Wednesday, March 19, 2014

#58 A Letter To Pal

[This is a letter to a pal, a brother actually. I'm removing his name, because this letter could go out generically to many others. A pal is also an acronym for a Politically Active Leader in the making.]

Dear Pal,

I heard you on an internet broadcast. You could have come off much better. You need to get less complex, and get with people's feelings. We thank you for ferreting out the facts. That's fine, but you ended up being caught up in details that only matter to nit pickers, without understanding the depth of our anger. THAT you must place first; acknowledge the rightful anger of the awakening American (and world) public. [Zbigniew Brzezinski certainly has good reason to be afraid, as he expressed it at a meeting of the CFR, in London]

Secondly, everyone is disgusted with inflation, taxation and government interference and meddling. We're also damn tired of corporations that are too big and that get funding to do terrible things. We do not buy AT ALL that we are responsible for degrading the environment, so we're disgusted with the guilt pandering too. We know who has been degrading the environment, the Monsantos, the British Petroleums, the GE's, etc. We suspect and can prove sufficient corporate involvement too.

You cannot ignore the research that has come before you, especially concerning the Federal Reserve. It WAS conceived and enacted in secret. There is a reason why certain people wanted a central bank to control the issuance of money here and in every other country, enough that they were willing, as they always have been, to make money on three wars to accomplish their ends. You say they're just a bank. What is so great about any bank, let alone one that controls the nation's money? I'll answer you, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

We will not be satisfied with splitting hairs over public vs. private corporations, etc. Certainly Congress could dissolve the Fed's charter and I believe there's a provision in there to buy them out too. Fat chance of any of that, because the cancer that really exists is bank debt. Want to know why? It's simple, Pal. All the money you know of was created the same way, as a loan from a bank. No big deal? Well what about the interest? That part of the money supply was NOT created, so it is always scrounged from everyone else. A false scarcity is created even during periods of inflation. Prices may rise but there's never enough money. It's the fatal flaw of the entire system and it's the reason it will eventually fall.

Let's get back into the post you passed along to me, since you think you've found someone who can do the job of POTUS.


Step 1 – Establish a Federal (national) anti-usury law.

He can do what he likes, he seems to have more confidence in law, certainly more than I do. But a law is only as good as it has support among the people. Someone somewhere will still be loan sharking. Any folly imaginable is not something the US government can or should be involved with. My criticism is not that it shouldn't happen, but that the government is ineligible from doing it. It is also ineligible from legitimately creating any money, because it has nothing to sell for what it buys, and if you think so, you haven't drawn the conclusion that he who does the buying gets what he wants, and in this sense, the government creates the money, it is theirs and they do all the buying, which is why we get all the things we do not want; empire, war, unemployment, etc. etc,

Step 2 – Freeze the stock market.

Again, it's none of the Federal government's business, 10th amendment. If corporations are formed at the state level it's their business. You do not seem to understand that even if the US is a corporation, and it is, that this is itself unconstitutional and unlawful. It should be exposed and dissolved. If that offends foreign creditors, let them whine in our courts (which shall all be turned upside down too since they are all crooked). Most of these creditors deserve the scaffold and it should be public too! [Yeah, and most of the people out there mean this too.]

Government is not a business, nor should it be. What would happen to the stock market if some rival private money system got started? Let's say further that the people managing that system did not practice fractional reserve banking or taking of interest for a loan. There are lots of other ways to finance something without asking the borrower to return more than was created.


Let's say that business gravitated to this money because it was more stable, so they could actually rationally plan contracts using it with better results. Let's say this money system became so popular that it became the international money in competition with all national currencies? Let's say that nations finally decide to stop creating money because their own money wasn't being accepted? What would happen to the stock market then?

I'll tell you, it would either dry up or change and become something other than it is. Government would have nothing to do with it in either way

Step 3 – Forgive all unlawful debt and taxation.

Of course. But this will happen anyway, it's called default and repudiation. You will of course have to unbundle all the “corporations” that have infested our government, as they are all technically unconstitutional.

As POTUS we'll want him to go further than that. We want a complete audit of all the so called amendments to the constitution and we'll want all of them after the 12th stripped away, as they were not ratified under the guidelines set forth in the constitution. Likewise we'll want mass repeal of most of the “law” that was built on those amendments, especially and we mean it, everything that is based on the 14th amendment. Whole areas of government involvement would thus fall away, as indeed they should. If all the money was private and the governments of the world came demanding taxes, they'd have to deal with us. Do you know what we'd want? An audit, a real one. If we found things we didn't like, we wouldn't fund them. What's the government to do then? 

Do you want to debate anyone on this? The 13th amendment is really the one that was ratified in 1810 not allowing, barring titled persons including lawyers from holding public office. We want that one in. We believe that the 13th amendment outlawing slavery was actually ratified so it stays in. The 14th was similarly not ratified so it gets thrown out. The 15th probably stands. We want the 17th thrown out too, as it wasn't ratified. We want a return of the US Senate to the states where it belongs and we want the idea of taxing someone's labour repealed forever as it is immoral. No more IRS, no more 16th amendment as it too was never ratified.

If you're such a researcher prove me wrong. I'll be open to it. But I still want those amendments struck form the constitution! The 14th is particularly bad. We are natural born citizens of the states and we become citizens of the states based on their own residency requirements. It is how a Californian gets to be a New Yorker by choice. It's realistic to have the amendments giving black men and women the franchise retained in some form but the 14th which enshines the falsity of “civil rights” over “natural rights” must go!. 

[2 April, 2014:  It will not be the concern of this blog to address these issues, especially the fraudulent 14th Amendment, that are very important and critical to the cause of natural rights and real freedom for Americans and everyone else. These are not properly the subjects of this blog.  However others are taking on that aspect of our fight and deserve your consideration and support.  Here's one of them.]

Step 4 – Overhaul the Patent Office.

This is among the best of his ideas. I say that because it's one of my own too. We all know that there have been many innovations that have been deliberately kept from the market to protect someone's monopoly. As far as I'm concerned nobody deserves to keep any patent unless they develop the idea. But I'd be harsher than he would about the matter.


Why give anyone more time to do what they have not done already? They had their chance, yank it from them and put it up for sale to someone else. Same deal applies, if they don't come up with something, the patent is sold to someone else. The patent office should be reorganized to trace development activities so that patents are thoroughly checked out for worthiness, and more importantly so that corporations do not resort to delay so that they don't have to do anything. Delay is one of the tactics of the bigs.

Step 5 – Replace paper, plastics, and textiles with hemp and produce alternative energy.

It's none of the government's business, 10th amendment again. Get with it! The only thing anyone can and should do is get the government OUT of the way of their development through honest competition.

Step 6 – Dismantle the Armed Forces into state militias.

Another fairly good idea. But the states are responsible for organizing their own militias not the Federal government. Nevertheless, I sense here that he might not like the 2nd amendment. I'll tell you right now Pal, he nor anyone else will EVER disarm this country, ever! Get that one though your heads right now. And if this government doesn't get that, or tries to do some United Nations or NWO arms registration or confiscation programme, you can expect war, civil war, the worst kind imaginable! We will not go the way of Russia or for that matter China or Libya. If they try any of that on us here, we're awake enough to know who was responsible and we'll likely make it personal if you know what I mean.

Step 7 – Dismantle the prison industry and abolish 100% of victimless crimes.

Fine with me. As far as I can see the wrong people are in prison anyway. Child molesters deserve death and those who sponsor such things (Bohemian Grove) deserve death too. Those who have conspired to profit from our deaths and intend to kill more of us would be my first candidates for prison cells and some of them deserve execution for their crimes and PLEASE Pal, continue to confound the pissants, sissies, ninnies and weanies out there and do it publicly! If some other amendments are offered, I'd also want the words “cruel and unusual punishment” changed to read “the punishment shall fit the crime.”

Step 8 – Education is paramount, voluntary, and free.

You are obviously hung up on the state doing it! [New York explicative deleted] The state needs to be OUT of it, all of it. Dump the Education Department, they are nothing we want any more of. Get that? We want NONE of their advice. Why would we, look at their track record.

You speak of making things free. You have no idea at all, because your basic assumption is that the state should be creating money when all that money they create is illegitimate; they have nothing to sell that we would want to buy and all governments live by taking from the rest of us as economic parasites. By creating all the money, they are the primary buyers. Why should that be? They do not know better how to spend their own money, where we are concerned, than we would if we created it ourselves.


So I put to you something you've never considered in your life, that the person without money has an inalienable right (cannot be taken away) to create their own money, as they have a right to buy with the likelihood that there is something they will want to sell back in the future.

Something you have not understood, because let's face it, you're still learning, is that THE issue is money and that there is never enough of it, that it is created by the wrong people, that it is naturally and accordingly spent in the wrong ways. Correct all that and much evil falls away. Of course it has to be international and private, NOT under any government sponsorship, and that's what it will be.

Step 9 – Promote the liberal arts, free thinking, and sovereignty.

You can enact any legislation you please and it will accomplish nothing. Sovereignty? Go after all those agreements we signed with the British monarch and the Crown, which is really the nexus of all that stands athwart our freedom, not just ours, but everyone else's throughout the world, as they are the core of the idea that states should issue money through lending it from central banks. In truth Jefferson was correct in wishing to forbid the US government from going into debt. THAT should be another constitutional amendment.

I'll give you one of my own ideas. Inform the British monarch and all others that certain persons will be considered war criminals, war profiteers and subject to an act of war, unless they are extradited for trial and likely execution in the United States. Oh yes, we will be doing the same with our own here too, but they have always had collaborators in London. We want an end to it; to fractional reserve banking, lending at interest, state sponsorship of business, other countless ways of meddling in our personal affairs.

We want money that we create, that even the poor are entitled to as a human right. We will take care of pensioners, the elderly, the handicapped, the infirm, etc. especially veterans, who have, in our opinion been very badly used by this (and every) government. We will do this by issuing our own money. If you have none, we'll give you some until you can get into the black. But maybe you never will, but we'll still give you money. It will be cheaper than welfare. Once you are in the black we'll assure you a steady price level and much faster transactions because we wont have to hold your money to make short term profits on it for lending it out, again at interest. We will abolish compounding of interest too, which is like taking a vice and legitimizing it ten fold.

What will the rich do to earn money on their money? Legitimate business I should think, or they'll live off what they have made and that will be that. We are about bringing an end to stores of money that accomplish nothing and of classes of people who are living off interest that they are literally not economically entitled to, because it is money that was never created in the first place and has in fact been STOLEN from others.

Step 10 – Apologize to the world and start a new beneficial friendship with our now foreign enemies.

Apologies are cheap. [NY explicative] your apologies!!! Millions have died. We know who were responsible. JUSTICE MUST BE DONE! The bankers, crooks, speculators, war profiteers, all have blood on their hands! You imagine that merely saying we're sorry is going to cut it? You really need to get a fix on people's anger. It's real.

As for all those people in their fancy suits, etc. I know them, they are callous and heartless, and the richer they are the worse it is with them. Not a single billionaire is entitled to their wealth, and many who are only worth hundreds of millions are just as bad. They made a lot of money on money itself, without producing a thing of value.

The issue of “backing” is moot without understanding that people can back money with anything and it's all irrelevant. I suppose that you understand this. All money is backed by what it buys, simple as that! If I sell you a pen for a dollar, I don't care if that dollar is backed by anything, because I know where I can spend that dollar. Money is nothing more than a means to split barter, period. Any other attribute it has been given like the time value etc. is phony and whether made lawful or not, is still phony.

Now that I might have blown you off. If you're still reading, and you seem able to read, and willing to read, then try these, they're short: 


#A.1 PRIVATE ENTERPRISE MONEY – E. C. Riegel   

Then you can join the discussions and contribute here

Best,


David Burton
venlead2013@aol.com

PS: I'll read the rest of your blog as I can.


[22 March, 2014: It seems pretty clear to me that Riegel was a Democrat. Do you think he would approve of direct democracy – voting over the internet? 

I wouldn't know.  Regarding direct democracy, I would caution to beware of very cunning and expert forces out there that know quite well how to mould public opinion, that would take easy advantage of any such schemes for very bad ends.

What's your personal brand of politics? It seems to me that Riegel's ideas could be picked up by moderate socialists, libertarians and even fairly conservative types.

I am an agnostic when it comes to American politics. I see governments in the West (and probably elsewhere too) as ultimately the captured prey of the banking oligarchy – and of course we are along for the ride as taxpayers, etc. into the worst of possible bargains involving exchange of our natural rights, for so called “civil” rights. The military industrial complex is the age old creature of the bankers going straight back to Babylon. Corporations are the monopolies that serve oligarchy. Ultimately such a system makes anyone not part of it expendable. Simple as that, and Tom Jefferson was right. We should have listened to him. But we followed Hamilton's advice instead.

That Riegel was a Democrat was part of his essential naiveté. It's now 2014. It's time to wake up. Riegel's ideas are something found in a time capsule. We take them up and adapt them to present circumstances. It is going to become increasingly important moving forward not to allow discourse to be determined by their definitions of the words we use. Watch for any tendencies in this direction, as representing a direct infringement on your natural rights to freedom of thought, speech and action. Of course one must always assume responsibility not to infringe on the natural rights of others.

A socialist is essentially a statist with a solution requiring the state to do something about the plights of people in society. We say their response to human suffering is natural, but their solution is poor as it depends on the state to “take care of it,” when that should be each human being's own personal responsibility. We suggest, along with Riegel, that the present monetary system was always unable - by design – to be able to handle these matters in a rational manner. It would be another subject entirely to go into detail to show how the socialist perspective is inextricably tied up with notions of equality and fairness that frankly have far less substance to them than property, which can always be objectively defined. What we are saying is that Riegel identified the right of money issue as an extension of one's personal property as a natural right. We assert and contend the correctness of his observation, to which we subscribe whatever our politics might otherwise be. Likewise if the idea of getting paid in one's own money really catches on, it will forever change the relation of employer and employee to the better for both. Since labour costs will be determined by the extra value of the labourer's float, cost accounting should result in cheaper products as well as less unemployment long term.

We have our disagreements with libertarians. In particular we disapprove of their Austrian school fellow travellers; usurers all. But libertarians usually have a far clearer perspective on personal responsibility and understand that individualism and the right for many to contract together to perform needful labour are hallmarks of a just and free society.]

No comments:

Post a Comment