive from the plethora of media today.

Socialism: (Dictionary.com)


1.a theory or system of social organization  that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

2.procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.

3.(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

Socialism: (Merriam-Webster)

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.
This definition is also very important: Click here to learn about Allodial Title as well as its related definitions.
Click here for a list of Federal Government agencies.
Click here for a list of State government agencies.

It is interesting to point out that socialism, as defined in #3 of each definition above, is also considered the transitional point between capitalism and communism. It is for this reason that I supplied the ten planks of the communist manifesto. It is not my intention to supply all the materials necessary for the study of communism here, only to connect the real definition of socialism to American government administration and policy by using only a few select examples.
I think it is worthy to examine these planks as many of these planks are partly employed in American policy and that many do not recognize this reality due to the previously mentioned confusion of language manipulation as well as propaganda.
I have witnessed that those whom do actually concede in argument upon realization that socialism is very well embedded into American policy only to supply the platitude that “there is no better way”. I also will add that I think that many who do realize the responsibility that goes with rejecting these socialist policies also means that they may lose some future “benefit” and that their “security” could be threatened; many already receive some form of “benefit” from this system, and this presents a real problem as well. In those cases I simply illustrate with simple arithmetic that this system is bankrupt and cannot sustain itself in the long run, and it is for that reason, and the many other serious defects in socialism, these systems need abandoning eventually anyway.

10 planks of the Communist Manifesto:

  1. Abolition of Property in Land and Application of all Rents of Land to Public Purpose.

  2. A Heavy Progressive or Graduated Income Tax.

  3. Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance.

  4. Confiscation of the Property of All Emigrants and Rebels.

  5. Centralization of Credit in the Hands of the State, by Means of a National Bank with State Capital and an Exclusive Monopoly.

  6. Centralization of the Means of Communication and Transport in the Hands of the State.

  7. Extension of Factories and Instruments of Production Owned by the State, the Bringing Into Cultivation of Waste Lands, and the Improvement of the Soil Generally in Accordance with a Common Plan.

  8. Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture.

  9. Combination of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Gradual Abolition of the Distinction Between Town and Country by a More Equable Distribution of the Population over the Country.

  10. Free Education for All Children in Public Schools. Abolition of Children’s Factory Labor in it’s Present Form. Combination of Education with Industrial Production.

I said I would be brief on this subject, but I have a feeling that I will need to elaborate a bit further. This is a subject that is hard to choose just where to begin, as I see nothing but evidence of socialism nearly everywhere I turn.

First I’ll list some of the more illusive or obscure manipulative characteristics of socialist control in American policy and administration and the mechanisms employed within the classifications of property, wealth, medium of exchange, banking, markets and travel.
1. Property, that which a person owns; the possession or possessions of a particular owner. It is important to understand the definitions of allodial title and fee simple in regards to property, and why these expressions are now nearly non-existent in America.
2. Wealth, all things that have a monetary or exchange value. Anything that has utility and is capable of being appropriated or exchanged.
3. Money/Medium of exchange, anything acceptable as a measure of value and a standard of exchange for goods and services in a particular country, region, etc.
4. Banking, the business carried on by a bank  or a banker.
5. Markets, A regular gathering of people for the purchase and sale of provisions, livestock, and other commodities. This classification also functions in many diverse sub-classifications, but for simplicity I will stick to the rudimentary level only. This should suffice for the point of this subject.
6. Travel, to go from one place to another, as by car, train, plane, or ship; take a trip; journey: to travel for pleasure. To move or go from one place or point to another, to proceed or advance in any way.
Refer to the 10 planks shown above

1. On property (plank #1): In this first point I will point out that socialism is mainly about the forced redistribution of property and wealth into a collective. Evidence suggests this reality; unless you own property in allodium, it is safe to say that you only have property ownership in a titular sense. -Interestingly, the WordPress spell-check does not recognize allodium as a word, I’ve provided the definition in the link above.- Titular, meaning you only carry legal title, as the titled property is still encumbered by a debt, even if the note is fully paid and the purchase debt is satisfied by payment in full based upon the terms set within the purchase contract. A mortgage is a purchase contract which automatically registers the said property with the state. Any registered property you “own” remains encumbered by the state through taxation. Try not paying the taxes and/or the fees on such property and you will meet the real owners of “your property” and their agents as they come to seize all of it. All other property which requires no enforced legal registration stored within the registered property is subject to seizure as well if these taxes are not paid. This point is generally speaking of real estate property, but also includes your automobile, as the same rules apply. The automobile example is also connected to the “travel” example, so I’ll discuss that a little further when I reach that subject.

2. On wealth (plank #’s 1, 2 & 3): Wealth could very much be considered the same class as property, but for illustrative purposes I will stress further. Wealth is capital in this classification, and capital is any property that is or could be used to support or expand wealth. Abundance of wealth also allows those who possesses it the time available to live as they see fit, as well as the freedom and time to study on what actions are necessary for certainty in the future. But with today’s politically driven envious attitude toward wealth, state redistribution enforced through state registration of capital (state encumbrances on wealth and prohibition of inheritance through massive taxes upon inheritance, etc.) one is derailed in the natural ability to act on personal need. Therefore similar mechanisms (heavy progressive taxation) are employed, as mentioned above on property: to redistribute this wealth from the owner to the state which then controls the ends of the capital derived from this wealth, e.g. redistribution, which upsets the natural actions necessary for self-preservation as well as preservation of the surrounding communities, as they are all connected; state control and manipulation of wealth. This leads us to the manipulative laws of incorporation and the monopolies they encourage as well as the harmful effects of centralization, which I will leave for now and use as another example later in another article.

3. On money (plank #5): or better known as medium of exchange and compared to so-called currency. Legal money does not truly exist in this system. I’ll explain this contention. Money, as a standard of stability of exchange for goods and services, which would not be perishable by over-taxation and inflation within a competitive monetary system, which could only exist in a true free market system, is only real if it is not created by fiat. I’ll reiterate this point: money can only exist in a true sense of its definition if it is employed in concert with a true free market system. The use of the words stability and value could imply manipulation, so I will be careful of using these terms. Monopolized and controlled by a central banking institution’s ability to inflate its supply as well as control the mechanisms of interest, undermining this so-called money, which renders it currency as it needs to keep moving, is manipulation. Designed to keep flowing, as its name implies (currency), stripped of value by inflation, which in turn creates an unnatural need for over-speculation and over-investment. This is not a natural characteristic of free market economics. This is a characteristic of control outside of and unnatural to a true free market system. A money monopoly capitalism; pseudo capitalism.

4. On banking (plank #5): This subject is very much connected to the “money” example above. Not only do we have a monopolized and manipulated supply of money (based on debt, interest rate manipulation, quantity manipulation by quantitative easing, which in turn effects its value). We also have what is known as fractional reserve within the banking system. (please see link) This fractional reserve system, which is “backed” by the government-run FDIC (currency insurance system), is yet another example of government taking over an industry. I hope you do further research, as I am only attempting to show evidence of government control, e.g. socialism.

5. On markets (plank #’s 5 & 8): The opposite of a free market system fits into the socialist classification. Except for an illusion created by propagandists and apologists, we in America do not have a free market system. Our economic system, which consists of government interventionism, money monopoly, protectionism, etc. (as shown above) cannot be considered a free market system, it is in fact the opposite. This classification also functions in many diverse sub-classifications, but for simplicity I will stick to the rudimentary level only. For more on this subject see my other article “Laissez Fair Hallucinations” where I get a bit more in-depth.

6. On travel (plank #’s 1 & 6): This is also covered in the “property” example above, but I will give just a simple every-day example. Look at the tolling and metering “businesses” (government monopoly): bridges, turnpikes, and various other means of metering other public projects. Public travel, metered through the state controlled business of tolls and taxation. This in an area of industry that could run much more efficiently and effectively through privatization, and that by the state selling these industries to foreign corporations to make up for state mismanagement of funds, corporations which have no real concern for the locality other than to take money out of the local system and distribute it in to a global system, this robs the local citizenry of the ability to reap the rewards of such an industry. Evidence suggests the state selling toll businesses to foreign institutions. (Again, I am providing the information supporting my contention, I hope you, the reader, spend the time on some of the research materials provided.) There are many ways to show examples of State ownership of industries, which could further support my contention of socialism, but I will leave this here for now. A thought on the subject of public projects: Many of these so-called public projects are paid up front by bonds which are paid for by the local citizenry, after construction of these projects the business of tolling (metering) begins. One may ask if these toll collections should go back to the citizens who paid for the project to begin with, as well as pay for maintenance. But instead the money typically goes into a state-owned “general fund”  and spent on more government. This establishes further my contention of state ownership of this industry, an industry which could be run by the private sector, by people of the region where it is established. The states are selling these operations, and the real estate along with it, to foreign corporations which further establishes my argument of state ownership of industry. If the state does not own it, the state could not sell it.

I could add a point on the media business and connect it to my previous PSYOPS point and connect it to plank # 6 of the communist manifesto: Centralization of the Means of Communication and Transport in the Hands of the State. But I wanted to be as brief as possible so I’ll leave the rest of the study to you the reader to decide on your own. If you do an internet search on the ten planks of the communist manifesto you will find a plethora of sites about a similar idea on America practicing communism, I wanted to attempt something a little different.

Upon further study of the ten planks of the communist manifesto there lies many more correlations to American government administration and policy. One could easily throw the 14th amendment into this classification and link it to plank # 4, but again I am only exploring the connection between government-run and manipulated industry.

And this site on state government agencies.
With the plethora of Federal and State agencies, shown in the links above, governing nearly every aspect of private life, and in conjunction, the business life in America, one is hard-pressed to prove the ability to do business without dealing with bureaucracy from government and without possibly breaking one of the thousands of legal ‘codes’ on the books today.
I think I have provided ample evidence of complete state control right down to the government mandated ‘currency’ we use; a constantly depreciating currency. The monopolistic quality of this currency and its connections to social engineering and manipulation by central government acting in concert with central banks; each benefiting from the acts of the other regardless of the harm caused to the future of the people this effects directly. The acts of government control on nearly every sector of the economy to favor some collective ideal.
I could write much more on this subject, but would rather have you do your own thinking and study on this subject and see if you truly come up with another answer. I think it is important to know just what we are facing in the possible future if this system is not taken back by the people. Unless we understand our government we cannot find resolutions to the barrage of political insanity we witness nearly every waking moment of the day.
For more related articles go here , here, here and here.

A Change in the Weather

Cover of "Critical Path"

Cover of Critical Path

I am having trouble with the current arguments for, and the arguments against the theory of global warming, or the now recently renamed climate change. Today, by whatever name, these arguments seem to carry a specific affiliation to a particular political side; either the side of the so-called conservatives or the so-called modern-day liberals.
This side taking detracts from the most important part of the argument to begin with; the argument whether or not man is destroying, or, capable of destroying his world and himself along with it.

I do think that there is evidence enough to at least say that, yes, we are capable of destroying our environment. And that we have done plenty of harmful things in the past and still do in the present, and that we are also fully capable of reversing the effects of pollution and can regenerate damaged areas of our ecosystems through science and technology.

But in the end what we are really talking about is destroying ourselves. The Earth has a way with dealing with us one way or another. When we destroy the ecosystem we eventually destroy ourselves, and if that happens, I’m certain the Earth will reclaim itself in the end. So we’re not really talking about saving the Earth, are we?

I don’t want to argue “sides”, I want to explore options about what I can do and in turn what everyone can do about the problem, because I also think that the problem isn’t only about the environment, it’s about economy as well. It’s about viable alternatives in energy and choice in everything from the kind of transportation we choose all the way to the type of food we are able to buy and or grow ourselves should we choose to. It’s about cutting our total dependence upon petroleum, and that’s a lot of cutting. Petroleum isn’t only about the gasoline we invariably pump into our gas tanks every day (not that we have any other choice in the matter). Petroleum is in nearly everything you use on a daily basis, including the food you eat. Many Americans are completely unaware of the connection to corn and petroleum and its relation to the “food” you eat from the grocery store. I recommend “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” by Michael Pollan for a more in-depth look into this side of the story.

I am not certain that we can plausibly argue against varying forms of environmentally destructive human activity by simply denying that it even occurs at all. In addition, one of the many platitudes on the subject, ‘it is not as bad as they say’, carries little merit with it at all in this argument, and for that fact any argument. Ahh denial…

But also I think that to clamour to political “parties” for their support, on either side of any issue, and that the use of their platforms and rhetoric to create consensus -which eventually winds up becoming “party” issues in the end- that this politicizing is acting in an unproductive way on this as well as many other subjects. The consensus, which political over-involvement creates that otherwise would not exist, is not an honest and ethical means of scientific resolve, unless we consider creating a misinformed mob an acceptable resolution to societal matters.

I think “climate-gate” is a great example of how the statistical facts are alterable when a particular “side” wants the results it needs to develop the ends to its means; and this goes for either side of an argument or debate. I do not know very much about climate-gate other than what I read in the news -seems to me either side could manipulate the “facts” through the various mainstream media sources which also prove to carry bias in many politically driven issues- and with that, I will say that this lends validity to my argument about politicizing subject matter such as pollution; it becomes yet another means for politicians to rob the rest of the public to serve their political ends. Pollution and systematic destruction of our ecosystem is what we are talking about in the end and the concern is real, any sane person should  see the logic in this. It would be a fallacy to argue by simply saying that pollution is not a problem.

It would also be an error in judgement to confuse me with someone siding with the global warming crowd. I’ll explain:I do not prescribe to the pandering for more government involvement, at least not the type of economically destructive involvement we are witnessing with such schemes as Cap and Trade. This proposal is only another way to tax and dominate a naïve public and has little to do with remedying pollution. This proposal, and possibly eventually global treaty, is more about funding a bankrupt world government and its system of self-perpetuating expansion. Cap and Trade is about state-ism on a global scale, and state-ism is a major contributing factor to where humanity is today. (Read the link.) If you think we have economic and ecological problems now, what do you think will happen when government runs the entire show? I would like to see everyone to stop buying what the television is selling and please think deeply about all this.

I’m going to throw this little quotation in for fun: “The capitalists are the communists, the communists are the capitalists.” Hopefully it will tempt you enough to want to read “Critical Path” by Buckminster Fuller for more on the meaning of this. Critical path articulates an uncommon and profound view of the world’s power structure and how harmful and illusory its mechanisms of power are to our future and that there’s a better way for the future, but that the human condition is continually manipulated and hindered from its full potential to self-support and self-sustain by the acts and institutions of the power structure. This is a wonderful review of the book.

And of course on the flip-side to what I am saying about global warming, I will add that those so ardently in favor of the “Drill, baby, drill” approach, those who would seemingly completely deny there’s a problem at all, that maybe looking a little deeper into the petroleum problem would help to better understand that ingenuity would be a better way; new technologies may never surface if we fight so hard for things as they are. Protectionism kills invention. Though I would applaud a move toward independence of foreign oil, but that care would be necessary to avoid ending up right back in the place we are in now; with limited choice in energy and therefore beholden to an oil monopoly and locked into a polluting and metered energy source with no end to its instability in price.

Maybe remedy to any current crisis would be all one can hope for until the next problem arises, as problems  will always arise because within every form of energy discovered, and the Human action involved in these discoveries, there lies a by-product and reaction that will need yet another remedy and another resolution. But when we become congested by state-ism and bureaucracy, we are unable to solve anything. (Unfortunately we may already be in that position.)

Government and corporations cannot be trusted to help solve social problems, its like asking criminals to solve their own crimes, and come up with their own punishment. We must all be able to act on reason and explore the knowledge available to us at the time of any crisis. And because man cannot know all things at all times, and science changes through discovery, that to create permanent mandate and policy based upon current knowledge is counterproductive and dangerous. And to expect government to act objectively, if political objectivity could even exist at all, in all such matters is absurd and naïve. Government has little incentive to create sound solutions, unless held accountable for its actions, and any accountability by government is almost non-existent, government seems to have more power and wealth to gain by perpetual social problems to “experiment” with anyway.

I am uncertain exactly what the solution is at this time but I will continue to argue against any further government intervention and corporate involvement in the matter. Both political and corporate sides of the argument are selling fear in exchange for a false sense of “security”, all based on the fallacy of scarcity, that’s what the power structure does, and the government and corporations capitalize on it. We get so caught up in who is right or wrong, we forget what the argument is really all about, then we lose sight of what can actually be done about it, leaving the institutions who helped create the mess to supposedly clean it all up. This presents a conundrum I understand, but I would actually recommend a sort of pressing of the ‘pause’ button, and maybe a consortium of real thought on these matters to take place before any more ‘policy’ or commercial rigidity to take root on this situation. The people whom all these policies and ventures effect need be included in the process to include insight and perspective to come up with foresight on this whole issue. A real grass-roots effort where localities enter in the remedial efforts from their position, as opposed to being undermined by any central power which cannot supply the same insight and perspective for their regional needs and requirements. This process could work in many other human endeavors. Maybe we would have less war in the end as well.

What we need to strive for is a results-driven leadership, a leadership of people who carry with them the environment as well as the Human condition as its main priority. To reach this goal government and at the same time monopolistic corporate institutions which hold each other so dear need be put in their place. The limits of our government, as delineated in the original contract, The Constitution FOR the United States, could get us back on track and this contract does not need any further perversions by those “acting” on our behalf. We need no more obscure and ambiguous interpretations of this document. What we need is adherence to the original Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments. This would be a great place to start, since it is our American government’s duty.

But I do not want to inundate this topic with further political rhetoric. I want to do what I can do, and at this time that would be to generate positive discourse on these questions. As I have attempted to illustrate above, I am not trying to take sides on this topic, but I am taking a stand. And that stand is against further robbery by the power structure by use of propaganda which creates  false consensus toward the goal of more involvement and more control of you and I and our children’s children by the great Government Incorporated under the illusory guise of “protecting” us against ourselves. OK, I did it again…but you get the point by now I’m sure.

In the end I hope to see real markets move into alternative energies, alternative transportation, alternative homes, alternative work and of course keeping the environment in mind. And along with all this, the free will for the people to choose these things as they come alive in the economy as a result of a real free market economic system.

Availability of alternative clean energy would create entire economies in of themselves creating a need for useful products and services and a need for more people to do the work that goes with it all. No one need be put out of work as the protectionists, and socialist unions propagate. All the work once needed in an antiquated industry simply re-tools for the next new industry that replaces the old systems. Business could come alive in so many ways and so many could benefit from a real free market system, a system of choice and free will.

The funny thing about socialism: There is seemingly no cure for capitalism except the complete perversion of the system until we are all chained to a wall of equality by government. Until we are all equally chained together in poverty, scarcity and fear, we won’t have the socialist utopia the capital manipulating socialists so desire. Petrified by legal codes at every instance of possible positive action, as our human reflexes want to better our situation, but cannot because we have become chained to emotional irrationality sprung up from ignorance and sealed by law.

If we do not have freedom in choice of what we would prefer in alternative energies, if these energies are not available how are we to lower our so-called “carbon footprint”? If science does not have the freedom to solve problems through technology due largely to protectionism and bureaucracy and the tyranny of socialist policy, how can any of us hope to ever solve the environmental issues we face today? Rather than moving forward by what was once American ingenuity and creativity, we are now regressing into a backwards society where we have no choice and scientific resolution is under arrest by the government propaganda machine.

To embellish my point further: Often in the beginning of any technological advancement, when a new invention goes into production, it is extremely expensive and can often only be purchased by the wealthy. These purchases build the capital necessary for the research and development needed to help bring the product to market in a less expensive model for all to enjoy. Through the envious behavior of redistribution of wealth the government employs so readily, do we think the government can perform all the R&D necessary to bring out the best products? To bring all the latest and greatest to the public? This is extremely doubtful because government cannot seem to even manage a trillion-dollar cash heist and property theft industry. They always need more money, like a child stealing money from your wallet on the nightstand and then asking for more allowance the next morning and they have not even done their chores. They’ll keep doing it if you let them!

It’s 2011, and we are still pumping gas, why on earth do you think that is? If you look back for more than thirty years we’ve heard the same story about petroleum and its harmful effects on the environment as well as its scarcity. The pollution, greenhouse gases, oil rig disasters in the ocean, tanker spills, wars fought over oil, price instability, etc., there’s nothing new here, these problems have haunted us for decades. It’s would seem it’s not about solving a problem. It’s all about the metering and profit! We need to change our perspective of “profit” and “value” and concede defeat to our self-destruction as the ends of the current means, and I am certain there is no value in that, a zero-sum game for all involved. For more perspective here please see my related article which discusses the false value of our currency that we work so hard for, and the problem of measuring the value of our work and goals by contemporary monetary standards: “Earning Good Money”.

And one last note to think about: Some of the wealthiest and most powerful Americans are politicians. Think about it.  Government takes the wealth that people create, not the other way around. The hypocrisy of the benevolent socialists.

I’m sure some will say that I’ve contradicted myself and have taken a side against socialism. And that this could be one way to discredit everything I am attempting to point out and distract from the merit of my contention. I will argue that would be an error for two reasons:

1) I see no side in many of the political circles who argue against socialism; no one, no politician, really calling it like it is, therefore no real political side to take. And because many Americans do not even seem to recognize socialism and simply do not know what it is. Many do not understand that we officially began our journey toward socialism in 1935 when the American government started the Social Security System, a government mandated and controlled retirement system. So many Americans seem not to understand the value of knowing what any of this even means; that this is a socialist system and it is failing miserably. It perplexes me that most Americans think this system is not a socialist system. (There are ways to wean America off social programs without completely cutting programs leaving those dependent on them in the streets. Please read this article as well)

2) I am taking a stand, not a side.

We have seen the west deteriorate economically, and the global environment along with it for decades under socialism, and I do realize that America’s version of socialism is more of an embryonic version, but it is still socialism. And for some reason there is a clamour for more of the same. I think this defines insanity.

There is no such thing as a ‘little socialism’. It is either present or it is not, and it is and has been present in America far longer than I have been alive and it is proving a miserable failure and will prove further with time if not turned around as soon as possible. Maybe we should try a more open approach. Maybe we need to take responsibility and bring forth the change by positive Human action. We cannot solve the massive problem of pollution and its effects on our environment if we cannot change the way we think of the institutions which create the pollution and then admit the part we play individually in the scheme of things.

It’s time for a massive re-orientation of thought. And above all actions government and corporations take, it is your actions and my actions that really count. Human action, as opposed to Human waiting around.

What the? Here I go again!

Why have I not covered what I really want to talk about yet? Life, friends, family,  living, art, fun, working for your own means, rewarding yourself and those around you with your creative inspiration, whatever they might be. Community, as a sum of people with free will and integrity as their guide.

For me, I simply want the time and energy to study, make music, and build an economy of my own within my community. My physical community as well as my cyber community, without government and their myriad of agents and accompanying legal-ease stealthily thwarting my every attempt at living a self-sufficient life. To be Human. To be free. To live by my free will and not the will imposed upon me by every possible institution of man.

I mean, all I really want to do is be happy and share that happiness. But how can I feel content in this world of corporate and government-run everything? I mean really, has anyone been paying any real attention? Is anyone really looking around at what little so-called quality of life we actually have left? Just what are we doing letting our souls be yoked by the machinery of despotic “globalism”? Are our minds and bodies so weary that we cannot stand and end all this B.S.? Why on earth do we continue to do nothing? To just keep bending over, over and over, paying more and more with our own labor, into a government controlled system of pure failure; a “welfare” system, systematically and endlessly throwing money at people whom due to the mechanisms of this forced benevolence, only multiply like rabbits. I often wonder that if the real natural laws of economy were in place, laws that lie within non-coerced human action, more people might have a better judgement of how many children they can raise, and we would not ever have a need to consider any socialist version of population control, let alone “welfare”. Our inaction is what keeps the machinery in place. Sooner or later this system as it is all coming down, one way or another. In case no one has noticed, the process has already begun.

I think some people regard “quality” of life, the ability to shop endlessly for crap they don’t need. All the while their kids are out drinking and doing dope, or who knows what, like “sexting” moments their own of poor judgement which they captured on their own smart-phone, recording it and sharing it no less. Something these lost kids will most likely live to regret later. Anything, I suppose, to put an end to boredom and lack of any real stimulation. Children mostly unchallenged by the government controlled, failing education system…one of the many failing government-run systems. But seriously, exposing yourself, how creative and intelligent.

But at the same time state agencies compel parents to do nothing, as this “system” teaches us that we have no control over our own children, that the state has the ultimate power and control. Should you try undermining the state, just watch what happens, you could have your children kidnapped by CPS, or you could be kidnapped by the police. Click this one small example.

I wonder if the only standard that America is willing to fight for is the socialistic version of “equality”, equality mandated by socialism which engenders envy and the accompanying mob mentality we see in the news today when any particular group is about to lose their “benefit package”. Benefits which are completely derived from the theft of another group, within an unsustainable chaotic economic system of coercion, decay, theft and bribery. Equality forced by government created delusions of iniquity…how interesting. Think about this folks, and without getting too far into the politics of unions, unions in the private sector are by design, at least in theory, to “protect” the worker from the employer. State unions are by design to protect the “worker” from their employer, the “tax payer”.

I’ll also take this opportunity to point out an absurdity on the part of socialism. Right now, in 2011, students are attending the union protest and sit-in in Wisconsin. Aren’t these the same students who oppose increases in student tuition? Hmmm… now there’s and interesting concept in economic theory.

All I know is we are out of touch with reality. There is so much available to us, and yet we let those who “represent” us keep it from us for our own “protection”, and we act like nothing matters, that everything will be A O.K.

So long as we have the luxury of acting like idiots, not giving a damn about anything but our own “stuff” and how much more useless crap we can gather, I suppose nothing will change and we may only have ourselves to blame. Those available luxuries are going to become dramatically less available, and soon, I guarantee it. Maybe that will bring back the intuition and resourceful attitude once endowed by America.

Who knows? But to the contrary, I believe more and more people continue to realize that things are getting worse in many ways, but better in many other ways at the same time. It’s just hard to find the better news because the mainstream networks do not cover it much. Maybe it’s because we all seem to only care about drama. It’s what we want to watch that the networks give. At least this is what the number crunchers at the networks think. But network viewership has been in decline since the 80’s and supposedly being replaced by cable. I would argue otherwise, and so I will.

Let’s look at how many bloggers there are now, that takes a lot of time away from the American past-time of watching TV, as I write these blogs, and put a quite bit of time and thought into them, I also read other blogs by people who do the same. I spend around two or more hours a day reading and studying on many of the subjects I am passionate about so I feel qualified to debate about much of what I bring up in my blog. I also find many ideas from other people stimulating and reassuring, and that humanity can and more than likely will prevail. I only hope it is not at the illusory controls of our current governing powers-that-be that continue to control the process.

Spend some time with some of the free information you can find on the internet and study away! Just be sure to qualify the websites you spend time on. Misinformation is plentiful on-line, so be very careful, backup as much as possible through critical thought and study.

I’ve said this before, but try to gain an understanding of what the politicians are up to as much as possible. By understanding that when you “vote”, you ultimately give consent to whatever these politicians do. Of course I am not saying do not vote, if that’s what you think matters, go ahead. I am talking about making change through human action. Vote by how you live and go about your business.

Some of what you may want to do is more than likely “illegal”, with thousands of laws on the books who knows jack anyways? But the real question is: is what it is that you want to do unlawful? This is seemingly only a semantic issue and very touchy subject by attorneys and those practicing  the “legal” profession. And I will disclaim that I am not a lawyer and I am not attempting to get people in trouble with the law, but my definition of illegal is real: “Contrary to or forbidden by law or statute”.

But by “unlawful” I consider this more in the constitutional sense. In other words, our government in America, from the Federal government all the way down to the local municipalities, gains only limited powers, and that ONLY by the limited powers contracted within the original organic Constitution for The United States, with the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, (the first Ten amendments). And that any statute, legislation or otherwise, regardless of its given quality of protection or security, is unlawful if it acts contrary to the limited powers granted to American government. And that no agent of American government can write law which precludes government agents from the laws written thereof. Bouvier’s Common Law Maxims provides insight into how American law was supposed to be written and carried out.

So sooner or later, you realize that nearly anything you do, and may want to do, is already illegal and that when your back is up against the ropes, you may have to fight your way out! If everyone agrees to fight back by our actions, sooner or later the fight goes the other way and the underdog actually realizes that a little confidence is all it takes to win a fight.

As we know, it’s all a big lie anyways at this point. We keep waiting around all our lives for something to change. And then we realize that it is only the actions of every person that brings positive change, not the politicians. So it’s within what we choose through our own free will and integrity that really counts. Your vote…not so much, not so long as a corrupted system is in place. Vote if you want, but I say: Go act on something you are passionate about!

Go plant your garden regardless of SB-510. Keep going to the farmers market to buy or sell your veggies and buy meats from local ranchers. Write articles about what to do with your extra earned ever-depreciating cash, such as buying precious metals or other currencies, or investing in real capital, YOU. Write about life in general and with passion. Compose music that is far different and open from what you hear on the radio or the “canned” stuff playing in the grocery store. Make your own art, whatever it is. Teach your children right from wrong (it’s not as ambiguous as many make it out to be), but let them be kids at the same time. If you are not happy with the school system, commit to teaching them at home, it has its rewards. Recognize and nurture the talents your children have, even the seemingly smallest of talent can bloom into something wonderful for everyone. Don’t take your freedom for granted, assert yourself when you realize your ability to act on the behalf of your own free will is imposed upon by another and do not be afraid to do so. Challenge the way things are, if you disagree with them, and do something positively opposite. If something is getting you down, figure out just what it is and do something about it! This blog is part of my process. Carry your passions with you and never allow those who are the keepers of things as they are to force you to leave them behind you.

And now I’m going to learn to play piano. I invested some money in a keyboard set and I can take lessons for free right here on my computer. And no one can stop me! Maybe I do something sinister like play my guitar too! Maybe I practice some “devil’s intervals“, HA! Maybe next I go and buy some organic unpasteurized milk…OH MY!

To be or not to be, that is the question.

Murphy’s Law, Pessimism and Cynicism vs Vision and Innovation

You have an idea. It’s a great idea and you know it, but not many others agree…at least not in the beginning. In most cases the first thing you encounter from others is negativity. Some of the negative reactions to your ideas are: “What’s wrong with the way things are now?” Or how about “This idea is too expensive.” Or ” No one will buy it, it’ll fail.” You have probably heard these and many more.

*I am only going to tackle these points in brevity, so I’ll be general. I will follow-up with details through other articles. You may already be beginning to see the direction most of this blog is going. At least I hope so.

Alright, “What’s wrong with the way things are?” Well, if the world is so OK as it is then why are we witnessing the financial so-called markets fail? The world seemingly aligning itself with another major war, poverty and famine still spreading and not enough being done to truly end these problems? And I’ll add that many in America are seemingly more upset about the price of gas than exploring the fact that we ought to have more choice in technology in regards to automobile manufacturing and the source of energy used any way, let alone the little thought about fact that the world is directly connected to what we do one way or another, and how much our “choices” do effect the rest of the world in a negative way. Many seem to refuse to even think of these subjects.

*For deeper thought on some of this see Buckminster Fuller’s CriticalPath.I largely agree with many of Fuller’s ideas and solutions. But his ideas are not the gospel to me…I’ll leave that for you to decide. I think he pointed out some major details of what I am trying to convey here.

“It’s too expensive !” This one is always interesting to me. The fact that advancing the human condition by way of a real free market enterprise system could never be too expensive is obvious to me. But because many do not understand what good money actually is and what a free market enterprise system truly is I will have to explore deeper in other articles, as I already have rough drafts on these subjects.

The fact that the gatekeepers of status quo, who all love to blame today’s economic and political follies on the “free market”, is largely a ruse. When more have discovered this lie, and hopefully I will help, they will realize there has been no true free market enterprise system and that any real attempt at one was, and still is, hobbled by a bulwark of government intervention and monopoly.

As usual, I digress…So my first response to this “too expensive” argument is simply: How can human advancement ever be considered ‘too expensive’? I’ll leave it at that for now.

Good economy requires a community to mobilize and support itself in as an autonomous a way as possible for real growth to occur. Think of it this way. It’s the old “give the man a fish he’ll eat for a day, teach him to fish and he’ll eat for a lifetime” approach. This of course also requires that communities are able, and have the desire to solve their problems locally. I mean, who knows better what a community needs then the community itself?

If “no one will buy it” is the argument against innovation, this is simply remedied by illustrating the values, covered above, in a more detailed way. Does a society survive without the ability and cooperation of all people? If people cannot individually manage their own affairs then how can they perpetuate society in a positive way?

If the Wright Brothers gave in to all the negatives they encountered, many simply in the design of their own creation, let alone negatives from other people, what do you think the outcome would have been? And I am only using this as an example as I understand the Wright Brothers were not the only ones working on flight. You understand what I mean, I’m certain.

I suppose what this article hopefully conveys is that when you, or someone else for that matter, has an innovative idea which strays from the general conventions of contemporary thought, before resorting to a negative reaction or train of thought, why not explore the process of what this idea is all about and what it can do for the world before succumbing to the onslaught of negativity. Find the values as well as its disadvantages and work through them to create a viable option for posterity. Then bring the idea to the surface and create a “market” for it. If the idea is a good one you will know because the market will decide. This of course seems contradictory to what I said about there not being a true “free market”. Well…make one.

Part of innovation is the ability to create. Helping people understand the value and responsibility of bringing an idea to the surface, and demanding it unencumbered by protectionism and regulation so that we decide what is good for us, is key to liberty and prosperity for us as well as posterity. So why not create a true free market?

To be continued…

What if…

What if you were the only one thinking of a solution to a problem? No really, what if that was true? Every now and then you find yourself upset about something in society, and you think it is largely ignored and you would like to see change, or in the least, awareness brought to this problem or possible crisis. Would you try to convince people one by one that there is something wrong? What if you managed to get more and more people on-board with your line of thinking and you became an activist with a following? What would your message be? Would you trigger people’s alarm mechanism and generate fear to get them to change? What values would you communicate to offer a satisfactory result in your activism? What do you offer?

These are only a few of the questions that come up when you suddenly become aware of something that you believe needs attention. I would myself always add the question:

What’s the up-shot of even knowing about a specific problem or crisis which may or may not affect someone or many people directly? Something that is possibly so out of the realm of a particular person or group’s current imagination and train of thought that they cannot even imagine any utility in your endeavor. What then is it that you offer as a practical solution or remedy to this problem?

Once you have answered some or all of those questions you are left with now finding resolution among the masses. How you go about this will decide whether your ‘revolutionary’ thinking will survive the onslaught of mediocrity and possibly fall to decay. Or worse still, your message gets out only to become devoured by a mob of unprepared, angry people of a similar ilk who are quick to grab up your idea and pervert it so much that it becomes dangerous. Or another possibility, you wind up inadvertently pushing some other person or group’s ideology which shares similarities to yours only far more radical and ill-conceived therefore harmful to your cause. There are examples of this throughout history.

Ultimately what I am asking is this: Does your ‘movement” create hysteria? Or does it calmly find solutions for Humanity? The way you go about your activism is sometimes far more harmful to your own cause if your plan of execution is not well thought out. Determine all the possible angles and plan your strategy accordingly. You’ll end up with far better results for yourself as well as all who are involved.