AuthorTopic: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints  (Read 52184 times)

Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 10973
    • View Profile
Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints
« on: May 16, 2015, 09:10:25 AM »
Diners, Staring this new topic in the Geopolitics section of the Diner to present Libertarian viewpoints on occasion for perusal and perhaps discussion.

Hopefully you will find some of the postings interesting and of merit.     Golden Oxen
« Last Edit: March 02, 2016, 05:01:07 PM by Eddie »

Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 10973
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints - Freedom From the Grid
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2015, 09:12:48 AM »


Freedom From the Grid

Published by The Daily Bell - May 15 2015

                                                       


Home solar and other off-grid technology is about to have its day. Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk's announcement April 30 that his company would market $3,000 home batteries that can store solar power for nighttime use is just the latest twist in the rapid evolution of systems that will let homes and businesses unplug from utility companies.

Tesla's $3,000 price point surprised experts at the Rocky Mountain Institute, a green-energy think tank which has studied grid defection. "We were expecting a similar product in the $15,000 range," said Jesse Morris, a manager in RMI's electricity practice. The low price means "more potential for load- and grid-defection, in more places, sooner." – MarketWatch, May 13, 2015

The pursuit of freedom means more than escaping the government. True freedom requires independence – the state of "not depending" on outside help.

In an advanced economy, very few people can claim to be fully independent. We all depend on each other to meet various needs. Division of labor lets us specialize in what we do best and acquire other goods and services from better-equipped neighbors.

Energy independence has long been an elusive goal. Most Americans depend on either a state-protected monopoly electric provider or a state-owned utility service. As is the nature of all monopolies, the value they deliver has little to do with the prices they charge. We pay because we have no choice.

Soon this could change. Solar energy technology has advanced rapidly in recent years. Prices have fallen to the point that in sunny regions it can be cost-effective for a home to generate most of its daytime power needs from rooftop solar cells.

One sticky technical problem remains: Solar cells don't work at night. They lose efficiency on cloudy days, too. This requires homeowners with solar systems to stay on "the grid" for those times, which complicates the systems and drives up costs.

Tesla's new batteries may help solve this problem. For the moment, prices are high and capacity limited, but that will change. "Grid defection," as the experts in the MarketWatch story call it, will be all the rage in a few years.

The monopoly electric companies see this coming and they don't like it at all. In typical monopoly fashion, their response has been to throw up barriers against anyone who dares intrude on their monopoly. New taxes on solar equipment and user fees for those who want to connect home solar systems to the grid may slow down progress – but they won't stop it.

"Freedom from the Grid" is nicely symbolic of freedom generally. Like sunlight, all the resources we need to live happy, prosperous lives are readily available. When people don't take advantage of those resources, it is usually because some kind of governmental restriction prevents or discourages it.

Solar technology is itself a victim of this structure. The myriad subsidies and tax credits that ostensibly promoted solar energy had the opposite effect, slowing it down. All this might have happened years ago if government had stayed out of the way.

Nevertheless, individual energy independence is finally within sight. Maybe seeing it will teach people the value of freedom and encourage them to seek more of it.

 http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/36293/Freedom-From-the-Grid/  :icon_study:


« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 09:15:21 AM by Golden Oxen »

Offline Eddie

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 12789
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2015, 10:38:05 AM »
Obviously this is something I've been working toward for a few years now, and I do think the idea of decentralizing electricity production is very exciting, and something that makes us more free, if we can get there. I have nothing against Elon Musk. I applaud his commitment to open source, which is a real, tangible sign that he is one of the good guys.

On the other hand, I wouldn't buy the new battery product he's touting. The technology really isn't green, and there are far better alternatives, although the cost is higher. Right now I'm in the process of figuring out exactly how much higher, but that 15-20K number the author threw out sounds reasonable to me. Like most things, you get what you pay for.

I am talking to the guys at Iron Edison right now to see if I can get them to do two things. One thing is that I want to buy dry Edison cells as preps, and either store the electrolyte or make it myself when the time comes to put the batteries into service. Talk about the ultimate barter item. In a fast collapse, high quality 50 year batteries would be worth far more than precious metals, imho.

The second thing I'm talking to them about is whether I could make small purchases. All battery retailers want to sell you a battery bank. (Big sale, Ka-ching goes the cash register.)I want to buy my banks one cell at a time, to avoid having to use up my savings or go into debt. So, far, I'm not too impressed with their response. Instead of addressing my questions when I emailed them, they sent me a ream of info that I already had collected myself, and ignored my specific questions. Their guy called me (an email would have been fine) on Friday,but I wasn't in the office, so I missed his call. I will speak to him on Monday.

There is at least one other company who makes the batteries, and I guess I'll talk to them next.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 11:04:12 AM by Eddie »
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline Palloy

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 3754
    • View Profile
    • https://palloy.wordpress.com
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2015, 09:04:34 PM »
http://www.meridian-int-res.com/Projects/How_Much_Lithium_Per_Battery.pdf
Current global production of some 100,000 tonnes raw LCE would be sufficient, if available, for some 2 million 16 kWh batteries per year. [... or 400,000 85 kW.h batteries like Tesla S]

That's all very well if you are one of the lucky ones that can afford 20 grand to get a temporary piece of energy independence.  But you have to ask yourself if most people can afford it, and if not, what their attitude is going to be towards those that can when the system starts falling apart and there are no police to shoot the poor bastards for you.  Would you really shoot someone who tries to steal your battery?  If so, then you won't be surprised to find out that some of them are prepared to shoot you and your family for it first.  What a way to live.



The State is a body of armed men

Offline Eddie

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 12789
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2015, 09:54:47 PM »
http://www.meridian-int-res.com/Projects/How_Much_Lithium_Per_Battery.pdf
Current global production of some 100,000 tonnes raw LCE would be sufficient, if available, for some 2 million 16 kWh batteries per year. [... or 400,000 85 kW.h batteries like Tesla S]

That's all very well if you are one of the lucky ones that can afford 20 grand to get a temporary piece of energy independence.  But you have to ask yourself if most people can afford it, and if not, what their attitude is going to be towards those that can when the system starts falling apart and there are no police to shoot the poor bastards for you.  Would you really shoot someone who tries to steal your battery?  If so, then you won't be surprised to find out that some of them are prepared to shoot you and your family for it first.  What a way to live.

 The government will loan more than that to anyone with a pulse, for some worthless student loan that channels money into the system. Plenty of  people in this country can come up with 20K for any number of discretionary purchases, anyway.  How many garages have a Harley parked inside that doesn't even get ridden? Are all those people rich?

It's a false argument to claim only the rich can do this. It's achievable by a great many people.

Besides,if the world descends into lawlessness, do you think it will only be the people with preps worth having who will be in danger? In that scenario, all life will be a little risky. Will I shoot someone to protect my family? Yes, I will. It is indeed a "way to live" as opposed to being a way to let someone kill me.



What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 10973
    • View Profile
New Military Spending Bill Expands Empire But Forbids Debate on War
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2015, 05:27:03 PM »
New Military Spending Bill Expands Empire But Forbids Debate on War

Written by Ron Paul
Sunday May 17, 2015

                           

  On Friday the House passed a massive National Defense Authorization for 2016 that will guarantee US involvement in more wars and overseas interventions for years to come. The Republican majority resorted to trickery to evade the meager spending limitations imposed by the 2011 budget control act – limitations that did not, as often reported, cut military spending but only slowed its growth.
 

But not even slower growth is enough when you have an empire to maintain worldwide, so the House majority slipped into the military spending bill an extra $89 billion for an emergency war fund. Such “emergency” spending is not addressed in the growth caps placed on the military under the 2011 budget control act. It is a loophole filled by Congress with Fed-printed money.
 
Ironically, a good deal of this “emergency” money will go to President Obama’s war on ISIS even though neither the House nor the Senate has debated – let alone authorized – that war! Although House leadership allowed 135 amendments to the defense bill – with many on minor issues like regulations on fire hoses – an effort by a small group of Representatives to introduce an amendment to debate the current US war in Iraq and Syria was rejected.
 
While squashing debate on ongoing but unauthorized wars, the bill also pushed the administration toward new conflicts. Despite the president’s unwise decision to send hundreds of US military trainers to Ukraine, a move that threatens the current shaky ceasefire, Congress wants even more US involvement in Ukraine’s internal affairs. The military spending bill included $300 million to directly arm the Ukrainian government even as Ukrainian leaders threaten to again attack the breakaway regions in the east. Does Congress really think US-supplied weapons killing ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine is a good idea?
 
The defense authorization bill also seeks to send yet more weapons into Iraq. This time the House wants to send weapons directly to the Kurds in northern Iraq without the approval of the Iraqi government. Although these weapons are supposed to be used to fight ISIS, we know from too many prior examples that they often find their way into the hands of the very people we are fighting. Also, arming an ethnic group seeking to break away from Baghdad and form a new state is an unwise infringement of the sovereignty of Iraq. It is one thing to endorse the idea of secession as a way to reduce the possibility of violence, but it is quite something else to arm one side and implicitly back its demands.
 
While the neocons keep pushing the lie that the military budget is shrinking under the Obama Administration, the opposite is true. As the CATO Institute pointed out recently, President George W. Bush’s average defense budget was $601 billion, while during the Obama administration the average has been $687 billion. This bill is just another example of this unhealthy trend.
 
Next year’s military spending plan keeps the US on track toward destruction of its economy at home while provoking new resentment over US interventionism overseas. It is a recipe for disaster. Let’s hope for either a presidential veto, or that on final passage Congress rejects this bad bill.

Copyright © 2015 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given. :icon_sunny: :icon_sunny:

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2015/may/17/new-military-spending-bill-expands-empire-but-forbids-debate-on-war/  :icon_study:

Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 10973
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints - Rand Paul Takes on Patriot Act
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2015, 05:28:27 PM »
The filibuster that wasn't: Rand Paul takes on Patriot Act


                                Sen. Rand Paul (R) of Kentucky is delivering his promised filibuster of the Patriot Act. But does it still count if there's no Senate business to block?   

                                         
                                      Republican presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul speaks in Des Moines, Iowa, on Saturday.
         
  May 20, 2015   

Republican presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul speaks in Des Moines, Iowa, on Saturday. (Charlie Neibergall/AP/File)   
Washington

When is a filibuster not a filibuster? When Republican Sen. Rand Paul takes to the floor to defend American liberties from the Patriot Act – and the bulk collection of phone records by the National Security Agency, or NSA.

The libertarian Kentucky senator, who is running for president, began talking Wednesday at about 1:15 p.m. He worked his way through one three-ring binder, with two more in reserve at the table next to him. His water glass was full. His reading glasses were getting a workout.

But technically, it’s not really the “filibuster” he promised the Union Leader in New Hampshire, because he wasn’t actually blocking any Senate business. The chamber is in a sort of dead period, waiting for the clock to run out on a procedural vote on trade.

After more than two hours into his speech, senators from both parties began to give him a release by asking him lengthy questions – which allowed him to keep holding the floor. If he can keep going until 12:01 a.m., then it will be a filibuster because he will actually be delaying Senate action on trade.

Technicalities aside, Paul now has video for use on the campaign trail and on social media, buttressing his pledge to “defeat the Washington machine.”

It’s a move reminiscent of his last marathon speech on the Senate floor, a nearly 13-hour test of personal fortitude when he railed against the Obama administration’s use of drones in 2013. That earned him an instant national following and the Twitter hashtag #StandWithRand.

“There comes a time in the history of nations when fear and complacency allow power to accumulate and liberty and privacy to suffer,” he began on Wednesday. “That time is now. And I will not let the Patriot Act, the most un-Patriotic of acts, go unchallenged.”  :emthup: :emthup: :emthup: :emthup: :emthup:

The tousle-haired candidate called the federal government’s bulk collection of Americans’ phone data, which was revealed by NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013, “a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment.” Indeed, a federal appeals court has ruled it illegal.

The section of the Patriot Act that the administration has been relying on to justify the data collection expires on June 1. To reform the practice, the House recently passed a broadly bipartisan bill, the USA Freedom Act. It would, among other things, take the government out of the business of phone-record collection. Instead, the records would stay with phone companies, and the federal government would need a search warrant to obtain them.

Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R) of Kentucky opposes the House bill, which passed by a strong vote of 338 to 88 last week. Senator McConnell says it would place a hurdle against the government’s ability to protect Americans from terrorists – a position in direct contrast to that of his junior colleague from the Bluegrass State.

But McConnell has bowed to pressure and said Tuesday that he will allow a vote on the House bill before the Senate breaks for the Memorial Day recess. However, it’s not clear that it will pass. An alternative might be to pass a short-term extension or, if that fails, to simply let the provision expire. 

Nothing would make Paul happier. Except, of course, to stand out in the crowded field of GOP presidential candidates.

That's exactly what this maneuver was designed to do.


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2015/0520/The-filibuster-that-wasn-t-Rand-Paul-takes-on-Patriot-Act :icon_study:


Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 10973
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Ideas - The Warfare State Strikes Back Against Rand Paul
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2015, 04:47:25 AM »


The Warfare State Strikes Back Against Rand Paul


Published by The Daily Bell - June 03 2015

Editorial by Shane Smith

If you're interested in knowing which scepters of power the Warfare State is most unwilling to relinquish, try wrenching a few from its grasp. The volume of the cacophony will let you know just how grievously the beast in DC has been wounded. And it's never roared as loudly as it did at midnight on Sunday, when Rand Paul forced the expiration of the NSA's domestic surveillance program. ABC News reports:

Three key provisions of the Patriot Act expired at midnight – Section 215, which authorizes the NSA's bulk collection of Americans' phone records; a roving wiretap provision that allows law enforcement officials to monitor terror suspects that use multiple phones; and a program that officials can use to monitor "lone wolf" terror suspects, not connected to any known terrorist organizations.

Virtually the entire Washington DC Establishment dogpiled Rand for his stand, outraged that anyone should shield American citizens from a Leviathan State that is accustomed to getting what it wants from its senators. To have its sustenance denied sends it into a rage. Sustenance, that is, in the form of slaughtered liberty. And Rand Paul's peers in Congress are behaving predictably like the spoiled toddlers they are when their toys are taken away.

This piece from Politico illustrates the attitude Rand's fellow senators have toward a scaling back of any government power whatsoever. John McCain had this to say about Rand's filibustering: "I know what this is about – I think it's very clear – this is, to some degree, a fundraising exercise... He obviously has a higher priority for his fundraising and political ambitions than for the security of the nation."

Utah Senator Orrin Hatch couldn't help but engage in a bit of red-baiting when discussing Rand's actions: "I think he's nestled in with a very large bunch of very radical people – from the left to the right... I don't know if he feels comfortable being with all those leftists who hate the PATRIOT Act. But he has a right to do what he's doing."

The article goes on to state: "The stinging personal criticism of Paul showed just how unpopular the Kentucky Republican's demands to kill the surveillance law is among party elders – and portended how this battle is likely to continue to hover over his presidential campaign, for better or worse."

Liberty is only theoretical to our political class. It sounds good. It flatters us to hear talk of liberty waft to us from the heights of the Imperial Capitol, but when something concrete is done to advance liberty, they close ranks and attack. The political class benefits from the decay of liberty, not its growth.  :'( :'( :'(

This editorial from the Daily Caller, entitled "The Fall of Rand Paul?" makes a feeble case that Rand might have ruined his presidential prospects by standing for principle rather than adhering to non-specific wishy-washiness that is typical of presidential contenders. The article goes on to state:

Paul's attempt to go mainstream may have worked for a time, but it is much harder task for the instinctually non-interventionist Kentucky senator to pull off when threats to American security dominate news cycles. Seeming more concerned with the threat of bulk metadata collection by the government is unlikely to win over many primary voters.

Contrary to what the author says, Paul's attempt to "go mainstream" was the very thing that turned many off to his presidency. It was depressing to witness the Son of Ron attempt to cater to the more mainstream Republicans, but with his heroic actions on Sunday night, the real Rand came roaring back. Whether his victory will last, though, is debatable. A vote on the US Freedom Act, in effect a repackaged and expanded Patriot Act, will be had this week. Cut off a head of the Hydra and two grow in its place. But regardless of how long it lasts, watching the entire DC Establishment squirm is too good to miss. Expanding power has been too easy for them for far too long.

The Warfare State's reaction to Rand's stand on Sunday displays clearly what we're up against when attempting to bring any semblance of limitations on the power of our government. When confronted with principle, or the ideas of liberty and privacy, it screeches and screams, and utilizes every weapon in its arsenal to repel the threat. A free society is a threat to the health of the State, and something to be feared by it. The State builds its power upon our own fear, fear of "terrorism," fear of any and every enemy of convenience that it can effectively make use of. Every base emotion is appealed to when agitating for expanded power – more power is needed to "keep us safe," etc. It hijacks the natural patriotism of the people and twists that love of country into support for the expansion of the State.

A government that recognizes no limits on power will do anything to eliminate a threat to that power. A government that scoffs at the liberty of its citizens is a tyranny, elected or otherwise. Like the Terminator, or the Blob, it can't be reasoned with or bargained with or reformed, and it won't stop. Its death is the only path to liberty and peace.

Rather than attempting to manipulate the emotions of the public to cajole us into abandoning piecemeal our heritage of liberty, Rand Paul is attempting to appeal to our reason, the way his father did. They implore us to ignore the appeals to emotionalism and plastic patriotism the War Machine in DC uses to get another bombing campaign, healthcare bill, surveillance bill, tax hike, etc. Our liberty is too important to sacrifice to the bogeymen of the moment.

The lesson to be learned from Rand's stand is this: Every person who denounced Rand's actions is an enemy of liberty and should not be trusted with political power.

Shane Smith is an accountant living in Norman, Oklahoma. He writes for Red Dirt Report. Liberty is his religion. :emthup: :emthup:


Published by The Daily Bell - www.thedailybell.com - All Rights Reserved. :icon_study: :icon_study: :icon_study:

 

Offline Eddie

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 12789
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints
« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2015, 07:45:25 AM »
David Brooks was spouting the party line on NPR yesterday, talking about how we're so beset by terrorists hiding under every rock, and how the nice folks at the NSA are such fine Americans who can be completely trusted to not take advantage of our civil liberties. Shit talking Edward Snowden....made me want to puke.
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 10973
    • View Profile

   Slave or Rebel? Ten Principles for Escaping the Matrix and Standing Up to Tyranny

Published by The Daily Bell - June 10 2015

Editorial by John Whitehead

Until they become conscious, they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled, they cannot become conscious.”—George Orwell

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

It’s a shell game intended to keep us focused on and distracted by all of the politically expedient things that are being said—about militarized police, surveillance, and government corruption—while the government continues to frogmarch us down the road toward outright tyranny.

Unarmed citizens are still getting shot by militarized police trained to view them as the enemy and treated as if we have no rights. Despite President Obama’s warning that the nation needs to do some “soul searching” about issues such as race, poverty and the strained relationship between law enforcement and the minority communities they serve, police killings and racial tensions are at an all-time high. Just recently, in Texas, a white police officer was suspended after video footage showed him “manhandling, arresting and drawing his gun on a group of black children outside a pool party.”

Americans’ private communications and data are still being sucked up by government spy agencies. The USA Freedom Act was just a placebo pill intended to make us feel better without bringing about any real change. As Bill Blunden, a cybersecurity researcher and surveillance critic, points out, “The theater we’ve just witnessed allows decision makers to boast to their constituents about reforming mass surveillance while spies understand that what’s actually transpired is hardly major change.”

Taxpayer dollars are still being squandered on roads to nowhere, endless wars that do not make us safer, and bloated government agencies that should have been shut down long ago. A good example is the Transportation Security Administration, which, despite its $7 billion annual budget, has shown itself to be bumbling and ineffective.

And military drills are still being carried out on American soil under the pretext of training soldiers for urban warfare overseas. Southeastern Michigan, the site of one of the many military training drills taking place across the country this summer, has had Black Hawk helicopters buzzing its skies and soldiers dressed for combat doing night combat drills in abandoned buildings around the state.

In other words, freedom, or what’s left of it, is being threatened from every direction. The threats are of many kinds: political, cultural, educational, media, and psychological. However, as history shows us, freedom is not, on the whole, wrested from a citizenry. It is all too often given over voluntarily and for such a cheap price: safety, security, bread, and circuses.

This is part and parcel of the propaganda churned out by the government machine. That said, what we face today—mind manipulation and systemic violence—is not new. What is different are the techniques used and the large-scale control of mass humanity, coercive police tactics and pervasive surveillance. As we have seen with the erection of the electronic concentration camp, there is virtually no escaping the invisible prison surrounding us. Once upon a time, one could run and hide or duck into a cave, but that is no longer feasible as caves are quite scarce, and those running the camp have their eyes watching everything.

Moreover, we are presented with the illusion that we act of our own volition when most of the time we are being watched, prodded, and controlled. “The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative,” Aldous Huxley stated. “The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him, the walls of his prison are invisible.”

In fact, with the merger of the Internet and the corporate state, unless you are alert and aware, it will be increasingly difficult to discern the difference between freedom and enslavement. With the methods of mind manipulation available to the corporate state, the very nature of democratic government has been changed. Again, as Aldous Huxley writes:

[T]he quaint old forms—elections, parliaments, Supreme Courts and all the rest will remain. The underlying substance will be a new kind of nonviolent totalitarianism. All the traditional names, all the hallowed slogans will remain exactly what they were in the good old days. Democracy and freedom will be the theme of every broadcast and editorial . . . Meanwhile the ruling oligarchy and its highly trained elite of soldiers, policemen, thought-manufacturers and mind-manipulators will quietly run the show as they see fit.

To many, the situation seems hopeless. But is it?

From the day you’re born until the day you die, the choices you exercise are very limited. You don’t choose to be born or choose what sex you are or who your parents are or where you live. When you are a child, you are told what to do, and when you enter school, you sit plastered to a desk and are taught what others demand you should know. Yes, the indoctrinating process begins on day one.

Then there are the rules, the endless rules. If you say the wrong word, write the wrong story or wear the wrong clothes, you can get thrown out of school or even arrested. You live where you are told and eat what others think you should eat. As you grow older, this list expands into employment, marriage and so on. In other words, your so-called reality is socially constructed. It is predetermined for you, and if you step out of line and disagree with what the current society deems proper, you will be ostracized. If you speak your mind to the governing authorities, you might find yourself behind bars.

The point is that in order to develop a compliant citizenry, people must be forced to live in a mental matrix of words, ideas, ideologies, and teachings that are designed to make us conform. “As the Matrix in the movie was used to facilitate the exploitation of humans,” writes author Henry H. Lindner, “so the current ideological Matrix was created for, and serves to exploit us, turning us into unthinking workers and consumers—slaves of the ruling elite who themselves are trapped in the Matrix.” In fact, “few of us are able to escape the Matrix. We do not even know it exists.”

For there to be any hope of real change, you’ll have to change how you think about yourself, your fellow human beings, freedom, society, and the government. This means freeing your mind, realizing the truth, and unlearning all the myths you have been indoctrinated with since the day you were able to comprehend language.

The following principles, taken from my new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, may help any budding freedom fighters in the struggle to liberate themselves and our society.

First, we must come to grips with the reality that the present system does not foster freedom. It denies freedom and must be altered. “Our authoritarian system is based on cruelty and control—it increasingly drives natural love and feelings from our society and produces violence and greed,” Lindner recognizes. “Our society is deteriorating morally and intellectually. This system cannot be reformed.”

To start with, we must recognize that the government’s primary purpose is maintaining power and control. It’s an oligarchy composed of corporate giants wedded to government officials who benefit from the relationship. In other words, it is motivated by greed and exists to perpetuate itself. As George Orwell writes:

We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution in order to establish a dictatorship. . . .. The object of power is power.

Second, voting is practically worthless. “In principle, it is a great privilege,” Aldous Huxley recognized. “In practice, as recent history has repeatedly shown, the right to vote, by itself, is no guarantee of liberty.”

We live in a secretive surveillance state that has virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. As Jordan Michael Smith, writing for the Boston Globe, concludes about the American government:

There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy.

How many times have the various politicians, when running for office, lied about all they were going to do to bring hope and change to America? Once they get elected, what do they do? They do whatever the corporate powers want. Yes, the old boss is the same as the new boss. The maxim: power follows money.

Moreover, voting is a way to keep the citizenry pacified. However, many Americans intuitively recognize that something is wrong with the way the electoral process works and have withdrawn from the process. That’s why the government places so much emphasis on the reassurance ritual of voting. It provides the illusion of participation.[/size]

Third, question everything. Don’t assume anything government does is for the good of the citizenry. Again, that is not the purpose of modern government. It exists to perpetuate a regime. Remember the words of James Madison, considered the father of the U.S. Constitution: “All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree.” Power corrupts. And as the maxim goes, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Fourth, materialism is a death knell to freedom. While it may be true that Americans are better off than citizens of other nations—we have jobs, food, entertainment, shopping malls, etc.—these are the trappings meant to anesthetize and distract us.

Like the dodo, any “bird that has learned how to grub up a good living without being compelled to use its wings will soon renounce the privilege of flight and remain forever grounded,” Huxley warned. “Same thing is true of human beings. If bread is supplied regularly and capaciously three times a day, many of them will be perfectly content to live by bread alone—or at least by bread and circuses alone.” Free as a bird, some say, but only if you’re willing to free your mind and sacrifice all for a dangerous concept—freedom.

In other words, the hope is that the cry of “‘give me television and hamburgers, but don’t bother me with the responsibilities of liberty,’ may give place, under altered circumstances, to the cry of ‘give me liberty or give me death.’” This is indeed dangerous freedom.

Fifth, there is little hope for any true resistance if you are mindlessly connected to the electronic concentration camp. Remember, what you’re being electronically fed by those in power is meant to pacify, distract, and control you. You can avoid mind manipulations to a large degree by greatly limiting your reliance on electronic devices—cell phones, laptops, televisions, and so on.

Sixth, an armed revolt will not work. Although we may have returned to a 1776 situation where we need to take drastic actions to restore freedom, this is not colonial America with its muskets and people’s armies. Local police departments have enough militarized firepower to do away with even a large-scale armed revolt. Even attempting to repel a SWAT team raid on your home is futile. You’ll get blown away.

Seventh, be wise and realize that there is power in numbers. Networks, coalitions, and movements can accomplish much—especially if their objectives are focused and practical—and they are very much feared by government authorities. That’s why the government is armed to the teeth and prepared to put down even small nonviolent protests.

Eighth, act locally but think nationally. The greatest impact can be had at local governing bodies such as city councils. Join together with friends and neighbors and start a Civil Liberties Oversight Committee. Regularly attend council meetings and demand that government corruption be brought under control and that police activities be brought under the scrutiny of local governing bodies and, thus, the citizenry.

In Albuquerque, New Mexico, for example, police were involved in 39 shootings dating back to 2010. After a 2014 police shooting of an unarmed homeless man camped out in a public park, residents engaged in nonviolent acts of civil disobedience to disrupt the normal functioning of the city government and demand that the police department be brought under control. Community activists actually went so far as to storm a city council meeting and announce that they would be performing a citizens’ arrest of the police chief, charging him with “harboring fugitives from justice at the Albuquerque police department” and “crimes against humanity.”

In Davis County, California, in August 2014, after a public uproar over the growing militarization of local police, council members ordered the police to find a way of getting rid of the department’s newly acquired MRAP tank. One man at the council meeting was quoted as saying: “I would like to say I do not suggest you take this vehicle and send it out of Davis, I demand it.”

Ninth, local towns, cities and states can nullify or say “no” to federal laws that violate the rights and freedoms of the citizenry. In fact, several states have passed laws stating that they will not comply with the National Defense Authorization Act which allows for the military to indefinitely detain (imprison) American citizens. Again, when and if you see such federal laws passed, gather your coalition of citizens and demand that your local town council nullify such laws. If enough towns and cities across the country would speak truth to power in this way, we might see some positive movement from the federal governmental machine.

Tenth, understand what freedom is all about. “Who were the first persons to get the unusual idea that being free was not only a value to be cherished but the most important thing that someone can possess?” asks Professor Orlando Patterson. “The answer in a word: slaves.”

Freedom arose from the hearts and minds of those who realized that they were slaves. It became a primary passion of those who were victims of slavery.

Some Americans are beginning to realize that they are slaves and that if they don’t act soon, they will find themselves imprisoned in the electronic concentration camp indefinitely. Mind you, there may not be any chains hanging from the dungeon walls, but it is a prison nonetheless, and we are, without a doubt, inmates serving life sentences.

This article contributed courtesy of The Rutherford Institute.


Published by The Daily Bell - www.thedailybell.com - All Rights Reserved.   :icon_study: :icon_study:

BIOGRAPHY
John Whitehead


John W. Whitehead is an attorney and author who has written, debated and practiced widely in the area of constitutional law and human rights. Whitehead's concern for the persecuted and oppressed led him, in 1982, to establish The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties and human rights organization whose international headquarters are located in Charlottesville, Virginia. Whitehead serves as the Institute's president and spokesperson, in addition to writing a weekly commentary that is posted on The Rutherford Institute's website (www.rutherford.org), as well being distributed to several hundred newspapers, and hosting a national public service radio campaign. Whitehead's aggressive, pioneering approach to civil liberties issues has earned him numerous accolades, including the Hungarian Medal of Freedom.

Whitehead has been the subject of numerous newspaper, magazine and television profiles, ranging from Gentleman's Quarterly to CBS' 60 Minutes. Articles by Whitehead have been printed in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post and USA Today, among others.

Whitehead gained international renown as a result of his role as co-counsel in Paula Jones' sexual harassment lawsuit against President Clinton. Whitehead continues to speak out in defense of a woman's right to be free from sexual harassment and frequently comments on a variety of legal issues in the national media. He has been interviewed by the following national and international media (partial list): Crossfire, O'Reilly Factor, CNN Headline News, Larry King Live, Nightline, Dateline, The Today Show, Good Morning America, CBS Evening News, CBS This Morning, This Week with Sam and Cokie, Rivera Live, Burden of Proof, Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, FOX News Sunday, Hardball, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, National Public Radio, BBC Newsnight, BBC Radio, British Sky "Tonight" and "Sunday," TF1 (French TV) and Greek national television.

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11622
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints: Correcting the record
« Reply #10 on: June 19, 2015, 07:08:14 PM »
We'll post here some correctives to the libertarian  propaganda some gold bugs like to post as representative of libertarian thought.

Let's lift the bedsheets and meet these subhumans up close and personal. For your first consideration, the former Repug/Libertarian candidate for Lt. Gov. in Virginia (thankfully defeated), Rev. E.W. Jackson:
EW Jackson: Charleston Shooting Result Of Anti-Christian Climate Created By Gays, Obama

EW Jackson: Charleston Shooting Result Of Anti-Christian Climate Created By Gays, Obama

Anti-gay pastor and Fox News contributor E.W. Jackson said yesterday that people shouldn’t “jump to conclusions” that the Charleston shooting was “some sort of racial hate crime.”

Instead, Jackson told radio host John Fredericks that the shooting may have been a result of the “growing hostility and antipathy to Christianity and what this stands for, the biblical worldview about sexual morality and other things.”

Just in case it wasn’t clear what Jackson was talking about, he went on to claim that gay people, President Obama and liberals in academia are the ones destroying these traditional values.

In an appearance on “Fox & Friends” yesterday, Jackson similarly downplayed the racial aspect of the massacre, despite the fact that witnesses and people close to the suspect have all said that the shooter was motivated by racial hate.

Jackson, a Virginia GOP politician, also went on a Twitter tirade claiming that “intolerant” liberals are “filled with hatred like [Dylann] Roof”:

FILED UNDER

PEOPLE:

E.W. Jackson

TOPICS:

Anti-Gay

- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ew-jackson-charleston-shooting-result-anti-christian-climate-created-gays-obama#sthash.P6UHh3na.dpuf


Let's be quite clear: this is who they are.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11622
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints: A Corrective
« Reply #11 on: June 19, 2015, 07:11:48 PM »
« Last Edit: June 19, 2015, 07:13:52 PM by Surly1 »
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11622
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints: A Corrective
« Reply #12 on: June 19, 2015, 07:14:46 PM »
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11622
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints: A Needed Corrective
« Reply #13 on: June 19, 2015, 07:21:18 PM »
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Petty Tyrant

  • Cannot be Saved
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 4573
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Ideas and Viewpoints
« Reply #14 on: June 20, 2015, 03:42:14 AM »
The black pastor says wait for the facts because the massacre happened in a church it may be religion not race. I had the same thought myself. He suggests some liberal people are intolerant if you do not share their view and seem ready to commit hate crime on him. Is he right or wrong when you call a black pastor who calls a spade a spade subhuman?

The bible clearly condemns homosexuality. There is no ambiguity about it. I believe this arose in a time when the edict to go forth and multiply was crucial to survival in a time of tribal massacres, although it is also part of prophesy of end times. Homosexuality put the israelites at a disadvantage and was therefore anathema.

This man is entitled to interpret the bible literally,  chances are he is a latent homosexual as it seems the majority of homophobes are. He doesnt have to interpret or rewrite the bible to be an acceptable christian.

There is no question that liberal academics have waged war in family values I agree with him on that. When u cite a majority of men in libertarian party ask yourself how your ideology treats men. When u cite a majority of white membership ask yourself how your ideology treats whites.

I see so many comments all the same about this "ideology of victimology". Females with family values rejecting feminism saying they are not victims. Mothers who want to educate their daughters about sex themselves rather than a syllabus of smut. Men afraid of getting involved because the risks are too high.

 to be in college  today or graduating college is different.  If you are female,  black, disabled, and lesbian you hold 4 aces in your hand for purposes of debating or hiring. being a white man is fine if your career is already established and u can count on the females in your friends and family not to have you imprisoned for rape if you forget to seek consent before touching them or they had a glass of wine or change of heart. but this is the reality facing the young male today. Hes playing for his life holding a dud hand. politicians and govts on the right are just as responsible as those on the left in allowing this state of affairs,  but the driving force of these policies is out of academia and this is seen as entirely left Which is why reverand jacksons sympathies strike a chord for a lot of people out there.

« Last Edit: June 20, 2015, 03:59:03 AM by Uncle Bob »
ELEVATE YOUR GAME

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
3119 Views
Last post May 15, 2014, 08:38:01 PM
by Petty Tyrant
Against Libertarian Brutalism

Started by Jeffrey Tucker Geopolitics

13 Replies
1673 Views
Last post August 25, 2015, 02:37:43 PM
by Surly1
2 Replies
451 Views
Last post December 01, 2015, 02:42:24 PM
by Eddie