Recent comments

  • DennisLeeWilson's picture
    DennisLeeWilson 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    As Paul said: "...The real difficulty, post-crash, will not be martial law, but keeping economic life going. The way to do that is form associations with the more worthy of your neighbors, business associates and relatives." For those interested in HOW such associations MIGHT be created, I recommend the Covenant of Unanimous Consent. tinyurl.com/Galts-Oath-and-the-Covenant For more detail regarding the Covenant, see articles at tinyurl.com/Covenant-of-Unanimous-Consent Dennis
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Attention all you Lone Wolfs: Those who present the greatest threat to you and those you love are now targeting anyone with the cajones to disagree with establishment thinking. If you are an individualist you might be -- might well be -- a "terrorist". I like the way Justin illustrates the ignorant buffoons: "...the lunk-headed cluelessness which dominates the FBI’s corporate culture..."
  • Persona non grata's picture
    Persona non grata 3 years 16 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Revolt slaves, revolt!
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 16 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Bummer. She should look into solar panels, a windmill or a generator. Just to tide her over. The utility bureaucracy has no real incentive to move fast on clearing this up sadly.
  • livemike's picture
    livemike 3 years 16 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Yeah this sort of insanity has been around since Wickard v. Filburn in 1942. Thank you Roosevelt.
  • Persona non grata's picture
    Persona non grata 3 years 16 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Fuck the government!
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 16 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Rita, you got that right. Sam
  • rita's picture
    rita 3 years 16 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Duh.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    Marc: Constantine was the first Christian Roman Emperor. .... He imposed a head tax throughout the empire payable (every four years) in gold and silver coin only. Constantine also crowned the first pope who was crowned (previous popes were not crowned). He crowned Sylvester, which was prelude to and eventually became known as "The Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation", The First Reich. The German word for Empire is "Reich". Most of us know of and have studied to one degree or another The Third Reich under Adolf Hitler. But few of us have studied or given any thought to The Second Reich. Or The First Reich. Or what conditions would need to be in place for The Fourth Reich to come into fruition. An observer today can look at the American Reich and understand that in our lifetimes (I'm 75) we've seen this nation deteriorate into the most egregious police state on earth -- more prisoners behind bars per 100m population than any other nation on earth, or in the history OF the earth. Leaving undeclared wars for another topic, we see a U.S. "president" who deems it prudent to assassinate U.S. citizens on his say-so -- no due process of law. And it is not going to get any better under more religious "presidents" and/or congress critters. Hang onto your hats, mates. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    Tony: Is God an anarchist? Your typical Christian-Zionist (sic) neocon will balk at the suggestion. But if God is love, how can He not be an anarchist? It's important to remember that most of us had to come out from under a host of fallacious ideology before we ever landed on this web site. Anarchy does not come easily. With that, my answer (for what it's worth) is "yes". From everything I can see objectively -- not colored by preconceived religious and/or political emotional ideology -- there is nothing in Hebrew scripture to indicate otherwise. Of course that's assuming "Hebrew scripture" is the final word on Deity, which ignores all Islam, Buddha -- and how many other religious movements larger than those subscribing to Hebrew scripture. The Book is a Testimonial to anarchy as we generally understand it (although the word is never used or implied). From stem to stern it is an admonishment to eschew political entanglement. That's why it's such a hoot for me to stand back and watch political types -- right, left, across and hold -- getting themselves stirred up in promotion of or opposition against war or abortion or same-sex "marriage" or other state machinations. Sam
  • Tony Pivetta's picture
    Tony Pivetta 3 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    Interesting take on the Garden of Eden account! My lifelong interest in matters of faith and state notwithstanding, I was not familiar with it. It makes sense, though, especially in light of I Samuel, Chapter 8: "Samuel delivered the message of the LORD in full to those who were asking him for a king. He told them: 'The rights of the king who will rule you will be as follows: he will take your sons and assign them to his chariots and horses, and they will run before his chariot. He will also appoint from among them his commanders of groups of a thousand and of a hundred soldiers. He will set them to do his plowing and his harvesting, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots. "'He will use your daughters as ointment-makers, as cooks, and as bakers. He will take the best of your fields, vineyards and olive groves, and give them to his officials. He will tithe your crops and your vineyards, and give the revenue to his eunuchs and his slaves.'" There's also St. Augustine's *City of God*, in which this Doctor of the Church likens kingdoms to "great robber bands." He goes on to write: "A fitting and true response was once given to Alexander the Great by an apprehended pirate. When asked by the king what he thought he was doing by infesting the sea, he replied with noble insolence, 'What do you think you are doing by infesting the whole world? Because I do it with one puny boat, I am called a pirate; because you do it with a great fleet, you are called an emperor.'" Is God an anarchist? Your typical Christian-Zionist (sic) neocon will balk at the suggestion. But if God is love, how can He not be an anarchist?
  • rita's picture
    rita 3 years 16 weeks ago
    Illegal Lemon Tree
    Web link Michael Dunn
    "I would expect these actions against someone running a drug house . . . " The lemon tree lady says it all. If they can take my stuff they can take yours too.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    If one is to ascribe credence for the Hebrew Book it becomes obvious The Creator, in admonishing the first human beings to abstain from the "...fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil...", was in fact warning them away from faith in political authority. Throughout that book the term "fruit" as coming from a "tree" or "vine" is analogous to "works (authority) of men" (the authoritarian sense has no adequate equivalent English translation that I know of). This holds true in all the dozens and hundreds of versions and translations of that all-time best selling Book. The analogy is used many times throughout the Book. My understanding of the metaphor is this: The Creator is quoted as instructing them, "I am offering you government OF The Creator, BY The Creator, and FOR the people!" The Law was later inscribed upon two tablets of stone as a contract between The Creator and the family of Israel. Well, along came the first recorded smiling, waving gangster we know of today as a "politician". The translation "serpent" is grossly inaccurate -- the Hebrew would be more like "whispering enchanter". That political shyster was easily able to convince that very first woman and her man that The Creator had lied -- that he (political authority) could offer them government "...OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people!" (Lincoln plagiarized at Gettysburg) That Book is a chronology of the desire on the part of human beings to be ruled by human authority ("...we will have a king..."), and the results thereof. I believe we are about at the end game of the storyline of the Hebrew Book. The "protesters" have no idea what the protest is about -- their "demands" appear to be for "the hair of the dog that bit us." Voters have no idea for whom or why they vote. The depredations of unfettered agents of state appear to have finally resulted in the squandering of the productive efforts of the people who have craved to be ruled -- and who have provided legitimacy to those parasites of state. Total economic collapse appears to be in the offing. None of them see, as we here at STR see, the incestuous relationship between "Wall Street", "giant corporations" and "Our Country" (the ancestry of that first recorded deceiver), that has given rise to the debacle now upon us. The enormity of the truth is incredible. Sam
  • Tony Pivetta's picture
    Tony Pivetta 3 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    I have a problem with force, period. Government by definition refers to the entity in society enjoying a legal monopoly on the use of force. Mixing anything with force--even freethinking, godless humanism (e.g., the Soviet Union)--is a bad combination. Ask the 20 million or so Christians who perished in the gulags.
  • Marc's picture
    Marc 3 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    How true. If you literally reversed all of Christ's teachings it would more closely approximate the madness swirling around in the head's of those Christians who who have made careers out of attempting to influence government policies - particularly those relating to foreign and military affairs. Let's travel back in time to the very first instance of Christianity melding with state. Constantine was the first Christian Roman Emperor. One would assume a new era kinder, gentler, more compassionate authoritarianism during his reign. Well, not quite. He imposed a head tax throughout the empire payable (every four years) in gold and silver coin only. Since the Roman Empire had been in serious decline for over a century not many people had any gold or silver coins. Fathers were forced to prostitute their daughters or face the consequence of possibly getting beaten to death by Roman soldiers. He eventually disbanded the 25,000 soldiers comprising Rome's Praetorian Guard and moved the capitol to Constantinople. Rome was left just another defenseless town on the Italian peninsula, a shadow of its former self. I personally have no problems with any religion so long that it does not mix with government. Government = force and religion + force is usually a bad combination.
  • Mitrik_Spanner's picture
    Mitrik_Spanner 3 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    The Occupy Wall Street protests seem to be a kind of left counter weight to the fascistic wing of the American statist culture. Too bad both sides are mired down in kooky ideas.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Bon vivant and literary poo-bah Dorothy Parker said upon hearing news that taciturn former president Calvin Coolidge had died replied: "How can you tell?" Same here. We've lost so much personal freedom just in the last decade or so that it is hard to not feel that we are not that free any more even using a relative comparison with the condition our liberty as of 2000.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 17 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Citizenship bestowed by a state entity is meaningless (or should be) to those who fancy themselves anarchists and who routinely denounce states and statism and all their emanations. Stripped to its essence what we have here is a situation that merely constitutes a large scale gang war. The two gangs (the USG, AQ) kill each others members. Live by the sword die by it too.
  • Peter McCandless's picture
    Peter McCandless 3 years 17 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    Excellent piece. Yes, many of "greatest generation" sacrificed to fight aggression overseas only to institutionalize more of it here. Excellent point.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 17 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Laughable. The only two on this list that I've read are *Nickel & Dimed" and *BNW* and I can't see how given our societal condition presently that they would be the least bit controversial. I suppose the know-nothings will always find something somewhere to bitch about though.
  • jd-in-georgia's picture
    jd-in-georgia 3 years 17 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    This is a great article. Just this past week, Jessi, a girl under our guardianship, had just written a paper on the perils of social promotion. Social promotion is where one is pushed through the system so that they will graduate with his or her peers, regardless of their level of intelligence. I was genuinely touched that a public school teacher cared enough to challenge a student to voice her opinion on the bogus nature of public education.
  • John deLaubenfels's picture
    John deLaubenfels 3 years 17 weeks ago
    The Oldest Institution
    Page Paul Hein
    Excellent column. What I've seen of today's youth does not lead me to optimism, however: most seem to believe that goodies dispensed by government are their birthright. What is today's equivalent to the ritual of initiation into manhood, with its attendant acceptance of self-responsibility (and therefore at least minimal self-governance)? So-called "young men" today area mostly just overgrown boys, still accustomed to suckling off a parental and/or government teat. I sincerely hope I'm being too pessimistic!
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 17 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Also, about 7 paragraphs down I was attempting to imbed in "Income" the following link: http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap4.html Klutz, klutz, klutz.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 17 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    The link that was supposed to be embedded in "strong lullabies" in the above response is as follows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqsT4xnKZPg Being dumb and clumsy in using html can sure screw up the continuity of a decent essay, can it not??? Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 17 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Discussions of this type insult the intelligence of all free-thinking sovereign states. That would be me. However, I secretly fear that I have precious little intelligence left to insult. To become free I proclaim one must recognize a critical but basic fact: that all agents of all government -- ALL -- have one primary set of purposes: to conceal, to confound, to perplex, to cover-up any semblance of truth. Anywhere. All the time. Throughout all of history. http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/library/TaxationisRobbery.html http://mises.org/easaran/chap3.asp Anything that could be detected by the unwashed masses as malfeasance on the part of "My Country" must be quashed early-on by soothing, yet strong lullabieshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqsT4xnKZPg. They can even, for instance, be led into war while standing in awe at various state-sponsored parades and/or "motorcades". And they should be encouraged to clap wildly when the king ("president", lovingly referred to by press types as "potus"; or "prime minister") rides by. I won't even discuss here the unbelievable "security precautions" expended to protect his uneasy head -- and with what the sovereign state understands his or her head SHOULD ride uneasily. And never question the nakedness of his or her "highness". Income is never defined by law. Thousands upon thousands of pages are devoted to coming to a non-defined entity referred to as "adjusted gross income". But all functionaries of all courts in all lands under all circumstances will "rule" their various equivalents to "The-Sixteenth-Amendment" are valid. Well, wouldn't you? If you were collecting a handsome income and bestowed with the "power" of appointment as a Supreme-Court-Judge??? (I suspect also under penalty of death if the truth were known). Probably, without doubt, next to the hastily and stealthfully enacted "federal reserve act", the most gigantic swindle known to man. And don't forget state wars, the most egregious and deadly swindles of all. Ask me about it. So "we" are supposed to argue and wag our fingers and tongues and express opinions and write legislators and get all worked up over a huge packet of sloganry like "fair share". Arguments such as the one this guy Obama is now presenting are nothing but distractions. You and I are being robbed. The more we comply, the greater the robbery. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 17 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Government by its very nature is criminal. If you cannot grasp that basic truth you will be whanging and whaling back and forth in the center of the court forever -- never advancing toward the goal (freedom). Always lamenting that you "should" have a right to this or a right to that. Agents of state (that would include the little "judge" quoted in the "ruling") will not and cannot grant or protect rights. Ever. If you allow them, they will certainly take away what you thought of as "my rights" (often they do that even when you do not "allow" them -- tried boarding a commercial airline lately???) Robert Higgs wrote an interesting essay: http://www.independent.org/blog/?p=6334 But in it he committed one fatal error -- he slipped and used "my rulers" once (but, after rereading the piece I see he put "our" in quotes the next time: "our" rulers). I'm convinced that if you continue to use such descriptors you will never achieve genuine "freedom". If I cannot define the problem, I'll remain IN the problem, and the problem will remain WITH me. I am a sovereign state. I pledge allegiance to no flag. Although I am a sportsman (probably in better physical condition than 98% of all the other 75 year-olds in my city), I refrain from attending episodes called spectator sports. My main reason for that is by avoiding such places I don't have to deal with the embarrassment of having patriots hiss and chastise when I refuse to engage in state worship and remain seated while some nerd chortles a poorly-written "anthem" that is billed as "national". In cases where I am chaperone to grand-kids or where I have kids in the game and can't avoid it, I take that opportunity to go to the men's room. I suspect I am going to live to see the day, and this at once saddens but again encourages me, when impending world economic collapse will engender massive black markets and total ignorance of edicts of state. All state agents will be rendered impotent. The only thing keeping them strong today is "voluntary compliance" by state subjects, a first class sham. All ignorance is NOT bad ignorance. Sam
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 17 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    About the only good thing you say about this device is that it's better than a rubber bullet in the eye or a broken bone or internal trauma from being slammed to the ground by a water cannon. It is a serious escalation up from tear gas though. I hope the media keeps reporting on this lawsuit.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 17 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    “no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd;” “no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;” “no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice…” ~ Attributed to: Wisconsin Judge, Patrick J. FIEDLER Anyone, what are "Plaintiffs"? Black's Law Dictionary (c.1991) begins it's definition with, "A person..." Would that be an "artificial person", or a "natural person"? Artificial persons. Persons created by human laws for the purposes of...government, as distinguished from natural persons. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 113 NATURAL PERSONS. Such as are formed by nature, as distinguished from artificial persons, or corporations, formed by human laws for purposes of society and government. Wharton. ~ A Dictionary of the Law (Black’s 1st c. 1891), pg. 802 Remember, "that which one creates, one controls", or, to be more specific, "one has a just claim to control". PERSON. A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it implies. … Persons are divided by law into natural and artificial. Natural persons are such as the God of nature formed us; artificial are such as are created and devised by human laws, for the purposes of society and government, which are called “corporations” or “bodies politic.” 1 Bl. Comm. 123 ~ A Dictionary of Law [Black's Dictionary of the Law, 1st Edition], pg. 892 [Emphasis added] Body politic or corporate. A social compact by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen covenants with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common good. Uricich v. Kolesar, 54 Ohio App. 309, 7 N.E.,2d 413, 414 Again, we must ask, are "citizens" created by "human laws" or by "nature"?
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Reason, once looked upon as libertarian in content, has joined the family of governmentalist advocates of The Beltway. Follow the money. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Suverans2 has been "training" me to use HTML. I flubbed the link to CERN on the above post: http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/About/Structure-en.html Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    CERNagents of 20 different European "states". But since agents of states have NO "money" with which to finance these escapades, guess who gets robbed? Right. Persons residing in 20 European "states". As a government ("public" ha ha) educator eons ago -- before libertarianism crept up and bit me in the arse -- I always wondered why I was expected to ooohhh and aaahhh over some "exciting discovery" that erupted from these governmentalist waste-making entities that appeared to be worship centers for the religion of state funded "science". Then I became an anarchist. Now I know. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    The best treatment of anarchy I've seen is a paper by John Hasnas and was posted on STR by Anthony Gregory over a year ago (PDF): http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/Obvious.pdf He also wrote The Myth of the Rule of Law, which compliments the anarchy column. Labels delineating "types" of anarchists or "types" of libertarians are superfluous, IMHO (which is not humble by any means). Either I am free or I am not free. Either I believe I (or anybody else) "could or should have power" to banish this, that or some other non aggressive behavior on your part, or I do NOT so believe. Either I believe you have a natural right to be left alone or I do not believe you have that natural right. That is the sole delimiter that makes or breaks me as an anarchist or a libertarian. "Scientific Anarchism" is an interesting characterization. I'll have to add it to the list I posted a couple weeks ago that consisted of between 40 and 50 different "flavors" of libertarianism and/or anarchy I had come across since signing onto the internet five or six years ago. Osgood wrote this in 1889, which shows that things were not much different then than they are now. Folks will wring their hands and roll their eyes in attempt to avoid becoming truly free and to limit yours and my quests for freedom. That's what labels are all about. Sam
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Oh, groan! Someone should 'splain to A. Barton Hinkle what "a right" is. It is "a just claim". The idea of rights naturally suggest the correlative one of wrongs; for every right is capable of being violated. ... And, therefore, while, in a general point of view, the law is intended for the establishment and maintenance of rights, we find it, on closer examination, to be dealing with rights and wrongs. It first fixes the the character and definition of rights, and then, with a view to their effectual security, proceeds to define wrongs, and devise means by which the latter shall be prevented or redressed. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 1612 So, with that understanding, A. Barton Hinkle, the question, inverted, properly becomes, is it "wrong" for animals to try to defend their life, liberty and property?
  • Evan's picture
    Evan 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Paradigm shift?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    G'day Sam, I stand corrected. That second paragraph perhaps should have read, (and now reads): What is interesting is that free men, i.e. those who choose not to be members of a man-made body politic[1] (group), and who are, therefore, governed only by the law of nature, are free to use whatever we wish to use, (we don't need the STATE to sanctify anything). _______________________________________________________________________________ [1] Body politic or corporate. A social compact by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common good. Urich v. Kolesar, 54 Ohio App 309, 7 N.E. 2d 413, 414 ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 175
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    As long as you voluntarily remain a member of "the group", your group "leader(s)" may tell you what you can or cannot ingest. Why? Because the collective ("the group") is ultimately responsible for the health of its individual members. What is interesting is that free men, i.e. those who choose not to be members of any man-made body politic (group), and who are, therefore, governed only by the law of nature, are free to use whatever we wish to use, (we don't need the STATE to sanctify[1] anything). But, with freedom comes responsibility. And, because I am ultimately responsible for my own "healthcare", I choose not to use methamphetamine as a recreational drug. "When the freedom they wished for most was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again." ~ Edith Hamilton ___________________________________________________________________________ [1] Legalize. ...To add the sanction and authority of law to that which before was without or against the law. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 895
  • jwalk's picture
    jwalk 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    St. Clair County, Michigan has been doing that for years now. They call it a "dismissal fee".
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Can an anarchist "banish all forms of authority" for everyone, (even for those desiring a ruler), or can an anarchist "banish all forms of authority" for himself only? "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." ~ Mahatma Gandhi To be (walk the talk) or not to be (talk the walk), that is the question.
  • rita's picture
    rita 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    In Arizona, the presumptive sentence for child endangerment is 2.5 years. The presumptive sentence for the victimless crime of possession of dangerous drugs for sale is 10.5. To protect the children.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 18 weeks ago
    Beautiful Freedom
    Web link Mike Powers
    Stefan Molyneux says more clearly and concisely what I've observed ever since my kids and grandkids felt sorry for me (I've always refuse to own television) and set me up with a computer and got me on the internet. A week or two ago I posted a list of various labels I had come across that are used by different "brands" or "flavors" or "types" of libertarians and anarchists. It seems the list I had compiled over the years numbered well over 40 varying disciplines. Then some readers posted more that I had missed to add to my list. All superfluous. It does not matter "how" such services as police and fire protection, streets and highways, air traffic control, etc., will come into being -- things that have generally been considered strictly the purveyance of state predators: "The Government", "The State", "My Country", "Our-Great-Nation", on and on go the slogans. Each of my 75 years has witnessed increasing incursions by omnipresent parasites of state into every phase and factor of the marketplace. And now these gangsters are bringing the economy right up to the edge of the abyss. I've never seen a truly free market. Neither have you. If you are on here it's because you believe the free market can and will give rise to better, faster, more efficient and less costly of these services than could ever be brought about by (dis)organized civil government. By the time these thieves and robbers finally cannibalize each other -- destroying an untold number of their serfs in the process -- and implode, all we can hope for is that there will be enough anarchists in our midst to make certain state will never happen again. Never. Let the marketplace determine "how" -- it will, you know. Sam. No government anywhere, at any time, has ever brought net benefit to any society, and there is no desirable function that any government performs that could not be performed better, or less expensively, by free people operating on a voluntary basis for profit or for charity. ~Jim Davies http://www.takelifeback.com/tdaw/ Also read: http://www.strike-the-root.com/52/davis_m/davis1.html
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    The Watchdog article is under the caption: Virginia may declare Sudafed more dangerous than date rape drug The author uses a major fallacy, which s/he clears up in the first sentence, "Virginia lawmakers..." Virginia is a location. A location is incapable of "declaring" anything. As our old friend Delmar England insists, we will never recover from governmentalistic insanity until we come to correctly define our terms. Out there in journalistic land insanity IS the social norm. It is probably important WE see through the insanity if we are to recover from governmentalism. (Oops -- there I used thewe word again! Sorry.) I've ceased using terms such as, "our rulers" or "our lawmakers", because they are no longer MY "rulers" or MY "lawmakers". My Lawmaker sustains photosynthesis. My Ruler maintains the rotation of the earth on its axis. That said, the article assumes a drug "war" is legitimate. Insane. Totally the domain of sociopaths. If there were truly a free market there would be no methamphetamine -- or any other "street drugs". All "black" markets would disappear if there were no meddlesome governmentalists to keep them strong. 'Nuff said. Suverans2, I think you're stretching "group" when you equate it with "government". You and I and a couple dozen other regular posters here at STR are members of this "group" when you think about it. And, if I wish to stay in this group I need to adhere to certain rules of literary conduct established by the administrator(s) (to say nothing of using good, common courtesy). But I'm free to leave this group whenever I choose. There's always "RushTalk" (ultra-neocon) or "Soarsboard" (ultra-liberal). I once belonged to Rotary Club. I quietly left as my anarchy became more cured and hardened. Rotarians love to rub elbows with and have senators and congressmen and presidents and prime ministers speak at their luncheons. Statists cum laude. I had already chosen to no longer be a member of "the government" and all "its" avid followers. I then chose not to waste my time in Rotary Club. Free men and women can choose their own poison. Sam
  • rita's picture
    rita 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    The way to "battle meth cooks" is to legalize meth.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    As you well know, Suverans2, I wholeheartedly agree with your post. As you also know, there were a goodly number of individuals in 1933 who refused to obediently gather their gold coins and bullion and turn it over to state-owned banksters in exchange for worthless fiat "currency" simply because a sociopathic tyrant dictated that is what they "must" do..."it's our LAW!" (yuk yuk yuk) If you could locate and retrieve a cache of that gold still buried deep in the earth it would be worth a "fortune" today. At that part of Dr. North's essay you quote he is emphasizing the need to define terms before one can understand why "economists" cannot or will not sanction economic theory. Writers often say "country," when they mean – or should have meant – the banking cartel's senior bankers, the system of individuals enforced by the Federal Reserve, who "advise" the chattels who dominate the illusion of "power" ("presidents", "prime ministers", etc) who dictate the terms of "money" to the unwashed masses. I refer to myself as a Sovereign State. I am a citizen. The ONLY citizen as a matter of fact. I chance to live close to people I love on a land mass named after a dubious "discoverer". I have not needed to move away from my family and friends to a "state" (is it "New Hampshire"?) or to a platform floating out in the sea to achieve and/or maintain sovereignty. Sovereignty be where ah is. State functionaries are still pains in the ass just like all the other common thieves -- except with ordinary thieves I have the advantage of knowing that the thief KNOWS s/he is a thief. As such I have total responsibility for MY well-being and MY behavior (I include this jurisdiction to include family and loved ones to the extent they seek my help due to their not yet having learned to declare and practice sovereignty for or by themselves). My President is responsible for the rotation of the earth on its axis and maintains the critical distance from the medium sized star that we know as "our sun". My Representative sustains such laws as photosynthesis. That is a good nation in which to live. I could not live any other way. Regards, Sam
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    G'day Sam, Within the article you recommended, we read the following: "...the banking cartel's senior bankers, the system enforced by the Federal Reserve, which persuaded Franklin Roosevelt to unilaterally confiscate all of the gold coins and gold-denominated debt certificates of all residents of the United States and all American citizens, no matter where they lived." Notice that the PRESIDENT, (not Franklin Roosevelt), could only "unilaterally confiscate all of the gold coins and gold-denominated debt certificates of all residents of the United States and all American[sic] [UNITED STATES] citizens"? The PRESIDENT has no authority over those who choose not to be members of his "group[1]". As an Individual Secessionist I am neither a "resident[2]" nor a "citizen" of[3], i.e. belonging to, the UNITED STATES or any of its franchise/affiliate STATES. _____________________________________________________________________________________ [1] Secession. The act of withdrawing from membership in a group. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1351 [Emphasis added] [2] Don't be fooled by the word "resident". Word "resident" has many meanings in law, largely determined by statutory context in which it is used. Kelm v. Carlson, C.A.Ohio, 473 F2d, 1267, 1271 [3] Of. A term denoting that from which anything proceeds; indicating origin, source, descent, and the like... Associated with or connected with, usually in some causal relation, efficient, material, formal, or final. The word has been held equivalent to after; at, or belonging to; in possession of; manufactured by; residing at; from. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1080 [Emphasis added]
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Nicholas Snow laments, "...So why then do some economists jump the train of economic theory?..." And then he goes into an intellectual discussion of "the importance of economic theory". Very good. But first I'd like you to read what Gary North had to say about the nature of "economists" and the Federal Reserve over on Lew Rockwell a few months back: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north962.html Sam
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    The bottom line? "The fact that federal loan guarantees were even necessary for Solyndra tells us that few, if any, lenders thought that giving the firm money was a very good idea." ~ Jerry Taylor and/or Peter Van Doren And, I'm not at all certain that the fact that "major Democratic donor, George Kaiser, had a major stake in the firm" had nothing whatsoever to do with Barack Hussein Obama's decision to offer up over FIVE HUNDRED MILLION TAXPAYER DOLLARS in federal loan guarantees to SOLYNDRA.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 18 weeks ago
    How to Get a Job
    Page Paul Bonneau
    Well, my wife does what she wants to do; and pays little attention to my advice (which is to stop working in the above-ground economy). She is hardly a wage slave. She plays the part of Hank Rearden to my John Galt. :-) One extra point I forgot to make: you as an employee bring a cost, and a benefit, to the employer. Cost is not only your wage, but regulations and all sorts of non-monetary stuff (of course government has increased everyone's cost to employers). If your cost is higher than what you produce, you might coast along in a hot economy, but not in a slow one. It's to your advantage to make the benefit greater than the cost, and the larger that gap is the less likely you will be part of a layoff. That's why I never in my life asked for a raise. I just told my employer that if I ever got the impression I was being taken advantage of, I would leave. I made enough money to suit my needs, because I was not envious or even curious what others made. Not my business...
  • mikehauncho's picture
    mikehauncho 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    Wow, they obviously didn't want to chase after him for fear of having to answer many questions about their terrible conduct. Dam this awful police state that steps on the powerless.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    Double posted. My bad.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 18 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    What saved this guy was the camera. Absent the cam this guy gets a curb stomping and ends up in jail.