Mar 072016
 

“There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil.” – John Adams

The Great Illusion of the two-party system is that it allows the voter a choice – usually between a liberal and a conservative government. The reality is that, whichever party wins the election, the government is, in truth, a totalitarian one. The “choice” is a mere distraction from the true objective.

Recently, an American college student, Justin Snyder, commented on his choice for his country’s next president and his reasons for it. Mister Snyder said, in part,

Continue reading »

Share Button
Aug 172015
 

“The shaping of the will of Congress and the choosing of the American president has become a privilege reserved to the country’s equestrian classes, a.k.a. the 20% of the population that holds 93% of the wealth, the happy few who run the corporations and the banks, own and operate the news and entertainment media, compose the laws and govern the universities, control the philanthropic foundations, the policy institutes, the casinos, and the sports arenas.”—Journalist Lewis Lapham

Being a citizen in the American corporate state is much like playing against a stacked deck: you’re always going to lose.

The game is rigged, and “we the people” keep getting dealt the same losing hand. Even so, most stay in the game, against all odds, trusting that their luck will change.

The problem, of course, is that luck will not save us. As I make clear in my book, Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the people dealing the cards—the politicians, the corporations, the judges, the prosecutors, the police, the bureaucrats, the military, the media, etc.—have only one prevailing concern, and that is to maintain their power and control over the citizenry, while milking us of our money and possessions.

Continue reading »

Share Button
Jan 212015
 

As Those Who Will Not See

My wife and I had a number of visitors over the holidays, including several foreign friends from our time spent in Europe and the Middle East. Both the Americans and the visitors from overseas eventually came around to wanting to discuss how deformed United States foreign policy has become, noting generally that the elite that runs Washington seems to have no clue about what is going on outside the continental U.S. Worse, there appears to be no appreciation for how negatively the rest of the world views the United States. Several marveled at the mind boggling formulaic speech made by President Barack Obama at Christmas in which he announced that the United States had officially “ended its fighting role” in Afghanistan, a blatant bit of misdirection in that Washington is retaining more than 10,800 troops in the country with full authorization to engage the Taliban as necessary.

Continue reading »

Share Button
Jan 072015
 

Back in 2008, in response to the GOP rush to nominate future ISIS supporter John McCain, Lew Rockwell wrote "Triumph of the Red-State Fascists" in which he examined how the (alleged) opposition to big government on the American right always takes a back seat to militarism and the conservative knee-jerk support for heavy-handed government in the pursuit of "order." Rockwell writes: 

At the same time, the libertarianism of the GOP's domestic agenda was supplanted by a belief that "big government and domestic statism were perfectly acceptable, provided that they were steeped in some sort of Burkean tradition and enjoyed a Christian framework." Fiery individualism and radicalism were replaced by a longing for a static, controlling elite of the European sort. Liberty was washed away.

That was fifty years ago. Today the same priorities abound on the Right: first, nationalism and empire, and, second, longing for order in the domestic area. The switch from anti-Communist militarism to anti-Islamic imperialism was not difficult. They took a chapter out of Orwell, and merely changed the name of the enemy.

Continue reading »

Share Button
Jan 052015
 

Imagine you were going home, and you noticed a bulldozer on your property about to topple your house to the ground. The man next to the bulldozer holding a clipboard might say, “Sorry, this property is ours now, because we can make a better use of it. But don’t worry, we’ll pay you what we think it’s worth.” Sad as it may sound, this scenario is common around the world, and it’s known as eminent domain.

Eminent domain is the process by which government can take private land, if it’s in the “public interest”. For example, if it’s in the public interest to build a railroad through your property, the government can bulldoze your house.

The logic of eminent domain works like this: whoever has the most “interest” in a piece of property should be able to own it. So if the public interest outweighs the private interest, then the public should own the property.

But how about the reverse? Can private individuals take public land, if the private interest is greater?

Continue reading »

Share Button
Dec 152014
 

Thomas Jefferson became one of my heroes when I was 13 years old. So you’d think I’d enjoy hearing people say good things about him, but very often, I don’t. My reason is simple: the people who praise Jefferson seldom really understand him, and if they did, it’s questionable that they’d like him. (Others try to get rid of him by trashing his reputation.)

What People Don’t Know

A crucial thing people don’t know about Jefferson is this: he was fully convinced that freedom in America was fatally wounded—in fact on its deathbed—by 1810 or so. He maintained that he and his fellow founders had blown their opportunity and that American freedom had already slipped away.

Now, since what I’ve written above will seem almost inconceivable to many Americans, let me back it up by quoting a few of Jefferson’s letters:

Continue reading »

Share Button
Dec 082014
 

Don’t you just love those Americans who celebrate how free they are under America’s national-security state system?

I wonder if such Americans also celebrated how free people were who lived under East Germany’s national-security state system.

I just read an interesting story in the New York Times about how the East German Stasi was confiscating art from wealthy East Germans. They would simply raid people’s homes, take valuable art, and then sell it, putting the money into the state’s coffers. According to the article, “between 1973 and 1989 the East German police, known as the Stasi, seized more than 200,000 objects in hundreds of raids.”

Why did the authorities do that? Because the government needed the money.

Why not simply raise taxes? Because people don’t like paying taxes. Anyway, why go through the taxing process when you can just barge into people’s homes and take their possessions?

Continue reading »

Share Button
Dec 012014
 

Many of my friends vote; people I love and respect vote; but I’ve given it up. That horrifies many people, but—truth be faced—it bothers them mostly because it calls their choices into question.

That’s very unfortunate, because I quite understand why they vote. And I don’t look down on them for it; I did it plenty of times myself. I just wish they’d stop punishing themselves with politics and be happy instead.

Politics is a type of slow-rolling torment. I don’t want people I love to suffer through it.

Yes, I know that my opinion seems crazy to many people, but again, it’s mostly because it differs so starkly from theirs. If my opinion is right, they’ve been wasting their time, and almost no one likes to consider that sort of thing. We fight such possibilities reflexively.

So, if you like your politics, you can keep your politics. I’m not trying to take it away from you. I’m just saying that I wish good people wouldn’t pour their time and energy down that particular drain—I don’t think it benefits them.

Continue reading »

Share Button
Nov 192014
 

How do you like the Journal’s war?”

So boasted the headline of William Randolph Hearst’s New York flagship that week in 1898 that the United States declared war on Spain.

While Hearst’s Journal, in a circulation battle with Joe Pulitzer’s World, was a warmongering sheet, it did not start the war.

Yet the headline comes to mind reading the Wall Street Journal, whose editorial pages seem to have concluded that on Nov. 4 America voted for new wars in the Middle East, and beyond.

On Nov. 13, the Journal’s op-ed page was given over to Mark Dubowitz and Reuel Marc Gerecht of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Assuming nuclear talks with Iran conclude unsuccessfully by the Nov. 24 deadline, they write, we have four options.

Continue reading »

Share Button
Nov 172014
 

Years ago, an elderly, frail Japanese martial arts master once boasted a 200-0 record against his opponents.

He claimed to have a unique power that allowed him to inflict serious injury on people without actually laying a finger on them.

Was it Chi? Magic? None of the above. It was a total scam. But that didn’t matter.

You see, the legend of the master’s powers turned out to be far more powerful than reality.

His core following of students believed in the master so much that they would fling themselves across the dojo whenever he raised his pinky finger.

And anyone who saw the display would become transfixed by the perception of the mater’s extraordinary abilities. It was an incredible case of mass delusion.

Continue reading »

Share Button