How Dare You Rob Me of My Time on Earth

Re: The Revolutionary War (which created America) and the Civil War (which saved America) were close to being somewhat “justified.”

The so -called Civil war--the South was not trying to invade the North. It was not a civil war. It hardly saved America. We are all slaves now.

Abraham Lincoln destroyed the Philosophical Union and imposed a Physical Union--Force over Reason--using bayonets and a train of usurpations worse than England's George III--the reason for seceding from England in the first place--and Lincoln UNDID Jefferson's works and thereby added teeth (an understatement) to Hamilton's Proto-Fascist national banking super state agenda.

They were both Revolutionary Wars. Re: the first War: The British are coming! Re: The second War: the British and their ways are already here with their Mercantilist agendas enforced by Abraham Lincoln's War of Northern Aggression.

Lincoln's 'Second American Revolution'
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo32.html

Re: The [first] Revolutionary War as the "creator of America".

Freedom--from tyranny and its train of usurpations--is necessary and essential but not sufficient. See Thomas DiLorenzo's "How Capitalism Saved America" (now remnant thanks to the planks of Abraham Lincoln's Unnecessary War. It was also the bloodiest war in American History and waged on civilians and later on the Indians).

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance90.html

Other entries:
http://www.google.com/custom?sa=Search&cof=LW%3A500%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fw...

Re: The Southern cause was "close to being somewhat justified."

The Southern cause was "NOT [just] close to being somewhat justified." It was right and completely justified.

Lincoln's stated purpose in the war was to destroy the principle of the Declaration of Independence that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Southerners no longer consented to being governed by Washington, DC, so Lincoln waged total war against them for four long years. Of course, he didn't put it this way but instead sugarcoated his objective with language about "saving the Union." At the time many Americans — including dozens of Northern newspaper editors — considered the act of compelling a state to remain in the Union at gunpoint to be destructive of the voluntary union of the states. And they were right.

The Unknown Lincoln
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo26.html

Understanding the large body of knowledge that intellectuals Ayn Rand and Ludwig Von Mises and their students-- including the ground breaking work of Thomas Dilorenzo's, "The Real Lincoln", and Stephan Kinsella's illuminating work on CopyRight copywrongs and its co-destruction of a Division of Labor society--are essential to UN-Blinding what IS UnSeen and impossible to glean by just reading what one's masters write, teach and spread around.

Lysander Spooner, the author of the 1845 book, The Unconstitutionality of Slavery and a celebrated abolitionist, wrote in his 1870 essay, "No Treason," that "all these cries of having ‘abolished slavery,' of having ‘preserved the union,' of establishing a ‘government by consent,' and of ‘maintaining the national honor' are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats — so transparent that they ought to deceive no one." Thanks to 140 years of propaganda in the government schools, these "cheats" now appear to deceive nearly everyone.

Notes: Lysander Spooner who authored The Unconstitutionality of Slavery in 1845, ...
http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&cof=L:http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewr...

Re: "During these days we feel in our gut that when General Sherman said, “War is hell” he was only half right.

Yes, War is hell for those who wish to secede from exploitative empires.

As soon as Gandhi began influencing millions of Indians, he and some 60,000 of his followers were imprisoned in 1930. This led Winston Churchill to declare that "Gandhi-ism and all it stands for [peaceful resistance to tyranny] will, sooner or later, have to be . . . crushed." "Gandhi had replaced Lenin as Churchill's arch nemesis," writes Baker.

A New Look at How Wold War II Happened
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo142.html

Sherman was every bit as much a racist and white supremacist as Lincoln. He was also an anti-Semite, and of course hated red-skinned people almost as much as he hated South Carolinians — and would later kill them in even greater numbers.

Slaves were raped, pillaged, and murdered indiscriminately along with the white population of the South, and Sherman did nothing to stop it. *This is documented*.

It has been claimed in print that Sherman was some kind of egalitarian who was motivated by indignation over the degree of racial inequality in the South. (Cisco proves what delusional liars such Lincoln (and Sherman) cultists as Victor Davis Hanson are in "Abuse of African-Americans" by Sherman's army in Cisco's final, stomach-turning chapter.

...The union of the founders was destroyed in 1865. War Crimes Against Southern Civilians explains in great detail how, in addition to killing some 300,000 dissenters to rule by Washington, D.C. on the battlefield, the U.S. Army, under the micromanagement of Abe Lincoln, also murdered tens of thousands of Southern civilians, including thousands of slaves and free blacks, while stealing tens of millions of dollars of their private possessions as well. None of it was necessary, of course, for the purpose of ending slavery; all other countries on earth ended slavery peacefully during the nineteenth century. This included the British, Spanish, French, Dutch, and Danish colonies, where 96 percent of all the slaves in the Western Hemisphere once existed. The purpose of the war was to finally realize the Hamiltonian dream of a consolidated, monopolistic government that would pursue what Hamilton himself called "national greatness" and "imperial glory." The purpose of the war, in other words, was a New Birth of Empire, one that would hopefully rival the Europeans in the exploitation of their own citizens in the name of the glory of the state.

Malice Toward All, Charity Toward None: The Foundations of the American State
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo123.html

On May 13, 1985, in the twilight of the Cold War, residents of Philadelphia were ruthlessly bombed from the sky...

The perpetrator was not the Soviet Union, or else the attack might have escalated into international conflict. It certainly would have made it into textbook timelines and become part of the nation’s consciousness. No, those responsible for this atrocity were members of the Philadelphia police department. The local cops sought to finish off their political enemies after years of animosity and tension. The proximate legal excuse for bombing their own city? The cops had gotten complaints about noise and the stench of compost.

Twenty-six years have passed since the bombing of the MOVE house and if there was any doubt before, it is now beyond question that the local police have become the occupying troops that Malcolm X described. They are the standing army the Founding Fathers warned against. In the United States, they are the most dangerous gang operating and they do so under the color of law.....

The chaotic violence of the modern police state is ubiquitous. Every day there are 100 SWAT raids in America. Remember in the old days when SWAT raids were reserved for stopping some terrorist intent on destroying half the city? Maybe that was just in the movies. There were 3,000 SWAT raids in 1981, the year the author was born, which was bad enough. There will be 40,000 this year.

Surely, the people who are killed by the cops had it coming. Well, consider how many are killed when the police presumably do not intend to kill at all and so reach for their taser...

Although there was plenty to object to in colonial law and law in the early republic 1776, police as we now know them didn’t exist back then. (Actually the so called Law and Order Red Coats were the thin red line cops back in the time as were the blue line of Lincoln's troops (see above posts regarding their law and order usurpations on civilians).

But don’t police put their lives on the line for us? Only 117 police were killed in the line of duty in 2009, which might seem like a lot, but being a police officer is not even one of the top ten dangerous jobs in America. Policeman is 12th and fireman 13th.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/86367.html

Regarding statistics of life forms being shot by police in their war against everybody:

The TV news frets about al-Qaeda, but rarely exposes the threat of the thin blue line. About as many Americans have been killed by police since 9/11/01 as died on that day. Between 1980 and 2005, police killed 9,500 people in the U.S., approximately one per day and almost three-fourths as many people as have been sentenced and executed in the United States since colonial times. A study in Harris County, Texas, found that between 1999 and mid 2005, officers in the county shot 65 unarmed people, killing 17.

They tended early on to focus their brutality against the other – immigrants, gangsters, ethnic minorities, transients and the counterculture. Today they still bias their violence against the fringes of society, the young and the powerless, but they are now so vast a presence that no one is safe, no matter how respectable, no matter his demographic.

Some will object that that author is cherry picking. So let us limit ourselves to just the last couple months to illustrate the depth of the problem....continued in link below

Abolish the Police
by Anthony Gregory
http://lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory213.html

PS If you distrust socialism, you should distrust law-enforcement socialism as much as anything, for this is the original sin that allows all other state depredations to follow. I think another blogger Rita had mentioned the need for statistics for police shootings on another thread. And they are in this link.

Dispute Resolution...

The fact that people still cling to the belief that the State is required to resolve disputes is amazing, since modern courts are out of the reach of all but the most wealthy and patient, and are primarily used to shield the powerful from competition or criticism.

And what of armed disputes and collective services?

The Stateless Society
An Examination of Alternatives
by Stefan Molyneux
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/molyneux1.html

This is one alternative outside the box of statism. One does not need to wait for this alternative to take hold although it already has to some extent as more and more understand what is going on. At a personal level it is about avoiding trouble. Taking precautions. Surrounding oneself with compatible friends. Reducing vulnerabilities. And this can be as explicit as having a personal covenant of unanimous consent. And there are arbitration services that one can use that actually solve the problems. Not to mention that a prudent businessman pays attention to the certainty trap and makes provision for the risk of set backs and liabilities....

I might also add that if the US can slide into being a third world banana republic, could it rise to another model?

Freedom vs Force
Why The Failing US and EU Should Follow the Swiss Government Model!
http://www.lewrockwell.com/holland/holland14.1.html

But then they did not have Hamilton nor Lincoln to contend with nor their whig Mercantlist warfare-welfare-you will be assimilated agenda.

But they the Swiss do have a 4% referendum that allows them to rescind laws on the spot--a way to easily undo the works of politicians . States (cantons that actually compete) and competitive interest in trade and good will....There is more of course including multiple currencies...Oh how refreshing....

So why is Switzerland different? Here are some highlight of why the Swiss government model works and the European Union and American Union have failed to deliver on their big-government utopian promises.

National Expansion By Voluntary Association vs Force — The term "Willensnation" is a Swiss concept of national growth and expansion by attraction through the voluntary association of neighboring principalities, cities, and individuals. This makes Switzerland a nation created by acts of free will rather than force. Growth by attraction of those willing to be part of the Helvetian Confederation rather than war and invasion have served the Swiss well over the last few hundred years of peace and prosperity.

How totally different from the American model of "manifest destiny" and military aggression which is how most of the national expansion of the United States took place. The growth of the Union was followed again by force with the outright invasion of the Southern states that decided to leave by Lincoln's armies during the War Between the States.

The article also specifically addresses and fleshes out :

Tax Competition vs Forced Tax Harmonization — ....

Competing Currencies vs Currency Monopoly — .....

Ultimate Citizen Control vs Political Establishment —....

This is something to look at. But it is govt and you know what that means.

There are alternatives to waiting for others and that was touched on at the beginning of this post and in other threads. Such as Was Ayn Rand A Proto-Fascist? (No she was not, Abe Lincoln was, but she did leave some answers)
http://www.strike-the-root.com/was-ayn-rand-proto-fascist

And alternatives were provided here on the link below too--no it is not to reform the police. They are beyond reform. Parenting does not require policing. Nor does living one's life.
http://www.strike-the-root.com/police-reform

Correction and Re-post to proper thread reply.