To the Voting Sheep of 2012

This is a partial transcript from a speech made in the book, The Iron Web, by Larken Rose. In it's entirety, it condemns both Republicans and Democrats and what they imagine to be kind and rightious. What I have posted, however, is the part that resonates with me and how I feel about our system all the way around. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Everything you think you know is upside down, backwards and inside out. But what has to take the cake, the height of your insanity, is that you view as violent terrorists the only people on the planet who appose the initiation of violence against their fellow men; Anarchist, Voluntaryists, Libertarians. We use violence only to defend ourselves against someone who initiates violence against us. We use it for nothing else. Meanwhile your belief system is completely schizophrenic and self contradictory. On the one hand, you teach children that violence is never the answer, yet out of the other side of your mouth you advocate that everyone and everything everywhere and at all times be controlled, monitored, taxed and regulated through the force of government. In short, you are teaching your children that the masters may use violence whenever they please but that the slaves should never ever resist. You indoctrinate your children into a life of unthinking, helpless subservience. You are placing the chains around their little necks and fastening the locks tight, and worst of all…you feel good about it. Out of one side of your mouth you condemn the evils of socialism and fascism and lament the injustices of the regimes of Hitler, Mao and Stalin, while out of the other side of your mouth you preach exactly what they did. The worship of the collective. The subjugation of every individual to that evil insanity that wears the deceptive label “The Common Good”. You babble on and on about diversity and open-mindedness and then beg your masters to regulate and control every aspect of everyone’s lives. Creating a giant herd of unthinking conformist drones. You wear different clothes and have different hairstyles and you think that makes you different. Yet all your minds are enslaved to the same club of masters and controllers. You think what they tell you to think and you do what they tell you to do, while imagining yourselves to be progressive, thinking and enlightened individuals. From your position of relative comfort and safety you condemn the evils of other lands and other times while turning a blind eye to the injustices happening right in front of you. You tell yourself that had you lived in those times, in those places you would have been among those who stood up against the oppression and defended the downtrodden. But that is a LIE. You would have been right there with the rest of the well trained flock loudly demanding that the slaves be beaten, that the witches be burned, that the non-conformist and the rebels be destroyed. How do I know this? Because that is exactly what you are doing today. Todays injustices are fashionable and popular and those who resist them, well they’re all malcontents and freaks, peoples whose rights don’t matter, people who deserve to be crushed under the boot of authority. Isn’t that right? You bunch of spineless unthinking hypocrites. Look in the mirror. Take a good look at what you imagine to be righteous and kind. You are the devils plaything. The crowds of thousands applauding the speeches of Adolph Hiter…that was YOU The mob demanding that Jesus Christ be nailed to the cross…that was YOU The white invaders who celebrated the wholesale slaughter of those godless redskins…That was YOU The throngs filling the coliseum applauding as the Christians were fed to the lions…that was YOU Throughout history, the perpetual suffering and injustice occurring on an incomprehensible scale, it was all because of people just like YOU The well trained thoroughly indoctrinated conformist, the people who do as their told, who proudly bow to their masters, who follow the crowd, believing what everyone else believes and thinking what ever authority tells them to think…That is YOU. And your ignorance is not because the truth is unavailable to you. They’re have been radicals preaching it for thousands of years. No you are ignorant because you shun the truth with all your heart and soul. You close your eyes and run away when a hint of reality lands in front of you. You condemn as extremists and fringe kooks those who try to show you the chains you wear…because you don’t want to be free. You don’t even want to be human. Responsibility and reality scare the hell out of you so you cling tightly to your own enslavement and lash out at anyone who seeks to free you from it. When someone opens the door to your cage, you cower back in the corner and yell “Close it! Close it!” Well some of us are done trying to save you. We’ve wasted enough effort trying to convince you that you should be free. All you ever do is spout back what your masters have taught you. That being free only leads to chaos and destruction, while being obedient and subservient leads to peace and prosperity. There are none so blind as those will not see. And you, you nation of sheep would rather die than see the truth.

Support a local business!

If you need concrete work/design...check out my friend, I highly recommend him!

http://www.naturesownconcrete.com/

HOW TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK

What if?

What if our foreign policy of the past century is deeply flawed and has not served our national security interest?
What if we wake up one day and realize that the terrorist threat is the predictable consequence of our meddling in the affairs of others, and has nothing to do with us being free and prosperous?
What if propping up repressive regimes in the Middle East endangers both the United States and Israel?
What if occupying countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan is directly related to the hatred directed toward us?
What if someday it dawns on us that losing over 5,000 American military personnel in the Middle East since 9/11 is not a fair tradeoff with the loss of nearly 3,000 American citizens no matter how many Iraqi, Pakistanian, Afghan people are killed or displaced?
What if we finally decide that torture, even if called “enhanced interrogation technique”, is self-destructive and produces no useful information and that contracting it out to a third world nation is just as evil?
What if it is finally realized that war and military spending is always destructive to the economy?
What if all war-time spending is paid for through the deceitful and evil process of inflating and borrowing?
What if we finally see that war-time conditions always undermine personal liberty?
What if Conservatives who preach small government wake up and realize that our interventionist foreign policy provides the greatest incentive to expand the government?
What if Conservatives understood once again that their only logical position is to reject military intervention and managing an empire throughout the world?
What if the American people woke up and understood that the official reasons for going to war are almost always based on lies and promoted by war propaganda in order to serve special interests?
What if we as a nation came to realize that the quest for empire eventually destroys all great nations?
What if Obama has no intention of leaving Iraq?
What if a military draft is being planned for for the wars that would spread if our foreign policy is not changed?
What if the American people learned the truth, that our foreign policy has nothing to do with national security, that it never changes from one administration to the next?
What if war in preparation for war is a racket serving the special interests?
What if President Obama is completely wrong about Afghanistan and it turns out worse than Iraq and Vietnam put together?
What if Christianity actually teaches peace and not preventive wars of aggression?
What if diplomacy is found to be superior to bombs and bribes in protecting America?
What happens if my concerns are completely unfounded?
Nothing.
But what happens if my concerns are justified and ignored?
Nothing good.

A discussion on the Philosophy of Liberty

We all know that we, as humans, have certain inalienable rights endowed by our creator. These rights are stated in the Declaration of Independence. These rights existed prior to The Declaration of Independence and will exist until the end of time because they were not granted by man therefor cannot be taken away by man. This is what was meant when it was said that the rights were inalienable. Those rights are the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

How do you define these rights? We have the right to physical life and nobody can do anything that would put an end to our life. Hence murder is illegal because to take the life of another is a direct infringement on that persons right to their life. We also have the right to the Pursuit of Happiness. This right is not a guarantee of happiness, only that we may pursue it. That’s simple enough, right? But when it comes to liberty, things get more complicated. What exactly is liberty? I have heard it said, more than once, that liberty is the right to “be”. A more theoretical definition would be that liberty is a concept in political philosophy that maintains the idea that human beings are capable of governing themselves. That is not to say that as a society, we do not need laws. Quite the opposite, in fact. Laws are enacted to promote peace within a society and are necessary to protect and promote the rights we are born with as endowed by the creator, however one chooses to define the word “creator”.

To believe in the concept of liberty is not to believe in a particular outcome, social or otherwise. It merely permits a person to think and make personal decisions of their own volition. It could also be said that liberty is based on the belief in “Self-Ownership”. To believe in liberty is to believe that you own your life. Self- Ownership, the belief that an individual owns their life, requires that a person think, speak and act for themselves If you accept the concept of liberty and understand that it applies to every human being, you must also accept that it is unethical to act in a way that would infringe upon anyone else’s inalienable right to Life, Liberty and their Pursuit of Happiness.

If you believe and accept the concept of liberty and self – ownership and believe that you alone have the right to your life and the right to make choices regarding your personal life, could you not also say that you are responsible for the outcome of your choices whether the outcome is success or failure? And if that is true, would it be ethical to expect or to initiate force against someone else in order to receive what the concept of liberty says you are capable and therefor responsible for providing for yourself? If you believe and accept the concept of liberty, the answer must compel you to say “No”. On the other hand, would it be ethical to seek help from family, community or charitable organizations? The answer to that would have to be yes because through the mutual consent between two or more parties, a person may receive goods, services, monetary compensation or any combination thereof as long as all parties are willing and agree to the exchange. The difference between the two scenarios should be obvious. One is enacted through force while the other is by mutual consent. Which of the two is most ethical to you? While we cannot initiate force against others to do what we believe to be right and just, if we accept and act in accordance to the rights and responsibilities of liberty, it is safe to say that community problems would be solved on a community level because who knows what a community needs better than the members of that community? Not all problems can or should be solved with a one size fits all form of legislation.

Our participation or lack thereof in society has a direct impact on our community as a whole. There was a time when communities were much closer than they are today. There was a time when adults and parents in a community looked after not only their own children, but their neighbors children as well. If a parent witnessed a child doing something unacceptable, you can bet that parent spoke to the child and made sure the parents of the child knew what the child had done. People were more involved within their communities and took the time to know their neighbors. Parents seemed to know that values and discipline started in the home and were reinforced at school through teachers, in the church and in their community. The children, knowing that they were not entirely anonymous in their actions, learned to behave because it is what was expected from society as a whole and this helped to cultivate their moral compass and to know, in no uncertain terms, the difference between right and wrong. These things were clearly defined by parents as well as society and children learned at an early age that there were consequences for their actions.

Most of you have heard the saying, “It takes a village to raise a child”. This statement is as true today as it was when the saying was popular. Times have changed and we no longer have “villages” and somewhere in the evolution of society, thoughts and attitudes began to change. Less importance was placed on personal accountability and more emphasis was placed on minding our own business. Who were we to tell anyone what was “right” or “wrong”? Child rearing became more personal and instead of focusing on teaching our children the core values we grew up with, we began to focus on political correctness. Shame was no longer an acceptable emotion for a child to feel, even when their actions warranted shame. In a society that was based upon liberty and the concept of self – ownership, our values drifted farther and farther from the original mark. The values that used to be taught in a community became more the exception and less the general rule. This could be considered a breakdown in society where it becomes every man for himself which is the exact opposite of a society based on liberty. As previously established, liberty and self-ownership require that we act in our best interest while respecting the same rights in others and a societal breakdown is not in our own best interest. While some would have you believe that believing in personal liberty is inherently selfish, liberty is the exact opposite of selfish. Taking responsibility for yourself and therefor your actions makes for a better society. The reason for this is that in believing in personal liberty and that of others, we are compelled to reject things that would infringe upon our individual rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Things like crime, violence, racism and drug addiction are things that are detrimental to us as people and society as a whole. Self – ownership would compel a person to reject these things and by doing so, the community would benefit and be more productive as a whole while an attitude of selfishness and entitlement is a drain on all productive members of a society. The very concept of liberty says this is so.

So if we believe and accept the concept of liberty and that the problems of society can and should be handled by the members of a community, the need for government intervention is removed because those who believe in liberty also understand that the use of force through legislation that would infringe upon anothers rights and is in direct opposition to a truly liberated society and the two cannot coexist if we are to consider ourselves a free nation.

Why not Ron Paul?

I have noticed the media, both conservative and liberal, reporting on all the Republican presidential hopefulls. The liberal media rips them apart on various aspects of their positions while demonizing the Tea Party and if you listen to Fox, they want to push Perry, Romney and Bachman down our throats. You never hear them speak about the one candidate who actually makes sense. So I ask, why NOT Ron Paul? Some in the media would have you believe he simply isnt electable or that his ideas are insane, yet they give no real specifics. Every now and then I hear someone say that Ron Paul wants to legalize drugs or that his foreign policy is weak. When I ask them to elaborate, they can't. They are merely parroting what they have been told. In fact, it seems this is ONE area that both Republicans and Democrats agree. They just don't acknowlege Ron Paul...period. They treat him as a non-entity, but why?
He supports bringing our troops home. Wouldn't this be a position for liberals to rally behind? One would think so, but they don't. He believes in a fiscally responsible government. Tea Party and Republicans should be able to get behind this since this is what they promised the American public when elected into congress last year. But no, not a word of support is heard from the conservative right. So why do we hear little to nothing from either party or from the media? My answer to that question is this; Ron Paul threatens the centralization of power that it's taken our government decades to establish. He wants to audit the Federal Reserve, abolish the IRS, limit government involvement in the private sector and restore our personal liberties granted by our Constitution. You know, the Constitution that both Republicans and Democrats attemp to circumvent on an almost daily basis? The constitution that limits congressional power and was meant to keep them from becoming oppressive. Yeah, THAT Constitution. Ron Paul wants a Constitutionally Limited Government and deep down, neither Democrats or Republicans want that because it limits what THEY can do. Ron Paul threatens everything they have worked so hard for. The constant bickering over ideology and the fact that we, as a nation, have become almost like sheep and are so entrenched in the whole "My party is right and you're is wrong" debate, we have lost sight of what's right (and wrong) for us as a nation. We've allowed the party rhetoric and buzz phrases to influence our opinions. If we could all take a step back and look at things without the opinions that others have convinced us we have, maybe we could see what is actually happening to us. Look back over the decades and see where we have sacrificed some of our personal liberty here and there when our politicians convinced us that failure to enact some type of legislation (for our own safety) would result in some type of catastrophe. Perfect examples are things like The Patriot Act and the TSA. Before you jump on the "I hate Republican band wagon", let me remind you that Obama, who ran on promises of getting rid of The patriot Act, has extended it time and again as well as expanded upon it by adding additional wording to include "Domestic Terrorists". A "Domestic Terrorist" is someone living here, a U.S. citizen who is considered a "Right Wing" extremist. How hard is it it classify as a "Right Wing Extremist"? Not as hard as one might think.

(Taken from DHS document concerning the definition of Domestic Terroist)

“Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

According to Obamas DHS:

“Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms Scholars and experts disagree over poverty’s role in motivating violent radicalization or terrorist activity.”

“High unemployment, however, has the potential to lead to alienation, thus increasing an individual’s susceptibility to extremist ideas. According to a 2007 study from the German Institute for Economic Research, there appears to be a strong association between a parent’s unemployment status and the formation of rightwing extremist beliefs in their children—specifically xenophobia and antidemocratic ideals.”

“Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.”

Is this something that our founding fathers envisioned for our nation? A police state full of citizens dependent on our government? I don’t think so, but don't take my word for it. Do your own research. Set aside what you have been told to think and listen to what Ron Paul has to say. Watch his speeches from past to present. Check his voting record and bills he has supported and ask yourself this question...Why NOT Ron Paul?

A new flavor of ice cream

Its' been awhile since I posted anything on here...lack of traffic LOL but oh well.

I've been thinking about the current administration and what exactly it is that they are trying to do. It doesn't make sense to me and I know I'm not the only one.
Its very hard to pin down exactly what ideology this administration is trying to implement here. There are shades of communism, socialism and fascism in many of Obamas policies and beliefs. But if you look up their definitions, he doesn't quite "fit" any one definition. I think it could be said that all three have the common thread of totalitarian style government. They also seem to function on the principle of collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group—whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called “the common good.” You could almost say though, that socialism, communism and fascism are just different flavors of the same brand of ice cream. I think Obama has taken facets of each and created a neopolitan sort of flavor which has made it hard to pin down. Whether or not this is intention, I don't know, but it does allow his supporters to discredit someone when they try to assign any one label to define his policies.
If you look at his stimulus packages that have allowed him the ability to influence the banking and car industries, you could definitely draw the parallel to fascism. Obamacare strongly resembles a socialistic style of single payer, government provided healthcare. His belief in wealth distribution fits into this category as well.
Obama has made statements like "It's time to level the playing field" which could be taken as the desire to create a classless society and is very much in line with communism. In his book, The Audacity of Hope" he, in his own words says he aligned himself with Marxist, Socialist and Communists in his college days. It's not so far a stretch to assume he supports these ideologies.If this is the case, 2012 cannot come soon enough.