Posts Tagged ‘dictatorship’

Who causes poverty?

June 28, 2014

Latinos cause poverty? Depends on which Latinos or Latin Americans, same as North Americans. Richest man in the world is Carlos Sims. But they have had their own versions of left-fascists, and residual poverty leaving them helpless.

The U.S. has enjoyed a history of traditional cultural importance of individual rights and free market principles and the robber barons are never capable of wreaking the havoc that governments do, and have historically done, every time and every place.
Foreign aid given to these governments, like Dambisa Moyo wrote, corrupts them, engenders obeisance to the oligarch interests here that use money they stole from us. Without the political payoffs of government to government, the politicians and political powers of those countries would have incentive to let their own economies generate a better tax base.
Maybe that’s what motivates Honduras with their new economic zones. After the United States joined the world in condemning Honduras for defending themselves against another socialist Cuban-Chavista tyrant, including the US Ambassador promoting dictator Zelaya’s plans and even helping plan the takeover, they figured they should get ready to take care of themselves.
After all, even the Chinese finally figured out there was no way to command the masses into prosperity.

 

June 21, 2014

Lincoln did not end slavery, nor was that his intention. He ordered cold-blooded murder on draft protestors, had reporters jailed for writing against that war, he ordered the enslavement of tens of thousands with conscription, the most odious enslavement because it orders you to kill and put your life in the gravest danger.

 

The “people of the Prince that shall come” of Daniel 9 have been preparing the ground for centuries for the plans to have their one lord over all. Just like it is now, slavery was their excuse for a moral cover for themselves.

 

Greenbacks. Turning the federal government into a national government. Increase national power over all the locals north and south. Truncate the northern secession movements by taking their best recruitment tool from them. The FEDERAL military services remained segregated but unequal until Truman began integrating them after WWII as part of their strategy to confuse the vote.

 

England was big traders with the South, but the “secret bankers” were playing both sides, AS ALWAYS. I’ve spoken with people in families of power south of the border, and the powerful players always contribute to all political players that might come into some power. The best-paid politicians are complaining about money buying elections, while taking money from Big Money Changers.

 

Nationalizing and centralizing political control nationalized all the conversations, so here comes Jekyll Island and the Federal Reserve Act. Adios freedom.

Go for 100% freedom from aggression and theft but take what you can get.

June 7, 2014

Tom Bell said he is “cautiously optimistic”. With the kind of hell that the world-government-statist control freaks put Honduras through in 2009 when they rebelled against their program, you can’t blame them for wanting to go under the radar.

That, said, I don’t have any illusions about Honduran politicians any more than others, although 2009 was a bit refreshing. I know more than you about them. My wife is from there and was one and wanted out from the first day she got in. And has nothing but an attempt to murder her and the children to show.

I think in 2009 the politicians actually just buckled under the pressure of wives, husbands, adult children, cousins, lots of friends, most of the LOCAL press that refused to march to international orders, ALL the Protestant leaders, ALL the Catholic clergy in the country almost, their chambers of commerce, the UNIONS (except for the Marxist dictated PUBLIC teachers’ union, albeit with great numbers of teachers dissenting, ALL private schools, their equivalent of a bar association (lawyers), and ALL but 4 of the Congressmen.

Congressmen and others involved in the effort travelled to South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, and other places that moved from poverty to prosperity.

Lobo, not so honest himself, had asked for suggestions from various sectors on how to escape poverty. My suggestion to the representative from the expat community that was invited to contribute, was education, technology, gold currency base, and among other things, a study of what was successful elsewhere.

My understanding is that some folks from Universidad Franciso Marroquin, a school that teaches Austrian economics theory, also participated in the planning of the zones.

I say, with Wendy of Daily Bell and many others, preach the actual radical solution of the NAP, anarcho-capitalism, and complete economic freedom from aggression and theft, but take everything you can get. Ron Paul voted for every single tax reduction that came along, including the ones with labels like “exemption”. but we all know he wanted to abolish them all.

 

 

Second Amendment: Did they mean to protect the right of only governments to arm themselves? Really?

May 30, 2014

Mr. P. H. would have his readers believe that the Second Amendment was meant to ONLY protect the right of the *government* to “bear arms” for the protection of a “free state”!

Yessir, they say, the Founding Fathers knew that without a constitution that guaranteed the right of the government to bear arms, why, the poor Congress and the poor Executive and the poor government-financed Army and the militia that they organized would be left defenseless! Nobody would let them arm the police! How could they have a standing army!

You heard right. They do agree that these rights are for all individuals, and that the fourteenth amendment recognized that these rights extend to individual rights from all governments (federal, state, local):

–free exercise of religion
–freedom from a religious establishment (official church)
–speech
–press
–assembly
–petition the Government for redress
–freedom from forced hosting of soldiers, whether in time of peace or war both
–to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable and warrantless searches and seizures
–no holding to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury
–freedom from double jeopardy
–to refuse to be forced to testify against one’s self
–to one’s life, liberty AND property, except by *due process* of law (not arbitrary process)
–freedom eminent domain except for a public purpose
–fair compensation for properties seized under eminent domain
–if accused, a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of peers, to confront witnesses against him, assistance of counsel, and to obtain witnesses in his own favor
–and, no excessive bail
–ALL other rights even if not enumerated

But some people say that there is one that was included in this list of INDIVIDUAL rights that was the ONE exception. That is, they say, that the right to defend your freedom against your own government is a right that they reserved for only the government itself!?!

Alexañdr Solzhenitsyn on the Communist war against workers, and the Communist-Capitalist alliance

May 4, 2014

I found this excerpt from Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s address to the AFL-CIO convention in 1975:

http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalism/monteith/1-communist-capitalist-2007.htm

You cannot understand the tragic events that are taking place throughout the world today, or the terrible events that lie ahead, unless you understand the alliance that exists between the leaders of the communist world, and the CFR-Globalists who control our nation. Alexandr Solzhenitsyn discussed that relationship when he addressed the AFL-CIO convention in Washington, D.C. on June 30, 1975, but he didn’t understand it. Since Alexandr Solzhenitsyn’s June 30, 1975, address is not readily available on the Internet, the first segment of his talk is reproduced in this letter:

Alexañdr Solzhenitsyn
June 30, 1975

“…Workers of the world unite.” Who of us has not heard this slogan, which has been sounding through the world for 125 years? Today you can find it in any Soviet pamphlet as well as in every issue of Pravda. But never have the leaders of the Communist revolution in the Soviet Union made application of these words sincerely and in their full meaning. When many lies have accumulated over the decades, we forget the radical and basic lie which is not on the leaves of the tree, but at its very roots. Now, it’s almost impossible to remember or to believe….

For instance, I recently published – had reprinted – a pamphlet from the year 1918. This was a precise record of a meeting of all representatives of the Petrograd factories, that being the city known in our country as the ‘cradle of the Revolution.’

I repeat, this was March, 1918 - only four months after the October Revolution - and all the representatives of the Petrograd factories were cursing the Communists, who had deceived them in all of their promises.

What is more, not only had they abandoned Petrograd to cold and hunger, themselves having fled from Petrograd to Moscow, but had given orders to machine-gun the crowds of workers in the courtyards of the factories who were demanding the election of independent factory committees. … Scarcely anyone now can recall the crushing of the Petrograd strikes in 1921, or the shooting of workers in Kolpino in the same year.

Among the leadership, the Central Committee of the Communist Party, at the beginning of the Revolution, all were émigré intellectuals who had returned, after the uprisings had already broken out in Russia, in order to carry through the Communist Revolution. One of them was a genuine worker, a highly skilled lathe operator until the last day of his life. This was Alexander Shliapnikov. Who knows that name today?…

In the years before the Revolution it was Shliapnikov who ran the whole Communist Party in Russia – not Lenin, who was an émigré…. In 1921, he headed the Workers’ Opposition which was charging the Communist leadership with betraying the workers’ interests, with crushing and oppressing the proletariat and transforming itself into a bureaucracy.

Shliapnikov disappeared from sight. He was arrested somewhat later and since he firmly stood his ground he was shot in prison and his name is perhaps unknown to most people here today. But I remind you: Before the Revolution the head of the Communist Party of Russia was Shliapnikov, not Lenin.

Since that time, the working class has never been able to stand up for its rights, and in distinction from all the western countries our working class only receives what they hand out to it. It only gets handouts. It can not defend its simplest, everyday interests, and the least strike for pay or for better living conditions is viewed as counterrevolutionary…. This story will shortly be published in detail in your country in Gulag Archipelago, volume 3. It is a story of how workers went in a peaceful demonstration to the Party City Committee, carrying portraits of Lenin, to request a change in economic conditions. They fired at them with machine guns and dispersed the crowds with tanks. No family dared even to collect its wounded and dead, but all were taken away in secret by the authorities.

…since the Revolution, there’s never been such a thing as a free trade union….

The American workers’ movement has never allowed itself to be blinded and mistaken slavery for freedom….

When liberal thinkers and wise men of the West, who had forgotten the meaning of the word ‘liberty’, were swearing that in the Soviet Union there were no concentration camps at all, the American Federation of Labor published in 1947, a map of our concentration camps….

But just as we feel ourselves your allies here, there also exists another alliance… one which is well-grounded and easy to understand. This is the alliance between our Communist leaders and your capitalists.

This alliance is not new. The very famous Armand Hammer, who is flourishing here today, laid the basis for this when he made the first exploratory trip into Russia, still in Lenin’s time, in the very first years of the Revolution. He was extremely successful in this intelligence mission and since that time for all these 50 years, we observe continuous and steady support by the businessmen of the West of the Soviet Communist leaders.

Their clumsy and awkward economy, which could never overcome its own difficulties by itself, is continually getting material and technological assistance. The major construction projects in the initial five-year plan were built exclusively with American technology and materials. Even Stalin recognized that two-thirds of what was needed was obtained from the West. And if today the Soviet Union has powerful military and police forces - in a country which is by contemporary standards poor – they are used to crush our movement for freedom in the Soviet Union - and we have western capital to thank for this also.

…Certain of your businessmen, on their own initiative, established an exhibition of criminological technology in Moscow. This was the most recent and elaborate technology, which here, in your country, is used to catch criminals, to bug them, to spy on them, to photograph them, to tail them, to identify criminals. This was taken to Moscow, to an exhibition, in order that the Soviet KGB agents could study it, as if not understanding what sort of criminals, who would be hunted by the KGB.

The Soviet government was extremely interested in this technology, and decided to purchase it. And your businessmen were quite willing to sell it. Only when a few sober voices here raised an uproar against it was this deal blocked. Only for this reason it didn’t take place. But … Two or three nights were enough for the KGB there to look through it and to copy it. And if today, persons are being hunted down by the best and most advanced technology, for this, I can also thank your western capitalists.

This is something which is almost incomprehensible to the human mind: That burning greed for profit, which goes beyond all reason, all self-control, all conscience, only to get money….

Lenin foretold this whole process. Lenin, who spent most of his life living in the West and not in Russia, who knew the West much better than Russia, always wrote and said the western capitalists would do anything to strengthen the economy of the USSR. They will compete with each other to sell us goods cheaper and sell them quicker, so that the Soviets will buy from one rather than from the other. He said: They will bring it themselves without thinking about their future. And, in a difficult moment, at a party meeting in Moscow, he said:

‘Comrades, don’t panic, when things go very hard for us, we will give a rope to the bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie will hang itself.’

Then, Karl Radek, whom you may have heard of, who was a very resourceful wit, said: ‘Vladimir Ilyich, but where are we going to get enough rope to hang the whole bourgeoisie?’

Lenin effortlessly replied, ‘They’ll supply us with it.’

Through the decades of the 20s, the 30s, the 40s, the 50s, the whole Soviet press wrote: Western capitalism -
- your end is near. But it was as if the capitalists had not heard, could not understand, could not believe this.

Nikita Khrushchev came here and said, ‘We will bury you!’ They didn’t believe that, either. They took it as a joke.” 

And then came Gorbachev, after the Soviet Union had dissolved, and warned in a speech to the Chicago commodities exchange, “If you think socialism is dead, you have another thing coming”.

Psalm 2 talks about this unholy alliance between the political leaders of Communist nations and the political leaders of the capitalist world:

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying,

Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.

10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.

11 Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

It was so way back then, but this chapter seems to foresee, foreshadow, the more organized secret alliances in the highest circles of political power  action today obsessed with more power.

To add to Solzhenitsyn’s examples of how the socialist regimes are all about exploiting the working class and the peasants, and not at all about helping them, of course their war against the workers and against unions, even the ones that their own ideologues have taken over, has continued, and that is exactly what it is, a war against the workers and against everybody else, with the goal of taking all power over all the subject populations.

In Venezuela, the biggest organization of workers’ unions joined the biggest capitalist association, Fedecamaras, to go on strike against the Chavez government and its taking on the role of dictatorship. Almost the entire work force went on strike. The Communist leaders’ war against workers in the real world had found a way adapted to the calls for “democracy”, and simply go hook and crook to win “elections” by fraud when they cannot win with majorities. But since when is a majority vote so sacred? There is no more wisdom in a majority vote than a minority vote!

Historians will probably put semantical sugar on the fact that Chavez-government agents and partisans showered cold-blooded murderous gunfire into the million-strong crowd of  absolutely peaceful marchers protesting Chavez dictates and power grabs. They were caught on video, and the Chavez-created courts watched those videos and cleared all charges against the murderous thugs who were so filmed, using the flimsy excuse that they could not match a shot on the film with any particular hit.

So having a minimum knowledge of real-world evidence is not required in a Chavez court, or more likely compliance with dictatorship priorities is required. We all know that in the United States, anybody caught on camera doing something like that would get plenty of jail time.

The kings of the earth have indeed set themselves, but The Lord Himself shall have them in derision.

Ron Paul says Obama’s Drone Wars Undermine American Values

April 28, 2014

His comments are found at the Daily Bell:

http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/35250/Ron-Paul-Obamas-Drone-Wars-Undermine-American-Values/

One big thing I like about Daily Bell is that they carefully analyze events, look for context, and make clear that what you see –in the regular news media fare- is not always what you get. No WSYWIG there, no sir. And it’s early to call for war crimes tribunals, as there is not sufficient infrastructure (yet anyway) to enforce them. Education will do its job. Ron Paul’s campaign to educate the American body politic is a good example of the greater effectiveness of this. The numbers of both those who are aware, both veterans in forums and publications, and the newly aware, will continue to grow despite the hysterical efforts of the Powers That Be to explain everything in Controlled Media in ways that pretend that there is no liberty movement. As long as there is a sector of the Internet that is free, and it is still possible to spread facts and the real stories at these electronic speeds, it will continue to grow. In fact, it will continue on in some form, even if they implement Lieberman’s wet dream of an Internet “off-switch…like China has.” Like China!

The USA has certainly supported fascists, drug lords and terrorists many places, and “installed” a few. But as a libertarian anarcho-capitalist myself, it is evident to me most left-fascists and libertarians alike, sometimes ascribe too much power to the CIA overseas. I call libertarians especially to telescope to a view of these world events from a higher altitude. I’ll bet you that some analysts within the intelligence apparatus have an inflated view of their own power.

For example, no matter how much Hugo Chavez and later Maduro blamed CIA plots for what Hondurans did in 2009, whatever the CIA did was irrelevant. My wife is from there, and it made me nervous that it might become another Venezuelan vassal state. If they paid out money here or there, they totally wasted all of it, because the overwhelming majority of the people of that country were dedicated to getting rid of the guy they supposedly elected earlier. It was a bit of a surprise even to me, since most of the poor are inclined toward looting the rich. I believe it’s possible Hugo Chavez won the first election, even though in my opinion he’s perfectly capable of committing fraud.

But I realized later that even many of the poor in Honduras are somewhat educated now about events elsewhere, and there is an Internet effect there too. It helped that apparently the media seems somewhat less subservient to the politicians, and some of the local elite families saw socialism as inimical to their own interests. There were probably a few of them also “hedging their bets” and secretly supporting the auto-coup plotter Zelaya, including one famous perennial presidential candidate who was accused very publicly of smuggling him into the Brazilian embassy.

Not all poor people are stupid or ignorant. Hondurans who hate poverty and who are capable of thinking analytically at all, they do NOT want an economy like Cuba’s or Venezuela’s. They know theirs has been corrupt, but they would rather not jump into the abyss of permanent poverty just like that. More so the middle class there.

Hillary Clinton made a personal call to Zelaya and told him to resign, and so open the door for the socialist president that the American ambassador had supported in the efforts to establish his lifetime national socialist Chavista fiefdom. Yes he did. What the CIA does is secret, but in the small-town social environment of a country like Honduras, not everything can be kept secret. Hugo Llorens appeared in some of the televised propaganda for the propaganda cover for the overt stage of the auto-coup, the takeover manifest”referendum”.

The “demonstrations” in favor of Zelaya were padded with paid bodies. Chavez poured so much money in that the lempira rose a full 10% against the dollar for a few weeks while they tried to make a show of it for the world.

The CIA may have been doing its thing there, no doubt, but keep in mind that the FSS and FIS (successors to the KGB and the GRU) are not exactly dead, and Chavez was all about intervention himself. He offered President Micheletti $3 million dollars to resign, poured money in for marches (that never reached the numbers of the pro-Micheletti, anti-Zelaya, anti-Chavez, or even the irate protests against CNN and its reporter, who was distorting the situation there.

Socialism does not need any CIA intervention to collapse under its own destructive weight. The CIA often does, always does, intervene for its own purposes. But let us not kid ourselves. Sometimes it may act in a manner you least expect, also. Moles are not rare anywhere, and the Venona papers of course corroborated the accusations of Senator McCarthy that the State Department was infiltrated by outright Communists that reported to the Soviet Union.

And who can doubt the jubilation of East Germans when the Berlin Wall fell and they were able to join the “more free” market and prosperity of West Germany?

Who can doubt that 90% of North Koreans would seize the chance to migrate to South Korea?

Who can doubt that the United States today just might have more Cubans than Cuba itself? And remember, Cuba cannot blame the embargo either, since every other nation in the world allows trade with them.

And even with the case of Chile, almost nobody ever hears the fact that the Congress in Chile, lacking a constitutional method to impeach and dethrone the dictatorship of Salvador Allende, voted 81 to 47, on August 22, 1973, for a resolution demanding the immediate cessation of Allende’s unconstitutional actions, that he cease arming leftist cadres, and a series of other demands, PLUS they demanded the removal of Allende from office. The military did nothing until the Congress demanded it, because of the economic damage and the violence that the regime had propagated.

This was even dubbed a “trade secret” by leftist journalists in Latin America: That they begrudgingly knew, admitted among themselves, that Pinochet’s actions had resulted in a much more prosperous Chile. And that was before they joined the G-7 club of “developed” nations.

Let me restate here though that I am absolutely opposed to US intervention abroad, all of it.

But many actions seem even engineered to hurt American interests, of which drone strikes are a “striking” example. Even if the orders that go forth for those actions are not purposed to hurt the country, they may be an example of God’s warnings that he would “turn back” the weapons in the hands of a nation under judgment. (Jeremiah 21:4)

Intellectual Property Monopolies Clarified

March 22, 2014

Tibor Machan always has something interesting to say in his columns at the Daily Bell web site. For example, his article “Intellectual Property, Anyone?”.

One comment pointed out that one reason that many intellectuals, even some libertarians, defend “intellectual property” monopolies, is “the envy that the intellectual suffer for the successful, troglodyte businessman”…

That may be true for many, but not for all.. But there is at least an idea that other parties who use someone’s new idea are somehow “freeloading”. I do believe in “credit where credit is due”, but this is impossible to do “justly” in the long run when you create incentives for “rent-seeking”. That’s what a copyright and patent regime does , especially in a land of corporations, or, the present land of corporations.

It inevitably becomes a battle of wits and trickery. Two people who have the same idea, but one of them lives closer to the patent office. Is that “fair”? I’m a software engineer, but some of my code is generic functions that I’ve written before. Whose code is that?

The US Constitution included the mention of copyright and patent, with a parenthetical clause that says the purpose was utilitarian. It a land of individual artisans, maybe, maybe not.

The most convincing argument, though, against “intellectual property”, in my opinion, is the total, absolute, unequivocal requirement by definition of an agency (government, mob, dictator, etc.) with powers to violate the non-aggression principle, PLUS the total, absolute, unequivocal arbitrary and capricious nature of where the boundaries are on “intellectual property”. That is, how far does it reach? How many years?

One science fiction writer, Robert Sawyer I think, wrote once that he thought copyrights should be limitless, without expiration, and inheritable to all generations!

This is all because we have come to think of copyright in this way. I have read that before the introduction of the printing press, there was no such thing as copyright, and copyright itself was “invented” by kings and authorities for the purposes of censorship. Think the “stamp act”. Think permits for the First Amendment akin to permits for the Second.

Although Thomas Cahill in his book “How the Irish Saved Civilization” pointed out that the reverence for books that the Irish learned from St. Patrick led to a noble’s exile for sneaking into his neighbor’s palace in the dark of night to copy the neighbor’s books in the dark!

The idea of monopoly rights for inventions for utilitarian purposes is also part and parcel with the idea that a monopoly of force over a bounded geographical area –or unbounded, as some world dictatorship advocates would have it– is necessary for scientific, artistic, and technological advancement.

One example demonstrates the lie of the collective utilitarian argument used in the USA Constitution. Tim Berners-Lee, and hypertext (and related ideas), and his colleagues, public-domaining the Web, and we all can see the results.

A more expansive article of evidence is the “open source” movement (as in the Open Source Foundation, which grew out of the idea of “free software”, with “free as in free speech, not free beer”, Richard Stallman’s preaching point. Tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of programmers are contributing to projects that by now ALL of us use.

Linux servers dominate the nodes used to carry the Internet. Firefox and Chrome and other freely shared browsers are pushing Internet Explorer out of the way. More and more of us are using Open Office or Libre Office or the Google applications to do their documents. This has inspired a parallel movement to do the same thing with hardware inventions, but not just computer hardware, but physical inventions. Open Source programs for 3-D printing for example.

And note that the barriers for entry into the class of patent-holders also holds back new inventions. With the new law Obama recently signed, it’s also a matter of who gets to the patent office first, and no matter if you had prior art, no matter if it was already in the public market. Get the patent and start trolling.

Another argument against patents as incentives for invention is the obvious fact of incentives to suppress them. A new energy patent holder (see infinite-energy.com, and use the hyphen!) might be tempted to sell it to an oil company for a billion bucks, and the oil company might consider it a bargain! And don’t forget the rumor of the light bulb that never burns out. Amazing how long those lights last in your car’s dashboard. And remember Tesla’s suppressed inventions. He might have been able to continue some of that today, with crowd-sourcing.

But the clincher, in my opinion, is the fact that no matter how you might enforce copyright or patent monopoly in the real world, there is no “natural” way at all, no “self-evident” way at all, to do it without arbitrary and capricious decree by somebody against any and all others.

//

Amish family flees the United States to avoid medical dictatorship

March 12, 2014

An Amish family has fled the United States to avoid medical dictatorship:

http://reason.com/reasontv/2014/03/11/amish-family-defends-medical-decisions-f#comment

There have been a number of communities in history who were “sort of” libertarians, although the Amish are outstanding examples of living without the “heavy hand of the law”. Their culture could thrive splendidly with a lot less interference.

There are cultures where the rules have been self-enforcing. In the time of the judges (book of Judges), there was no government, no police force, no king, no tribal chief. Elders might emerge esteemed for advice and counsel, Thou shalt not steal was revered as a command from the hand of God himself, so property rights were SACRED.

Even the much-maligned laws of Moses, including the more “draconian” measures, were avoidable by simply opting to live outside of them, and many did. Plus, it was all on the honor system.

When they were conquered, there would be a leader gather an army, kick out the invaders, then disband back to the farms. s

But “the people” demanded a king. Prophet Samuel warned them: A king will put insufferable burdens on you, he will take your good harvests for himself, he will send your sons to war. God DOES NOT WANT A GOVERNMENT MIDDLE-MAN FOR ENFORCEMENT!

//

It’s wrong to force someone to do a service involuntarily

March 1, 2014

That’s why it’s called “involuntary servitude”. The term was used for chattel slavery of recent centuries (still persisting in some places) but it also applies to any service that a victim is forced to perform under threat of confiscations or prison or anything else, by a neighbor, a neighborhood crime syndicate, a political movement or a government.

This is my reaction to somebody’s condemnation of “state’s rights”:

http://rcooley123.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/when-states-rights-are-wrong/

I say it is an outrageous wrong to require the Jewish owner of a bakery to create a cake with Nazi symbols for a Nazi celebration under threat of government-enforced extortion penalties. .

It is an outrageous wrong to require the Muslim owner of the bakery to create one that shows a pig on his imam’s grave.

It is an outrageous wrong to require a rape victim to do a birthday cake celebrating her rapist.

It is an outrageous wrong to require an Armenian print-shop owner to publish a book praising the Turkish treatment of Armenians in the early 20th century, or to require the Turkish counterpart to publish the Armenian version.

Extortion is a crime, whether an individual does it, a crime syndicate, or a government.

Compelling a person to perform a service under threat of monetary confiscation or imprisonment is a criminal violation of the victim’s rights, no matter how noble you think your cause is.

Theft is theft, it is not equality

//

Woman wants to force Muslim business to give her a haircut

February 28, 2014

Muslim refuses to give a woman a haircut for reasons of faith, woman sues to force the business to serve both men and women:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2012/11/15/woman_denied_haircut_goes_to_human_rights_tribunal_of_ontario.html

(She is a lesbian who wanted a man’s type of haircut)

This has an easy solution: the non-aggression principle.

If you believe in the non-aggression principle especially, it’s a matter of the freedom from being forced, compelled, to do something under threat.

You don’t have the right to stick a gun in my face and get me to do a day’s work without pay. Slavery for a day.

No matter what some tyrannical law says, no matter whether some illegitimate “government” or police state sycophants say….

Nobody has a right to force a Jewish bakery to sell them a cake with Nazi symbols on it.

Nobody has a right to force a woman to sell them a cake that quote Dan Brown’s favorite fraudulent “feminist gospel” with “Women cannot go to heaven”.

Nobody has a right to force a black artist to paint the slogan “Whites are superior’.

Nobody has a right to force a barber to give a service he does not want to give.

Compelling you to perform a service that you would not do voluntarily, is called involuntary by definition, as in involuntary servitude.

//


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 172 other followers