Food Tyrants


rita's picture

"The progressive campaign against obesity relies on the assumption that the individual no longer owns his or her own body" HELLO! Can you spell "prohibition"? Can you spell "drug war"? How about "mandatory substance abuse treatment"? For decades, the vast majority of Americans have sat in fat, dumb, happy silence while literally millions of us were harrassed, arrested, imprisoned and gunned down in cold blood on the assumption that "society," aka "our government," owns our bodies. Oh, but threaten to take away their Quarter-pounders, and listen to them wail. And you think even one of these bozos sees a connection? Not freakin' likely. This would be funny if it weren't so tragic.

Suverans2's picture

The "connection" most "bozos" don't see, (or refuse to see), is this:

    Que sentit commodum, sentire debet et onus. He who derives a benefit from a thing, ought to feel the disadvantages attending it. 2 Bouv. Inst. n. 1433.

Care to guess what one of the main "disadvantages" is? "Allegiance", which is, "Obligation of fidelity and obedience to government in consideration for protection that government gives."

And, to complete the circle, a major part of the "protection" that "government gives", is ____________? You guessed it, "prohibition", which is really not much more than "protection" from yourself, in an effort to make your life "bozo-proof".

    Obedience. Compliance with a command, prohibition, or known law and rule of duty prescribed. The performance of what is required or enjoined by authority, or the abstaining from what is prohibited, in compliance with the command or prohibition.

So, if you are tired of being a "bozo", leave the "circus". ;)

rita's picture

The only people prohibition was ever meant to protect were paranoid whites from the minorities they oppressed and certain politicians from well-deserved obscurity. That nonsense about protecting me from my own choices can easily be disproved with a little research into the nature of illegal drugs -- most of them are neither dangerous nor addictive -- and drug arrests, most of which involve a drug that has never, ever killed anyone and a level of violence that would be unacceptable from American soldiers in any other part of the world.

That said, please explain exactly how one "leaves the circus."

Suverans2's picture

G'day rita,

    "The only people prohibition was ever meant to protect were paranoid whites from the minorities they oppressed and certain politicians from well-deserved obscurity." ~ rita

You lost me there, rita. I have no idea how "prohibition" was, (or is), "meant to protect...paranoid whites from the minorities they oppressed and certain politicians from well-deserved obscurity". Are you referring to drugs, as if that is the only thing your government "prohibits" you from doing?

Exactly? Withdraw from membership in the group.

    "We the People, living under natural law, do have the [natural] 'right' to secede from ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT and will continue to do so until our last breath." ~ sc 1000
    "I would suggest using the Declaration of Independence as a good place to start....just update the text with modern phrasing [and personalize it] and insert appropriate examples of tyrannical abuses. Whether or not an armed conflict would result, would depend on the players involved." ~ Tuppence

[Bracketed information added]

Quotes taken from:

Suverans2's picture

"Authority is yours to delegate or to keep, and no one can [rightfully] take it from you. Revoke your delegation of authority..." ~ tzo [Emphasis added]

Declaration of Independence
Formal Notice of Individual Secession

Secession. The act of withdrawing from membership in a group. ~ Black’s Law Dictionary, Abridged Sixth Edition, copyright 1991, page 940

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for a man to dissolve the bands which have connected him with a body politic, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Law of Nature and Nature’s God entitle him, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that he should declare the cause(s) which impel him to the separation.
″We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that [is to say] they are endowed by their Creator with certain Inalienable Rights″[1], "rights which can never be abridged because they are so fundamental"[2], that among these Natural Rights are Life, Liberty, and justly acquired Property, "together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can"[3]. To secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men[4], deriving their just powers from the Consent of the governed, – and whenever any Government becomes destructive of these Inalienable Rights, every man has the Lawful Authority to Withdraw his Consent, and to return to the separate and equal station to which the Law of Nature[5] and Nature’s God entitles him. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be Seceded from for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that men are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by Withdrawing from the governments 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 Secede from such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of this Man; and such is now the necessity that constrains this Man to Secede from this Government. The history of the United States Government, rather than securing, has a record of repeated injuries to, and usurpation of, Man’s Inalienable Rights, all having as their direct objective the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over men.

I, Robert Wilfred, therefore, being a Lawful Man, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of my intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the Creator of the heavens, the earth and the seas, and all that in them is, solemnly publish and declare, this Man is, and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent, that he is Absolved from all Allegiance to the United States, and any and all States under the authority of the United States, and that all political connection between him and the aforementioned States, is and ought to be Totally Dissolved; and that as a Free and Independent Man, I have full Power to Arm and Protect Myself, my Loved Ones, and my justly acquired Possessions, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Trade, Possess Land, Travel Freely and to do all other Acts and Things which Free and Independent Men may of Natural Right do.

[1] Excerpted from: The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
[2] Black’s Law Dictionary, Abridged Sixth Edition, copyright 1991, page 1057
[3] "Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first, a right to life; secondly, to liberty; thirdly to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can." ~ Samuel Adams, signer of the American Declaration of Independence
[4] “Our legislators are not sufficiently apprized of the rightful limits of their power; that their true office is to declare and enforce only our natural rights . . . and to take none of them from us. No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another; and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him . . . and the idea is quite unfounded, that on entering into society we give up any natural right.” ~ Thomas Jefferson (c.1816), author of the American Declaration of Independence
[5] The law of nature is superior in obligation to any other. It is binding in all countries and at all times. No human laws are valid if opposed to this, and all which are binding derive their authority either directly or indirectly from it. ~ Institutes of American Law by John Bouvier, 1851, Part I, Title II, No. 9

Notice to the Agent is Notice to the Principal; Notice to the Principal is Notice to the Agent
Amen and amen.

Authors Signature ________________________________

First Witness ____________________________________

Second Witness __________________________________

AtlasAikido's picture

I am reminded both by Rita and you--Suverans2 of this:

Thaddeus Russell tells a renegade tale to Lew Rockwell.

Professor Russell’s new Renegade History of the United States speaks volumes to the eternal conflict between those who hold power and all the ordinary peoples. The Founding Fathers wanted the British regime without the King. The wonderfully anarchic culture in the colonies alarmed them to the core [including the drinking and carousing in the pubs] of the whites and non. The abolitionists, who were deeply Puritanical, felt that slaves were too free in some ways, and Reconstruction was the first Afghanistan – the push of New England to control the entire world. Thad Russell sees Obama as the throwback to the worst of the Progressives, desiring total control over peoples’ lives. Meanwhile, the regular left misses or ignores the dark side.

"Thaddeus Russell has broken free of the ideological prisons of Left and Right to give us a real, flesh-and-blood history of America, filled with untold stories and unlikely heroes. No waving incense before the sacred personages of Washington, D.C. here. This wonderful book follows the best American traditions of iconoclasm and – what is the same thing – truth-telling." ~ Thomas E. Woods, Jr., author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History|

PS For them who followed in the footsteps of the control freaks it's ALL about "controlling" us. They can and do print money but rather rape the pension funds of those who work for them in addition. Why? Because they are plain vicious!

rita's picture

Yes, Suverans, I suppose I was. I should have said "the prohibition of drugs, including that 'noble' experiment, alcohol prohibition."

Suverans2's picture

G'day rita,

I still fail to see why you say, "The only people prohibition was ever meant to protect were paranoid whites from the minorities they oppressed and certain politicians from well-deserved obscurity."

I am currently of the opinion that "prohibition" of drugs is to "protect" high drug prices [1], since a blind man can see that that is precisely what the so-called "War on Drugs" does.

    The product is difficult to acquire or produce, dangerous to handle or not easily available legally, if at all. If goods are illegal, such as some drugs, their prices can be vastly inflated over the costs of production. ~ Wikipedia

"Prohibition" obviously does not stop the selling, buying, or using them, (as anyone with half a mind can learn from the history of the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution). It may, in fact, have the opposite effect; it may encourage it, particularly with the so-called "minorities"[2], due to the high profits.

[1] "The United Nations has reported that the retail market value of illegal drugs is $321.6 billion USD."
[2] I believe that the "paranoid whites" are actually the minority race of the world population, and slowly(?) becoming the minority race of the Unites States.