Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Papers Please! All Aboard! ...Last Stop, Auschwitz...

This latest essay of mine asks what will happen if
we do not begin stopping the violations of our rights,
as they are happening. ...If we do not begin to defend
ourselves with force, when we are met with force.

They have overwhelming force, but they do not have
planning or intelligence. They bully us with brute force
and expect us to submit. We should learn to disappoint
them, as did a small group of "citizen-subjects" in Warsaw,
Poland, in 1941.

Do you want to hear what became of America?
It died a long, long time ago. It died when Americans
refused to rebel the first time they were told that
they couldn't own whatever private property they
wanted to own, and when they lost the product
of their labor to the Federal Reserve. And now, we
have mongoloids in airports demanding that we
waive our rights, without cause, provocation, or


I'm sorry to use such harsh language, but listening
to the following recording made my blood boil. I
understand that socialists like Ashcroft and
Gonzalez and Holder have all turned America's
eagles into vultures, but sometimes I can't view it
dispassionately. I spent all day at the range,
shooting paper plates at 25 yards with my handguns.
I didn't miss once. I'm so glad I hadn't listened to
this before I left, or I would have been literally
trembling with rage.

Scroll down to the link marked:
"recorded all but the start of the incident"
audio recording of the actual interrogation:

You will hear mindless children in men's bodies
threatening and questioning an American citizen
about why and how he came into possession of
money. How dare he be free to travel, free
from harassment and questioning, and
inconvenience? How dare he assert his rights,
or even ask why they are being abridged?!

They repeatedly threaten him, and pressure him to
waive his 4th amendment rights: "We can avoid all
of this, if you'd just submit."

They proceed to insult his intelligence ("It's a
simple question"), and threaten him with unlawful
DEA searches, harassment, and further
interrogation. They return time and again to
the tired bromide of "If you don't have anything
to hide, then why won't you answer our questions?"

...Maybe because the 4th amendment says he doesn't
have to answer them!

It's "suspicious" if you don't waive your rights.

Just like Germany in the mid 1930s. Everyone
has something to hide! And if they don't, it
can be fabricated, since due process is gone.

Is this the last stop? ...America's final

Few Americans realize that this train ride has
a final destination, since we've allowed the
government unlimited power. The power to hold
the purse strings, the power to make us beg for
permission to own property.

...But the train is moving really slow, and
it's such wonderful scenery!

For temporary comfort and apathy, we've sold
our future down the river, to a slave trader
that makes those in Frederick Douglass's
"Narrative" look positively benign.

Hopefully, us freedom lovers can begin working
together, before the train slows to a halt, and
we find out where our cattle car has taken us.

The man being questioned in the recording? He
works for Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty".

As such, he is a suspected "terrorist"

...as is anyone capable of reason, and incapable
of "doublethink".

Monday, April 13, 2009

A Review of Marc Stevens' Speech "Delusions", "Opinions" Vs. "Facts"

I want to link you to the uncut truth. Go to http://marcstevens.net and watch "Delusions".

Now then, understand that I am not as critical of electoral politicians as some people are. I understand that there is good that can be done using counter-systemic psychology, among the voting masses.

To some of you who are receiving this, Marc Stevens' speech might be painful, to others, cathartic, to others, an annoyance.

I understand the idea of the Constitution, and of declaring war. I get it. Al qaeda is an external threat. But they can't get to me very well, unless it's because the internal threats to my freedom have won, making my country weak and servile.

In truth, like all anarchists, I have no country.

...The only war I can believe in is a personal war.

Nature is anarchist, human action is the best when it is libertarian and decentralized.

If you don't like Marc Stevens, it would help to read "No Treason: the constitution of no authority" at LysanderSpooner.org

and perhaps

"Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: an American Slave" by Frederick Douglass.

Douglass was born into literal Southern Slavery. He taught himself to read and write, under the penalty of death. He had to pretend to be a happy slave for years, (happy to be allowed to keep some of his money, but not most of it) until he had saved enough money to escape.

Now that we are all slaves of the Federal Reserve, we are in a similar, though more
comfortable situation.

We have freedom of some choice, but not true freedom. Do we risk what we have, or press onward to find out what we've been missing?

We are allowed to keep a small piece of what we earn, and are expected to not
complain that we give the vast majority of it away. It helps to know that the
government is not stupid, and at the actual top, it is not bureaucratic and

You get as much money as you can, but just as easily, your claim on that money
can be targeted, since there is no law. Or, if it appears that many slaves similar
to you have gotten the same idea, a "financial crisis" can be manufactured.

Most people only realize this when they start to try to fight the law, and see
that they are, instead, fighting a pledge of allegiance (an emotional part of the mind of a million slaves).

And that's the real battle. The battle against conformity. Libertarian anarchism
is what the nonconformist subscribes to, once the illusions and chains of irrational
belief are lifted.

Let's just imagine that the USA was free, and that there was no state.

Would it be pretty obvious that people should learn how to defend themselves?

Would "front sight" rifle and pistol training academy have more or fewer students?

More, I would guess. And they would be vastly better prepared for violence than
the average citizen is. Moreover, they would have gone through more rounds of
ammunition than even military marksmen go through. (Parasitism doesn't pay as well as the earnings of a strong host. It is always less. The tape worms in the lion's guts don't have life as good as the lion has it. And the lions --who exist by means of force-- don't have life as good as the man --who lives by his mind-- has it. The military, which is parasitic, cannot spend as much on ammunition as the individual productive humans on which it feeds ...at least not in a free market.)

Would Al-qaeda attack such a strong nation of individuals? --Not likely. And in the event that it did, it would be destroyed upon entry.

Would our politicians attack us with their courts, if we failed to use our productive efforts to prop up slave-states like China? Could they even attempt this, if we were not enslaved to a false belief in their paper?

No. We would be too wealthy for them to prevail against us in a court of law. Moreover, China and Iran would fail, and their leaders --Al qaeda among them-- would be swallowed whole, kicking and screaming by their rebelling countrymen, (who would demand to be as wealthy and happy as those they were trading with.)

By being closer in proximity to the Arabs, and mingling with them as their free superiors, we would wage psychological warfare against their irrational, emotional religious hatred of individualism. Psychological warfare is the most effective kind of warfare there is, as anyone who listens to Marc Stevens knows, or as those who have read the CIA manual on psychological warfare by Paul A. Linnebarger know.

Just as the wealthy libertarian anarchist wages a form of psychological warfare against the servile state thugs who see the superiority of his belief, and the material blessings it affords. The simplest view of this is the contrast between socially tolerant free-market Republicans and socialist Democrats. The Democrat at first feels superior for having suffered for his moral beliefs, but if the Republican is similarly moral, the Democrat can only feel stupid. (As Dostoevsky's Raskolnikov must have felt, throughout his time spent in Siberia.)

The same is true, but to a greater degree, between statists of all kinds (D or R or C or G or AI, or "weak-L") and anarchists.

The surest way we could have revenge against the middle-eastern terrorists is to eliminate our Federal Reserve bank, and reinstate the rights of US "citizens" to free speech, and due process. (Don't be so stupid as to believe there is such a thing as free speech, since effective free speech has been done away with. Frank Turney of Alaska was arrested for speaking the truth about jury rights to incoming jurors outside of a Fairbanks courthouse. He was sentenced to 160 days for "jury tampering" although his only crime was handing out general information about jury rights to incoming jurors.)

We tasted a small amount of the wealth that such a difference in policy creates during the Industrial revolution.

Plenty of nations experienced no industrial revolution, and remained in extreme poverty. Freedom is relative, and you have only as much of it as you desire.

That's why I desire a lot of it. I have enough desire for markets to give extra to thousands of my countrymen.

When I am successful, there will be such a thing as a true market.

What we have now is only a half-assed, stunted imitation of a market.

...It's not enough for me.