More News and Commentary

Ryan McMaken: You Support Ukraine’s Independence? Then You Support Secession.

Megan Redshaw: Moderna Asks FDA to Authorize Covid Vaccines for Kids Under 6, Changes Efficacy Claims to Meet Guidelines

Andrew Napolitano: The Problems With Disney and Florida

Nathan Stone: Don’t Be Afraid to Call It Grooming

Hans-Hermann Hoppe: Decentralized and Neutral

The Last Refuge: The Media Meltdown Over the Possibility of Free Speech Twitter is Very Revealing, Meanwhile Twitter Employees Fear Loss of Censorship Mechanisms and Leaked Audio of Twitter Executive Reaction, and Deep State Response, Dept of Homeland Security Will Establish Disinformation Board with Obvious Agenda

Breitbart:  GOP Rips ‘Dystopian’ DHS Plans for Disinformation Governance Board, ‘Orwellian Abuse of Power’ by Biden Admin

Michelle Malkin: Orrin Hatch’s Beltway Barnacle Legacy

Igor Chudov: Moderna Knew Vaccinated People Will Never Acquire Proper Immunity after Breakthrough Infections

Madhava Setty: FDA Rubber-Stamps Remdesivir for Infants Without Evidence of Safety, Efficacy

Doug Bandow: Our Dangerous Donbas Dalliance

Jacob Hornberger: JFK’s Rejection of the Anti-Russia Animus

Joseph Solis-Mullens: Where the Truth Is Hidden: Debating the Current State of the US Armed Forces

Charles Burris: From Darwin To Hitler: The Origins of Scientific Racism

Jon Rappoport: My New Podcast: Kill-Shot Psychiatry, George Carlin, Hero Peter Breggin

And John Kline: The Judges and Judicial Rulings at the Heart of Wokeness

NH Free State Activist Carla Gericke Testifies on Behalf of Secession

Carla Gericke is a libertarian activist and New Hampshire Free Stater who gives testimony here in favor of putting a question on the ballot for New Hampshire voters to decide whether to secede and become an independent nation, just as the colonies seceded from the British.

Like the colonists’ oppressors King George and all his minions, our oppressors are slithering in the DC Swamp.

I wrote about Carla’s 2016 run for the state senate. In her 2020 run she was the Republican candidate and received 45% of the vote.

As I have said many times, this U.S. territory is just too big to be all one single political unit or country, at 3.8 million square miles and a population of 330,000,000 people.

It is time for a peaceful, voluntary decentralization and completely dismantle the totalitarian central planning Leviathan apparatus in Washington that has already destroyed, impoverished and murdered many, many lives.

Here is a video thread of Carla Gericke speaking on behalf of New Hampshire secession. (It might take a little time for each video to load. There should be a total of 4 videos.)

Do We Need the Supreme Swamp to Decide Whether Gov May Forcibly Inject Us with Drugs?

I’m trying to write something about Amerika’s growing authoritarianism and fascism with the Covid psy-op and the Soviet January 6th psy-op, but I’m doing everything I can to avoid writing about that stuff right now. So here are some good tweets I’ve seen on the Supreme Bureaucrats.

Here is Reason on Sonia’s idiocy.

And also, this morning I heard Glenn Beck make a good point: not just “vaccines” (the Pfizer/Moderna mRNA which isn’t a vaccine but just another pharma drug), but ANY drugs including psychiatric drugs, the gubmint will want the power to forcibly shove down our throats. Over my dead body, de Blasio, Adams, Wu, Newsom, et al. fascist scum.

It doesn’t matter how the Supremes rule on the vaccine mandate cases, because we already know what morons and statists the 9 lettered and robed imbeciles are from their past statements and decisions. The Supreme Court needs to be ended and thrown into the dustbin of history along with the entire useless U.S. government.

We will be better off with a decentralized society after we’ve seen all the evidence against central planning we need to see. See a recent article on all that by Karen Kwiatkowski. And by the way, a bill to put state independence i.e. divorce DC on the ballot in New Hampshire is moving through the state legislature as we speak.

More News and Commentary

Chris Hedges: The Most Important Battle for Press Freedom of Our Time

Life Site: Audio Tapes Reveal Hospitals Are Depriving Covid Patients of Nutrition, Intentionally Isolating Them

Michelle Malkin: Who’s Choking Off Your Children?

Elizabeth Economou: No End in Sight to Jay Inslee’s Reign of Terror Against the Unvaccinated in Washington State

Jon Rappoport: Behind Closed Doors: Medical Research Labs

The Last Refuge: FDA Panel Votes Unanimously to Approve 5 to 11-year-old Vaccinations: “We’re Never Going to Learn About How Safe This Vaccine Is Unless We Start Giving It, That’s Just The Way It Goes”…

Whitney Webb: Covid-19: Moderna Gets Its Miracle

Ryan McMaken: Three Reasons to Start Taking Secession Seriously

Andrew Napolitano: A Press Afraid to Be Free?

Joseph Mercola: How Health Officials Accelerated the Diabetes Pandemic

Gateway Pundit: Survey: 34 Percent of White College Students Lied About Their Race in College Admissions Forms — The Liz Warren Syndrome in Action

Mollie Hemingway and Tristan Justice: Biden FBI Joins Pelosi In Blocking GOP From Investigating January 6

Tate Fegley: The Military’s Social Policy Suggests a Lack of Real-World Threats

And Doug Casey: Why the Carbon Hysteria is a Huge Threat to Your Personal Freedom and Financial Wellbeing

More News and Commentary

James Bovard: Biden’s Wrecking Ball for Financial Privacy

U.K. Guardian: Boys More at Risk from Pfizer Jab Side-Effects Than from Covid, Suggests Study.

Paul Craig Roberts: Coronavirus World Update Lies for Big Pharma Causing More People to Die

Vasko Kohlmayer: Reality vs Gaslighting: The Vaccine Failure Stares Us Straight in the Eyes

Jeff Deist: The Prospects for Soft Secession in America

Jacob Hornberger: The FFF Book on the Kennedy Autopsy Selected for Amazon’s Prime Reading Program

Charles Burris: Gore Vidal, Our American Cicero

Project Veritas: Covid Vaccine Exposed, Part II: FDA Official: ‘Blow Dart’ African Americans with Covid Vaccine is ‘Where We’re Going…Just Shoot Everyone’ … Calls for a ‘Nazi Germany’ Style ‘Registry’ of Unvaccinated Americans: ‘Think About It Like The Jewish Star’

Laurence Vance: Medicine and the Constitution

And Gateway Pundit: Worst Attack Since Civil War?… Newly Released US Capitol Surveillance Video Shows Jan. 6 Protest Inside Capitol Was More of an Open House than Insurrection

Will New Hampshire Secede from the Dysfunctional States of America?

A New Hampshire state legislator has filed for a constitutional amendment to put a question on the 2022 state ballot for New Hampshire to leave the United States of America, a NHExit.

According to WND, the Amendment would read, “New Hampshire peaceably declares independence from the United States and immediately proceeds as a sovereign nation. All other references to the United States in this constitution, state statutes, and regulations are nullified.”

I looked through the New Hampshire Libertarian Party twitter to see if there has been any reaction:

Just a reminder, the American Declaration of Independence reads:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Any of that sound familiar?

Happy Secession Day!

On the LRC blog, Thomas DiLorenzo linked to one of his past articles, Happy Secession Day, and I thought it was appropriate now, for this day at this time.

From the article:

… America’s most prominent secessionist, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, was very clear about what he was saying: Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and whenever that consent is withdrawn, it is the right of the people to “alter or abolish” that government and “to institute a new government.” The word “secession” was not a part of the American language at that time, so Jefferson used the word “separation” instead to describe the intentions of the American colonial secessionists.

The Declaration is also a states’ rights document (not surprisingly, since Jefferson was the intellectual inspiration for the American states’ rights political tradition). This, too, is foreign to most Americans. But read the final paragraph of the Declaration which states:

“That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved; and that, as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and do all other things which independent states may of right do (emphasis in original).”

Each colony was considered to be a free and independent state, or nation, in and of itself. There was no such thing as “the United States of America” in the minds of the founders. The independent colonies were simply united for a particular cause: seceding from the British empire. Each individual state was assumed to possess all the rights that any state possesses, even to wage war and conclude peace. Indeed, when King George III finally signed a peace treaty he signed it with all the individual American states, named one by one, and not something called “The United States of America.” The “United States” as a consolidated, monopolistic government is a fiction invented by Lincoln and instituted as a matter of policy at gunpoint and at the expense of some 600,000 American lives during 1861—1865.

Instead of “Packing the Supreme Court,” Let’s UNpack the Supreme Court

OMG, Schumer, Nadler and Markey want to “pack the Supreme Court,” by adding 4 more Democrat “Justices” to the existing 9 Supreme Bureaucrats. They want to do this because they really believe that the current Court has a 6-3 “conservative” majority! Yes, they really believe that.

The reason that the Sheeplecrats want to “pack the Supreme Court” is because they are too impatient to wait for a “Justice” to retire (or die) and be replaced by one that’s more to their liking.

So they impatiently drool to ram their dictatorial mandates and tax-thefts down the throats of the people more quickly by getting a faux “Supreme” Court to rubber-stamp their agenda. And with HR 1 all future elections will belong to them, these thieves, cheaters, fraudsters, hooligans, barbarians and shysters.

And it isn’t just Democrats who are the criminals and thieves and extortionists, the Republicans are bad, too. (See Laurence Vance’s articles exposing the conservatives and Republicans‘ corruption, ignorance and hypocrisy, for example, when it comes to their proclaiming to promote “limited government,” “free markets” and “liberty.” i.e. they’re FOS just as much as the Democrats and “liberals.”)

No, rather than packing the Supreme Commissars, I say, let’s UNpack them, by just getting rid of the whole thing. They really suck, when you get right down to it.

The 9 robed goons are unreliable, unsupportive of the Constitution, incapable of defending liberty, and they are just all around nothing more than Soviet-like apparatchiks, quite frankly.

The truth is, what we have at the top of the U.S. so-called judicial system is a Supreme Swamp, because that is exactly what those “Justices” are, just another part of the Swamp in Washington.

The Supreme Court rarely comes to the side of the rights of the individual and private property against the threats and aggressions of the government and police.

For example, while some of the current “Justices” were not there 10 years ago, at that time the High Swamp high-fived the jailing and strip searching of arrestees who were abducted for non-arrestable offenses, such as walking a dog sans leash or for unpaid parking tickets.

The Republican appointees were the ones who voted to approve such criminal treatment of presumably innocent folks. Hence, “Rethuglicans.”

But “liberals” are also useless when it comes to civil liberties. Also around that time the Court rubber-stamped the government’s drug gestapo breaking into people’s home, terrorizing them and abducting them because police smelled marijuana and heard a toilet flushing, implying people were “destroying evidence,” even though such evidence was not that of an actual crime with an actual victim.

And obviously with an 8-1 decision, several of the “liberals” on the High Swamp agreed with the usual conservative authoritarian neanderthals, that the drug war police state is so important that we must allow government police to criminally and violently break into a home and terrorize and abduct innocent people for ingesting non-approved drugs. “Liberals” Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer joined the “conservative” neanderthals in this one, with Ruth Bader Ginsburg actually citing that dusty ol’ Fourth Amendment in her lone dissent.

Sorry, morons, the real and only legitimate ruling to that case is to rule the entire drug war unconstitutional, because the government involving itself in drugs is not authorized by the U.S. Constitution. And, does the individual own one’s own life and body or does the government own one’s life and body? Duh, Elena, Sonia, Clarence, et al.

The 9 robed Swamp Supremes are loathsome and corrupt, and are the lap dogs for the fascists in the White House and the communists in CONgress, and they are useless. Bought and paid for, or otherwise bribed to do the fascists bidding as well as being obedient State-worshiping ignoramuses, that is what these people are.

Chief “Justice” (sic) John Roberts suddenly switched his vote of ruling the ObamaCare law unconstitutional to his joining the Obama apparatchiks to approve the ObamaCare law and the individual mandate. Was Roberts threatened, or blackmailed? NSA whistleblower Russ Tice told how NSA abuses made high public officials susceptible to blackmail, and other NSA whistleblowers including Edward Snowden and William Binney backed those assertions.

They will be even worse now when they see government officials and juries deciding cases out of fear of being attacked by social activist thugs engaged in “peaceful” protests, and out of fear of their homes being burned to the ground.

And the Supreme Sheeple then approved ObamaCare a second time in 2015, and its subsidies, further empowering the criminal IRS. “The Affordable Care Act is here to stay,” said Barack Obomber, reinforced later by traitor John McCain who voted against repealing it.

The High Supreme Swamp also ruled against the Fifth Amendment in its Kelo decision to allow local governments to steal private property away from the owner and redistribute it over to other private citizens for financial profits. That was a no-brainer, but John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter, and the only remaining one of them left now Stephen Breyer thought otherwise.

And Scalia? An “Originalist”? Heh. Scalia of course sided with the drug war police state in the aforementioned decision, is questionable on the 2nd Amendment, rejected private property rights and self-ownership in favor of collectivist moral legislating, and obediently accepted the government’s bogus war on terror to justify violating the due process rights of detainees. (And, while he wasn’t endorsing internment camps, he even pointed out that internment camps à la World War II could return again in good ol’ USS of A.)

And Amy Coney Barrett? What a disappointment, even before she crawled up to the High Slimy Bench. In a lower court decision, Barrett sided with the other two fascists in her three-judge panel of the 7th Circus approving Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-McDonald’s) unconstitutional Covid lockdown orders and limits on gatherings.

As I pointed out in an earlier blog, constitutionalist pastor Chuck Baldwin noted that based on her previous opinions Barrett will probably rubber-stamp the COVID police state and forced vaccines, and probably the surveillance state as well.

All these Supreme Court “Justices” (sic) defend the police state, the national security state, and seem to obediently believe the government’s false flags and fabrications to justify enslaving and imprisoning the population to “protect” them from the foreign bogey man, and from their own vices.

Brett Kavanaugh. Yech. Total authoritarian apparatchik police statist swamp creature. Included in lower court rulings Kavanaugh voted in favor of CIA covering up of the JFK assassination, and other national security state interests.

I wrote in an earlier blog on Kavanaugh’s deference to the national security state regarding the bulk collection of telephony metadata. This Cato article quotes Kavanaugh’s lower court opinion from 2015:

The Fourth Amendment allows governmental searches and seizures without individualized suspicion when the Government demonstrates a sufficient “special need” – that is, a need beyond the normal need for law enforcement – that outweighs the intrusion on individual liberty

The Fourth Amendment says nothing about there being a “special need” of government law enforcement that “outweighs” the right to be secure.

Does the Fourth Amendment say regarding our right to be secure, “except for a special need of law enforcement”? Nope.

Kavanaugh writes (with my comments inserted):

In my view, that critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by this program. The Government’s program does not capture the content of communications [Yes it does, with phone calls and emails as well!], but rather the time and duration of calls, and the numbers called.

Besides being ignorant of the feds’ ongoing criminal intrusions against innocent people, Kavanaugh also cites “drug testing of students, roadblocks to detect drunk drivers, border checkpoints, and security screening at airports” as examples of allowable violations of the Fourth Amendment.

In a different case, while the Court’s “liberals” in the majority voted to protect the right of the people and their cell phone data to not be tracked, the neanderthal “conservatives” who love the police state say, no, we think that gestapo Amerikan police goons must be permitted to track people’s cell phone data without a warrant, without reasonable suspicion, because we really don’t support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America and its Fourth Amendment, as we swore an oath to do. (And that case included Neil Gorsuch with the other conservatards who love the police state. So much for that guy.)

So, the Government Supremacists cite “exigent circumstances” when they know the gubmint goons are violating someone’s Fourth Amendment rights but they don’t care, such as in the case of permitting police to draw blood from an unconscious motorist who had already parked his van and was walking about. So, the Supreme Swampers themselves are goons and thugs, in my view. The Supreme Thugs is really what they are.

But back to Supreme Thug Brett Kavanaugh, in at least 3 “national security” (sic) cases Kavanaugh rubber-stamped the holding of terrorism suspects without charge or actual suspicion or evidence at the Guantanamo prison. (al-Bihani v. Obama, Uthman v. Obama, and Omar v. McHugh.) He might as well be an employee of the CIA. So, what if Gubmint suspected you conservatives of “insurrection” or “domestic terrorism,” for example, you want their goons abducting you without evidence or warrants and to be imprisoned indefinitely? You want that? Duh, conservatives.

Conservatives defended Kavanaugh in his nomination battle, but they don’t realize that Kavanaugh is a staunch “social justice” defender of Title IX. As he stated before the Senate Judiciary Committee, “Title IX helped make girls’ and women’s sports equal. And I see that law’s legacy every night when I walk into my house, as my daughters are getting back from lacrosse or basketball or hockey practice.” So obviously he is clueless as to the abuses of Title IX to enable false accusations of hapless males especially in college. Duh, “conservatives.”

Speaking of “social justice” (sic), the Supreme Swamp also shows what unprincipled gutless wonders they are in their attempting to defend a baker who refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding, but for the wrong reasons, a decision based on anything but the private property rights they should be upholding but seem to have no clue as to what that actually is.

And why didn’t the Supreme Bureaucrats overturn the “Defense of Marriage Act,” or any of the states’ impositions or state referendums on protecting or forbidding gay marriage? Why do legislatures or CONgress get themselves involved with the people’s private matters? As I wrote in this article, you own your own life and have a right to form whatever contracts with others you want, as long as it’s voluntary. Marriage is none of the State’s damn business!

The gutless Supreme Apparatchiks also showed how they view freedom of the Press by declining to hear journalist James Risen’s case on protecting a confidential source. They obediently and pathologically defend the national security state no matter what. But, they merely reflect the Amerikan True Believers. Oh, well.

And on freedom of speech, the “Justices” (sic) all oppose free speech when the other Party is the one being opposed, with socialism-dreaming “liberal” Elena Kagan possibly being the worst of them.

I’m sure the sheeple Democrats and Republicans would go running to the Supreme Nannies to get their permission on whether the people of the states can make use of the 10th Amendment to nullify federal edicts.

But, real Americans will nullify fascist orders and intrusions whether the Supreme Bureaucrats like it or not.

Tom Woods wrote a terrific book on the history of nullification in America and how it should be used currently:  Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century. Woods addresses objections to nullification on this page. (And see this, this, and this.)

I wish I could advocate “packing the Supreme Court” with libertarians and voluntaryists who believe in the non-aggression principle, private property rights, self-ownership, freedom of contract and freedom of association, but that’s not realistic.

No, the answer is to UNpack the Supreme Court and “throw the bums out,” along with the rest of the horrible central planning apparatus in criminal Washington. You bet.

More News and Commentary

Jacob Hornberger: Immigration Pipe Dream at the Los Angeles Times.

Wendy McElroy: “Victim-Centered” Justice Is a Threat to Due Process.

Tho Bishop: Trump’s Potential Legacy: 50 Million+ Enemies of the State

Charles Burris: ‘Government Becomes God’: Jacobin’s Satirical Cover Literally Idolizing Biden Strikes Nerve

Ryan McMaken: No, the Chinese Won’t Invade America If Secessionists Succeed.

And Veronique De Rugy: Joe Biden’s Plan for Big Government.

On the Right of the People to Nullify Federal Diktats

It looks like we will have a turn to the left with more socialism if Joe Biden gets in power, which means President Kamala Harris, and probably AOC as the Speech and Thought Commissar who will distribute a long list of those the administration has determined to be “racists,” etc, i.e. anyone who disagrees with the Regime.

So this will be a time in which those who believe in the freedom and principles of the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights will have to seriously consider, if not full secession and genuine independence then nullification of the further federal edicts that Biden or Harris will attempt to shove down our throats. (And this isn’t just because of the illegitimacy of their presidency given that they imposed a coup via a massive organized racketeering operation of fraud and vote tampering and fabricating.)

To get a good idea on the right and importance of nullification, I recommend Tom Woods’s book from 2010, Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century. Here it is at the Mises Institute store, and Amazon.

I have quoted before from this blog post by Tom Woods and will again, in his explanation of the relationship between the states and the federal government:

If you and I give a third person (call him Person C) a limited power of attorney to help govern our affairs, and that person oversteps the boundaries outlined in the contract we signed, who gets to decide if Person C is in violation of the contract? Is it Person C himself? Or is it you and I, the people who wrote and signed the limited power of attorney in the first place? Likewise, the states, as the principals to the constitutional compact, have a far better logical claim to be the judges of constitutionality than their agent, the federal government.

In Woods’s Liberty Classroom page on nullification, he writes:

1) The states preceded the Union.  The Declaration of Independence speaks of “free and independent states” that “have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.” The British acknowledged the independence not of a single blob, but of individual states, which they proceeded to list one by one. Article II of the Articles of Confederation says the states “retain their sovereignty, freedom, and independence”; they must have enjoyed that sovereignty in the past in order for them to “retain” it in 1781 when the Articles were officially adopted.  The ratification of the Constitution was accomplished not by a single, national vote, but by the individual ratifications of the various states, each assembled in convention.

2) In the American system no government is sovereign.  The peoples of the states are the sovereigns.  It is they who apportion powers between themselves, their state governments, and the federal government.  In doing so they are not impairing their sovereignty in any way. To the contrary, they are exercising it.

3) Since the peoples of the states are the sovereigns, then when the federal government exercises a power of dubious constitutionality on a matter of great importance, it is they themselves who are the proper disputants, as they review whether their agent was intended to hold such a power.  No other arrangement makes sense.  No one asks his agent whether the agent has or should have such-and-such power.  In other words, the very nature of sovereignty, and of the American system itself, is such that the sovereigns must retain the power to restrain the agent they themselves created.  James Madison explains this clearly in the famous Virginia Report of 1800.

There is further information on that Nullification resource page. And Woods answers some of the objections to Nullification, such as the claims that it violates the Constitution’s supremacy clause, that it doesn’t appear in the Constitution, that the Supreme Court ruled against the idea, that it was used by the southern states to defend slavery, and other objections.

So of course people have the right to live their lives however they want, as long as they are peaceful. Given that the Declaration of Independence recognizes the unalienable right of each individual to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then of course the people of the states have a right to nullify federal diktats.

For example, healthcare. As I wrote in my June of 2011 article on disobeying dictators,

Now, by “disobeying dictators,” I am not advocating violence, but only that people live their lives as they see fit, as long as they do not intrude on anyone else’s equal right to do the same with their lives. So there comes a time when civil disobedience is in order. By civil disobedience, I mean acting in defiance of government-imposed rules and dictates that have nothing to do with protecting life, liberty and property. This includes individual- or state-nullification of federal orders. I believe in the Non-Aggression Principle and oppose the use of aggression as an initiated means toward an end.

Like in the old Soviet Union, Obama’s government-controlled medical scheme will not only be harmful medically, but the increasing police state we are experiencing will be used to enforce the controls, and also will be used against individuals who show dissent from the government’s authoritarian dictates.

We The People don’t need all that, and we don’t want it. We want freedom and peace. (At least I do.)

Now, what would happen if doctor’s offices, hospitals, medical equipment manufacturers, drug and supplement makers, and insurers just decided to do their business with their consumers – honestly and peacefully, and without aggression or fraud – and totally ignore federal regulations, mandates, fees, licensure laws and other intrusions? Frankly, those intrusions’ only real purpose is to protect established physicians and businesses’ profits from prospective competitors and start-ups. (The medical establishment was already corrupt well before ObamaCare.)

The contracts involved in the relationships between doctors or other medical providers and patients, or between insurers and patients, are private contracts, and third parties such as government bureaucrats sticking their big noses into those private contracts are committing acts of criminality, of trespassing, in my opinion.

Acts of nullification are necessary for Americans to be better served in their medical needs. With freedom, the consumers would determine what is needed, not the government, and the producers would serve the consumers – quality of medical care would then rise and the prices would fall.

So I definitely recommend Tom Woods’s book on nullification, which people should send to their state legislators and even their U.S. congressmen and senators.

On the Amazon page it quotes “from the inside flap”:

Unconstitutional laws are pouring out of Washington…but we can stop them.

Just ask Thomas Jefferson. There is a “rightful remedy” to federal power grabs–it’s called Nullification.

In Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century, historian and New York Times bestselling author Thomas E. Woods, Jr. explains not only why nullification is the constitutional tool the Founders envisioned, but how it works–and has already been employed in cases ranging from upholding the First Amendment to knocking down slave laws before the Civil War. In Nullification, Woods shows:

* How the states were meant to be checks against federal tyranny–and how a growing roster of governors and state attorneys general are recognizing they need to become that again
* Why the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution reinforces the rights of states to nullify unconstitutional laws
* Why it was left to the states to uphold the simple principle that an unconstitutional law is no law at all
* Why, without nullification, ordinary Americans will continue to suffer the oppression of unjust, unconstitutional laws
* PLUS thorough documentation of how the Founding Fathers believed nullification could be applied

Nullification is not just a book–it could become a movement to restore the proper constitutional limits of the federal government. Powerful, provocative, and timely, Nullification is sure to stir debate and become a constitutional handbook for all liberty-loving Americans.

We already have a lot of federal bureaucracies and agencies which shouldn’t exist and should be abolished along with all of their regulations and fees and fines. None of them is authorized by the U.S. Constitution, and if they exist, then the people have a right to nullify them. Of course, it is helpful if such nullification is made official in state laws by the state legislatures.

Trump Attorney Sydney Powell Details Vote Fraud Accusations

You’ve probably heard that the Trump campaign has been accusing the Democrats of stealing the election with massive vote fraud schemes, flipping votes from Trump to Biden, bringing in coolers and suitcases full of “mail-in” ballots for Biden, etc., etc. The software for some of the machines used is by a company called “Dominion” which apparently is highly suspect.

In this video, Trump campaign attorney Sydney Powell goes over some of the details for “Greg Kelly Reports” on Newsmax TV.

However, Jon Rappoport and Tucker Carlson are asking Sydney Powell to provide evidence of her accusations. It seems to me that she and other attorney Rudy Giuliani have presented a lot of evidence, including witness sworn affidavits. Although, there is a lot of circumstantial evidence such as vote tallies occurring showing numbers that could not be possible statistically, and the sudden stopping of vote counting late election night after it was clear that Trump was winning by a wide margin, followed by a sudden increase in Biden votes appearing out of no where.

But these elections are futile, anyway. When will people learn that central planning doesn’t work? The larger the country and the larger the central government the more chaos and dysfunction you will have. All the power-seekers and power-grabbers and psychopaths are driven to the central power structure in Washington. The country needs to decentralize. I have explained all that several times here, including in this article.

Some Post-Election Comments

I’m posting this around noon, with no word on who the next puppet will be, Trump or Biden (i.e. Harris).

The final vote tally is not yet ready, but it looks like Libertarian Party presidential candidate Jo Jorgensen is getting roughly 1 to 2% of the vote. She might as well be Lyndon LaRouche. In 2016 Gary Johnson the pothead got roughly 3.27% of the vote which was the highest ever for the LP.

I think that, had the hacks and apparatchiks of the “Libertarian” Party gone with Jacob Hornberger as their presidential nominee (the one the actual voters in the state primaries overwhelmingly voted for), there would have been a lot more enthusiasm among many in the Liberty movement, probably better publicity and more support. I am not saying that Jacob could have taken that many votes away from Trump and Biden to get much more over 3 or 4%. But, he was the better, more consistently libertarian and principled candidate.

But nooo, the hacks and apparatchiks of the “Libertarian” Party snubbed the voters of the primaries and went with the “social justice” crap, this obsession with gender and race that “social justice warriors” seem to have.

I would definitely support a 2024 LP candidate Jacob Hornberger, who will be only 74 then. Hell, I’d support Ron Paul at age 89 in 2024 for President. But, it looks like we probably won’t have an America anymore by 2024, because the Democrats and Republicans have turned the country into Amerika, and getting worse.

My preference instead is to just get rid of Washington, D.C., because it has outlasted its usefulness, whatever usefulness it ever had (which is to say, none). Decentralization is the answer to all this.

I know, I know. It is unrealistic to hope that someday the libertarian message will get across to the masses, when the government controls the education system and the mass media. That was apparent way back in 1988 after I voted for Libertarian Party nominee Ron Paul and then saw that he received just a few hundred thousand votes. The “news” media didn’t really report on his candidacy. There was no change in the reporting from the “news” media in 1992 with that election’s terrible LP nominee, Andre Marrou.

Back then, the “news” media would declare: “There are only Republican and Democrat, and that’s it.” Anyone who had views that strayed from the beloved Establishment, views that challenged the statist quo, were “fringe” or “extremists,” and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Had today’s “news” media morons been around during the time of the American Revolution, those who promoted property rights, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence would have been run out of town and dismissed as “fringe” and “extremists,” as today’s promoters of liberty still are. Nothing has changed in all these decades in which the government has controlled education and dumbed down generations of people.

The ignorant “news” media along with the dumb-dumbs of the Democrat Party went with a corrupt Alzheimer’s sufferer as their favored candidate for President. That tells us something, doesn’t it?

And you can see how the low-IQ “news” media and their social media compadres are now not only ignoring libertarians and otherwise anti-Establishment dissidents but outright smearing, blacklisting and censoring them.

So while we’re all waiting, waiting, waiting to get final results of the election, election officials are counting, counting, counting ballots, mail-in ballots, absentee, as well as making up and stuffing ballots, putting in names of dead people, finding “lost” ballots in their car trunks and refrigerators, and more. And it’s mostly Democrats doing those cheating things.

Yes, Republicans have cheated and stolen elections or nominations, such as the Romney people stealing the nomination away from Ron Paul in 2012, but mainly it’s Democrats doing most of the cheating. They are the ones who want to extend ballot deadlines well past the date of the election, so they have more time to throw out Republican ballots and make up new ballots. The Democrats are the party of “ranked choice,” which is used to intentionally confuse voters and so the third runner-up will be the winner and not the actual top vote-getter. And the Democrats are the party who don’t want ID requirements to verify a voter’s identity. It’s easier to cheat without being required to identify yourself. Duh.

And in this election specifically, the Democrat and leftist people have shown how unhinged they are in their hatred of Donald Trump. I’ve never seen anything like it in all my years.

First they make up a “Russia collusions, interfering in the election” scheme, along with a made-up Steele dossier that was used to present false information to the FISA court to illegally spy on the Trump campaign (a collusions accusation that was all debunked by the Mueller report). And then they have a CIA “whistleblower” use an everyday phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian president to try to impeach Trump, which didn’t succeed. And then the Covid scamdemic, whose main purpose was to terrorize the masses to fear voting in person on November 3rd so they would want to mail in ballots, so the mail-in balloting could be used for massive cheating and voter fraud (like they’re doing right now). The scamdemic terrorism and panic was also used to tank the economy, and tank they did, to try to undo Trump’s economic successes with the tax-cut-stimulated economic expansion and extremely low unemployment rate.

But despite the schemes and the cheating, by extremist, unhinged low-IQ psychopaths and loony-tunes Democrats and their “national security” partners, Trump will probably still win reelection. Nancy Lugosi will begin the first of many impeachment proceedings because she and the other wackos just don’t like him. But the House will stay under Democrat control for that wonderful gridlock. If you’re pro-liberty, should should appreciate gridlock. And if Biden still wins, the Senate looks like it will remain Republican controlled to slow down the Democrats in the Soviet-clone communist paradise they are drooling to inflict on the rest of us.

Ignorant, government-loving Trump still hasn’t drained the swamp, and it doesn’t seem he ever will. Not with Jeff Sessions, Bill Barr, Chris Wray and Gina Haspel, as well as the Goldman Sachs crowd including Steven Mnuchin. And all the military generals Trump has surrounded himself with, all those horrible interventionists, neocons, militarists, globalists, etc.

In 2012 there was a good chance that a Republican presidential nominee Ron Paul could have ousted Obama, because Dr. Paul was the only candidate who was beating Obama in the polls in head-to-head matches. Romney is…whatever.

But the truth is, the only way now to save our hanging-by-a-thread civilized society is to decentralize the society. That means getting rid of the government in Washington, even through secession if necessary. Such a notion bothers a lot of people who are long-time nationalists, like most conservatives especially. But that is what needs to be done. Otherwise, it is becoming Soviet Union 2.0 and that’s not good.

On the Choice Between Two Anti-Freedom Fascist/Socialists

Many conservatives, Republicans and libertarians are saying that we had better vote for Donald Trump or the whole country is going to be a third-world hell-hole, and many liberals, Democrats and progressives are saying that we had better vote for Joe Biden or the whole place will be ruled by white supremacists, racists, nazis, etc.

Well, they’re all wrong, and I wrote this post in February 2014 that I will repost today, and thought you might find it of interest. (The one video included is no longer there, and there might be one or two links that don’t work.)

Hmmm. Which Lying Shyster Should I Vote For This Time?

February 2, 2014

Some people seem to think that I’m a real drag when it comes to my criticisms of society, America’s decline and elections. There are those who look forward to the next election so they can go to the polls really believing they will make a difference.

Uh-uh. You’re just wasting your time. And if you want to continue living in a fantasy world, that’s up to you.

Liberty activist Judy Morris has this blog post titled, “Voting Doesn’t Matter Because All Elections Are Controlled by R and D Big Money, Big Banksters, Big Corporations and Big Defense Contractors.” And she goes on explaining just how these elections don’t matter, how democracy is a majority voting to make use of the State’s police powers to take other people’s stuff, how the two major parties in control shut out challengers to the status quo, and how the corporations and fat cats are really buying the elections. But then she goes on to make suggestions on changing campaign funding laws and encouraging support for third parties. So she’s being very realistic until the very last three or four paragraphs, which just didn’t make sense to me.

I especially liked Ms. Morris’s comparing Dinesh D’Souza to the billionaires the Koch Brothers and Sheldon Adelson, George Soros et al. D’Souza has recently been attacked by the fascist Obama DOJ for campaign finance violations because of a mere amount of $20,000. Yet, the Kochs and Adelson and their hack organizations threw tens of millions of dollars down the drain to fund the loser, Willard Romney. Obviously, the only reason Obama’s corrupt and criminal DOJ is going after D’Souza is because of D’Souza’s film 2016 on Obama.

Morris writes:

By law, an individual can only contribute $2,500 to a candidate. Even if ordinary folks could afford a $2,500 campaign contribution to a candidate, which they can’t, the lion’s share of political money comes from PAC’s, special interests, banksters, defense contractors etc. and these are the folks who own and control the RNC and DNC machines.

While the Huffington Post reported that the 2012 presidential election cost $2 billion,Politico reported that the cost of the 2012 presidential and congressional elections was $6 billion, here. Open Secrets, an organization that specifically tracks political money, also reported that the 2012 presidential and congressional elections cost $6 billion, here.

It’s clearly evident that the rich and powerful hijacked and now own our election system. The RNC and DNC machines are nothing but money laundering machines for special interests.

If an individual voter can only contribute a maximum of $2,500 to a candidate and if Denesh D’Souza is being prosecuted for his role in a puny $20,000 campaign finance fiasco, how is it that the Koch Brothers can legally pony up a staggering $400 million and casino magnet Adelson can pony up $100 million to influence election outcomes?

Most recently, this corporate financial influence in elections can be seen in the ObamaCare and anti-gun rights propaganda being pushed by the Soviet NFL for the upcoming Super Bowl. Here is Alex Jones on that:

But for elections, one of Judy Morris’s solutions is to “ban all fund raising by anybody except the candidates and they should only be allowed to raise money from individual voters.” But all that has some First Amendment problems, because really individuals and groups have a right to spend or waste their money on whatever they want.

But Ms. Morris’s suggestion to vote for third parties is not practical, as those parties or candidates who are anti-State and pro-freedom do not seem to get the attention they deserve or are silenced by the ones in control of the process. The ones in control are those members of the U.S. CONgress and all their minions all across America who love power and are NOT going to give it up voluntarily. They will not vote to loosen election laws to make life easier for third parties or anti-Establishment candidates.

And the Rulers in control, such as “Speaker” Boehner and Mitch McConjob and others will not vote or support policies which advance freedom. Sooner or later, people are really going to have to accept the truth of the matter.

And regarding the idea of using elections to reverse the trend of ever-growing government intrusiveness and criminality, I wrote in my March, 2010 article, November, 2010: More Rearranging of Deck Chairs (with a follow up just recently here),

When Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980, the “conservative” president not only didn’t cut entire cabinet-level departments as promised, he added three new cabinet-level departments. After cutting taxes, a year later Reagan signed what was then to be America’s biggest tax increase. Reagan also signed one deficit-laden budget after another, and during Reagan’s presidency, the National Debt skyrocketed along with all the regulations and bureaucracy he promised to cut.

Following the 1994 “Republican Revolution,” the federal government continued to grow out of control, and, after 2000, the younger President George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” – i.e. more socialist redistribution of wealth schemes – and expanding the military industrial complex only fed Leviathan much more.

Then, in November of 2010, mainly because of the passage of ObamaCare the voters elected many new Republicans to Congress. Some of the candidates pledged to repeal the Affordable (sic) Care Act, a.k.a. ObamaCare.

Well, it’s 2014 now, and have they repealed ObamaCare?

However, we do have a proposal now by three U.S. senators to “repeal and replace” ObamaCare.

Ooooh, another Republican plan to replace socialism and fascism with fascism and socialism.

Senators Richard Burr, Orrin Hatch and Tom Coburn present several aspects of their own version of government-controlled medical care. But it is not a free market health care plan. It just changes a few aspects to make it a little less intrusive, a little less socialist on the surface but the government still controls things by telling individuals and businesses what they may or may not do.

You see, with the unrealistic conservatives, Republicans and “libertarians,” political compromise is the solution. Not the solution to better medical care, just the solution to help politicians get themselves reelected. Sadly, the naive and the gullible just can’t seem able to get that.

So, as far as this new Republican plan to replace ObamaCare with the same thing but with the deck chairs rearranged, many conservative and Republican sheeple are all for it. For example, the clueless conservatives of the New York Post editorial board conclude, “GOP candidates heading into their campaigns this fall now have a genuine alternative that would offer universal ­coverage.”

“Universal coverage”? Is that even possible? Who the hell but socialists and communists talks about “universal coverage”? (Is there even universal coverage in Cuba? In Venezuela? England? Was there in the old Soviet Union?)

Avik Roy of Forbes says this is the “most credible plan yet,” when no, it is NOT the “most credible plan.” The most credible plan is to get the government out of medical care completely! Roy also says that this new Republican plan raises taxes, and “that’s a good thing.” Doh!

And there’s a congressman from Georgia who is running for the U.S. Senate, and he says that his background as a physician gives him credibility in going on to help to repeal ObamaCare. Yeah, that attitude sure helped with Sen. Bill Frist, MD. And what has Rand Paul, MD done? Nuttin’!

Laurence Vance explains the Republicans’ history of support for government-controlled medical care. Vance concludes by noting that the real constitutional alternative to government health care is medical freedom. And that’s it.

And Jacob Hornberger explains even more specifically what a genuine free market in medical care would be. That means repealing ALL the socialist and fascist governmental intrusions into the lives of the people. (And such repeals would apply in every other area in which these greedy, corrupt government bureaucrats intrude themselves. Everything!)

But worse, and more depressing is that this new RepublicanCare is dependent on 2014 elections, or more likely dependent on 2016 elections. By that time, America will already be a full third world country. Get rid of damn ObamaCare NOW, for crying out loud!

So, as we saw from the 2010 elections, elections don’t matter. And legislation doesn’t matter. It’s all a scam.

Hmmm. By the way, let’s take a look at the aforementioned U.S. Senators Burr, Hatch and Coburn campaign finances for 2009-2014 as given by OpenSecrets.org:

For Richard Burr:

Top 5 Industries, 2009-2014, Campaign Cmte

Industry Total Indivs PACs
Retired $560,356 $560,356 $0
Health Professionals $469,649 $272,949 $196,700
Insurance $398,251 $175,251 $223,000
Lawyers/Law Firms $395,898 $279,648 $116,250
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $386,621 $98,550 $288,071

_________________

And for Orrin Hatch:

Top 5 Contributors, 2009-2014, Campaign Cmte

Contributor Total Indivs PACs
OC Tanner Inc $72,010 $72,010 $0
Cancer Treatment Centers of America $65,000 $65,000 $0
Cerberus Capital Management $65,000 $65,000 $0
Blue Cross/Blue Shield $56,500 $21,000 $35,500
Fresenius Medical Care $55,500 $45,500 $10,000

Top 5 Industries, 2009-2014, Campaign Cmte

Industry Total Indivs PACs
Securities & Investment $1,185,346 $982,275 $203,071
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $811,401 $263,960 $547,441
Lobbyists $499,461 $485,307 $14,154
Insurance $483,788 $123,614 $360,174
Lawyers/Law Firms $478,121 $257,990 $220,131

_________________

And for Tom Coburn:

Top 5 Industries, 2009-2014, Campaign Cmte

Industry Total Indivs PACs
Health Professionals $196,072 $83,072 $113,000
Oil & Gas $171,550 $67,800 $103,750
Leadership PACs $123,908 $200 $123,708
Insurance $106,650 $8,150 $98,500
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $102,601 $2,601 $100,000

_____________________

Not that any of that means anything. So people need to face it that these elections really are meaningless.

As Murray Rothbard observed,

…first, left-liberals, in power, make a Great Leap Forward toward collectivism; then, when, in the course of the political cycle, four or eight years later, conservatives come to power, they of course are horrified at the very idea of repealing anything; they simply slow down the rate of growth of statism, consolidating the previous gains of the Left, and providing a bit of R&R for the next liberal Great Leap Forward….

And these elections are meaningless because when we can dig up one or two “good” people who mean well, when they get in there to “repeal” stuff, they will not really repeal anything. They get addicted to the power that such governmental authority gives them. They now get to tell people what to do, and have their orders enforced by armed goons, and they love it. Better than drugs.

I hope that soon people will really see what a sham central planning and federalism are. The whole scheme is really a criminal scheme in which some people use the armed power of the State to take from others, and that’s it! And it is an apparatus with which the psychopaths amongst us satisfy their cravings for power and control over others. If you want to believe otherwise, then I guess you prefer to be gullible.

Earlier Post on Mob Violence, Riots and Decentralization

I posted this in March of 2011 and thought it might have some relevance today in the difficult times we are having in Amerika.

March 1, 2011

Our Choice: More Government Intrusions and Mob Violence, Riots and Looting; or Decentralization and Freedom.

I don’t know how much more I can stand all this doom and gloom regarding the future, and the economic outlook. Americans’ foolish continued dependence on the centralized federal Leviathan is what’s going to cause actual economic collapse, rioting and looting, social unrest and violence. The answer as far as preventing all that is staring us right in the face, and that is freedom, particularly just getting rid of the federal government.

The Anti-Federalists were right in that not only does having a centralized bureaucracy not help the society in any way, but inevitably, it can and will lead to (and is leading to) totalitarianism. That is what we already have now, but there are too many people, most of whom spend too much time sitting in front of the TV continuing their hypnosis or playing with their little texting/gaming gadgets, who just have this blind faith in the State no matter how bad it is, no matter how criminal it is, regardless of the State’s increasingly severe abuse of the people’s liberty and property. But why must we in the minority, who recognize the true inherently evil destructive behaviors and history of the State, suffer and be abused and enslaved because so many in the majority amongst the population are masochists?

The Economic Collapse Blog had a post on the various incidents recently of “mob robberies” and rioting and looting, as well as brawls in restaurants and retail areas during the holiday season. It doesn’t even appear that these examples have anything to do with the economic recession/depression or unemployment, just that they are examples of the general moral decline and reduced respect for the rights of others in America. In my opinion, that is all thanks to the growth of government, the criminality of the government and how so many people have enriched themselves via the powers of the State, from the big banksters, the defense contractors of the military-industrial-complex, to the professional politicians and bureaucrats (such as Barney Frank, Dick Cheney, etc.) who have never produced anything of actual value to others and who could never actually survive in a world based on totally voluntary contracts and without being parasites of the State.

The Economic Collapse Blog notes that “Frustration and anger are rising from coast to coast and millions of Americans are losing faith in the system.  The thin veneer of civilization which we all take for granted is already starting to disappear.  So what is going to happen when the economy collapses?  As our economic system fails, mob robberies and rampant looting are only going to become more common.”

“Losing faith in the system”? What system? Do you mean faith in a system of freedom, private property and individual liberty? Well, we haven’t had that in America. We have had State control of everything. People have had faith in the government — the State — to do this, that, and the other thing. But because of its compulsory and monopolistic nature, government has done nothing but screw up this, that and the other thing, actually everything it gets its grubby paws on, everything! Especially the federal government. How stupid the Founders were to cave to those who wanted a centralized bureaucracy with actual power!

One of the videos the Economic Collapse Blog included on that post was from the Rodney King riots, nearly 20 years ago. And that wasn’t really even to do with economic troubles, only racial troubles, in which the racist white police department got away with beating a black man. That in and of itself is disgusting, but nothing justifies going and destroying other people’s property, robbing people and looting stores and injuring and murdering people.

Of course, if neighborhood policing were not an activity monopolized by the State, and there were competing policing firms all held accountable under the Rule of Law, then none of that kind of crap would happen, and security agents would not get away with beating presumably innocent people. Only under a system of monopoly can that happen, because monopoly is inherently corrupting.

Now, regarding the economic collapse that the doom-and-gloomers are predicting, the Activist Post blog has this post on how the economic collapse is deliberately designed and is so designed in order to “reduce the population.” I think that’s a bit much, and that the current economic recession/depression is not designed by any one individual, group or organization, but, like the Great Depression, it is occurring through various situations including mostly the incompetence and the “fatal conceit” of government officials. Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke are control freaks, and they have been given huge compulsory powers as agents of a State-run bureaucracy, the Federal Reserve. But as with the usual results of other compulsory State bureaucracies, everything they do results in the opposite of what they intend. They and their fellow statist nincompoops in Washington live in a total fantasy world. “They’re out there,” as Jerry Williams used to say.

The real answer, and how to prevent further economic collapse and to reverse what is happening, is freedom. Even just decentralizing America by abolishing the federal government completely, abolishing all its monopolies especially in territorial protection and the production and issuance of currency, will free up the country a great deal. If each state had its individual independence and sovereignty as is the inherent right of any people within any given territory (the right to not be compelled to be dependent on any centralized federal bureaucracy), then, if the people of any given state did not like the intrusions of their own individual state government, then they can abolish the state government as well, and let each city and town have its own independence and sovereignty as well.

The more decentralized a territory, the more free and independent the people are.

Hans-Hermann Hoppe addressed these ideas in his great book, Democracy: The God That Failed. Prof. Hoppe noted in that book that, given the choice (not that we have the choice right now), a society with many smaller states is preferable — and certainly freer and more prosperous — than a society of one centralized State, i.e. the federal authoritarian government dictatorship that we have now. Prof. Hoppe made this point in this interview.

It is said, for example by the bureaucrats of the European Union in Brussels, that economic prosperity has increased dramatically with increased political unification. In reality, however, political integration (centralisation) and economic (market) integration are two completely different phenomena. Political integration involves the territorial expansion of a state’s powers of taxation and property regulation. Economic integration is the extension of the interpersonal and interregional division of labour and market participation. In general, the smaller a country and its internal markets the more likely it is that it will opt for free trade.

I think that a world consisting of tens of thousands of distinct countries, regions and cantons, and hundreds of thousands of independent free cities such as the present-day “oddities” of Monaco, Andorra, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Hong Kong, and Singapore, would be a world of unprecedented prosperity, economic growth, and cultural advancement.

One of the economically most prosperous nations however is the United States, which is a big country.

Yes, in fact there is no direct relationship between territorial size and economic prosperity. Switzerland and Albania are both small countries, while the U.S. and the former Soviet Union are large. However, there is a highly important indirect relationship. Smallness contributes to moderation. In principle, all governments are counterproductive in taxing and regulating private property owners and market income earners. A small government, however, has many close neighbours. If it taxes and regulates its own subjects visibly more than its neighbours it is bound to suffer because people will “vote with their feet”: they will leave to live and work elsewhere. And they need not go far to do so….

It is assumed that larger political units – and ultimately a single world government – imply wider markets and hence increased wealth. However, this is untrue. The larger the territories the lower a government’s incentive to continue its domestic liberalism will be because people will lose the possibility of voting with their feet. Throughout the entire period of European and, indeed, global unification we have witnessed a steady and dramatic growth of government power, taxation and regulatory expropriation. In the light of social and economic theory and history a very strong case can be made for secession…

Here is a link to the introduction to Hans Hoppe’s Democracy: The God That Failed.

In a decentralized U.S. sans federal government, if some people of a particular state don’t like the intrusions and rules of that state, they can vote with their feet, certainly much more easily than Americans can do presently if we don’t like the way our federal totalitarian regime is ruining our whole country. For most people, it is difficult or impossible to vote with our feet and leave America.

But why should anyone have to leave America because they don’t like State violence and trespassing into their private lives and property, and because they don’t like their labor being enslaved by parasitic, professional politicians and their flunkies who don’t want to make their own way in life? Why should anyone have to leave America because the federal government is destroying the country?

And why must we endure the abuse and tyranny that the federal government has been causing us, either directly by its intrusive and invasive policies, or by the increasing violence that its policies have wrought in America? That shouldn’t be the case, so, let’s get rid of the federal government before its intrusions kill us all.

Voting for the “Lesser of Two Evils” Is Still Voting for Evil

Derrick Broze: Multiple Studies Predicted Governments Become Authoritarian in Response to Pandemics.

Caitlin Johnstone: Why The ‘Lesser Evil’ Is An Illusion.

Nick Weber: The War State: Summary, Analysis, and Commentary.

Daily Wire: School District Making Parents Sign Waiver Agreeing Not To Monitor Virtual Instruction (The “teachers” are afraid that parents might actually hear the sex-perversions and communist propaganda “teachers” are inflicting on the kids on a daily basis!)

John Vibes: Study Finds Pandemic Hasn’t Slowed Down Police Killings In 2020.

Tom Woods: Lockdowns Kill, Exhibit Z.

Zero Hedge: AG Barr Throws Cold Water On Possible Trump Pardon Of “Traitor” Edward Snowden. (Barr said that Snowden “was a traitor and the information he provided our adversaries greatly hurt the safety of the American people…” So, because the information that Snowden provided was to the American people, therefore Barr thinks WE are “adversaries”! Barr is lying when he says that Snowden “hurts our safety” by informing us on what the NSA is doing to us. It is the NSA hurting us, our privacy and security!)

Hans-Hermann Hoppe: Nationalism and Secession.

Gary Galles: No, We Don’t Need a Government Post Office

Zero Hedge: UK Officials Exposed For Inflating COVID Hospital Numbers At Height Of “Pandemic”

Ted Galen Carpenter: Why the Surge in U.S. Spy Plane Flights Near Russia?

And Washington Times: Soros-Funded DAs Are Rogue.

Create your website with WordPress.com
Get started