 |
|
|
 THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE Number 447, December 9, 2007 "People get used to the idea that they are ruled by liars and thieves"
Send Letters to editor@ncc-1776.org
Letter from The Free State Project Re: "Ending the Empire of Lies" by L. Neil Smith I am still infuriated that the Spawn of Satan was not brought to trial for killing Mrs. Weaver on the grounds of sovereign immunity. I thought that kind of crap (or to follow the example of a recent writer: Charlie Romeo Alpha Peter) was why we rose against the British. The term outlaw at one time included the concept of someone who lost the protection of the law. I believe the phrase was "Meat for any man's axe." While I would not advocate any criminal act, government officials who place themselves above the law are stepping outside its protection. Regarding conspiracy theories, everything from JFK's assassination to the Area 51 myth complex, I find their prevalence truly disturbing. In the end they create a feeling among many that the government is so powerful and unaccountable that "resistance is futile." The second is that people get used to the idea that they are ruled by liars and thieves and forget that they deserve a government of effective, honest leaders. The promulgation of these theories is another lie, for even when their facts are true they are told in a such a way by their originators that obfuscates the truth ( I refer to officially started or co-opted theories.). Regardless of their "kernel of truth" or the need of freedom loving people to expose the truth so that we can protect our freedom (not to mention these theories are kinda fun to explore.), we must not let them be used to beat us into despair and submission to injustice. Of course, as Libertarians we wish to reduce the presence and power of government, approaching anarchy as close as we and our fellow citizens can handle. That said, as long as we have to tolerate government, we have the right to demand a government and governmental leaders who deserve our loyalty because they do what they were hired to do, protect our "unalienable rights." Sovereign immunity is the Statists' way of saying they don't have to earn our loyalty. The way their media flaks push these theories brainwashes too many decent people into not expecting the government that rules them to be worthy of their loyalty. In the days of feudalism, a vassal gave fealty to his lord and received maintenance in return. How he expressed this fealty and what maintenance he was given were clearly defined and were considered a contractual obligation. Sovereign immunity and the use of conspiracy theories to lessen people's expectation of just government represent a gross failure to honor this contract. A.X. Perez
Bob Wallace's Superb Work Check out Bob's stuff at: I told him he should send it to you, because Bob is one of the outstanding thinkers of the libertarian movement, in my opinion. Peace and Liberty Manuel Miles
[Mr. Wallice sent us an article "The State as Serial Killer" which we publish in this issue—Editor] Re: "Ending the Empire of Lies" by L. Neil Smith In his editorial "Ending the Empire of Lies", El Neil give an impression that fractional reserve banking is a new idea. Unfortunately it is not—Only the name has been changed to protect the guilty. The earliest example in Western Civilization I'm aware of dates back to at least 11th century England. The attempt by Charlemagne around 800 AD to resurrect the Roman money system failed because he was unable to accumulated sufficient metal to mint enough coins. A largely barter economy ruled in Europe until the discovery of large silver deposits in Saxony about 1040. This combined with the later finds in Austria and Tuscany around 1150 and the rediscovery of mining skills brought more base metal into use. However the penetration of money into the European economy was slow with the copper "penny" being the only coin in anything like regular use thru the mid 13th Century. It wasn't until about 1250, for example, that silver coins were first minted in Florence. Consequently storing wealth in gold or silver from 500 AD thru at least 1100 AD was a liability that had to be guarded against loss. By 1000 AD, goldsmiths were regularly storing precious metals in secure vaults for which they issued a receipt to the owner for his deposit. These receipts came to be used in commerce because they were more convenient and safer than carrying large amounts of gold. To avoid a trip to the goldsmith's vault, the cost of transport and threat of robbery, a holder could transfer a receipt to a creditor. By the middle of the 11th Century the goldsmiths encouraged this process by making the receipts out to simply "the bearer". The receipts became a form of money. Eventually some goldsmiths realized that only a fraction of the metal in their trust was physically in circulation at any time and began to offer receipts for more gold than was in the vaults in exchange for repayment with interest. Most did this without notifying the depositor, tho a few successful ones shared the profits from these loans with their largest depositors. The practice was illegal in the 11th century but was well accepted by the middle of the 12th. It was directly responsible for the wealth and ultimate collapse 200 year later of the Florentine banking houses. The only new ideas added in the 20th Century were a central bank that could loan money to another bank to cover withdrawls over its reserves and deposit insurance. Stephen Carville
Free State Project Surges Past 8,000 Participants
Concord, NH—Over 8,000 activists have signed a commitment to move to New Hampshire to promote smaller, less intrusive government. Weekly sign-up numbers show that momentum for the movement is building, with a 25% increase in the sign-up rate since August. This is on top of the earlier success of more than 1000 members signing up to move before December 2008. "Project participants are from all over the United States: California, Florida, Texas, everywhere", said Irena Goddard, President of the Free State Project. "Small government and personal responsibility are what people are after. They are sick of the 'nanny state' government that dictates morality and then taxes away significant portions of their livelihoods. These people are coming to New Hampshire to work hard, and to demonstrate to the rest of the world what a free state could really look like." When asked to explain the surge of interest in the Project, Goddard doesn't need to guess. "The feedback we're hearing is loud and clear: it's the 2008 Presidential election. This is a hotly contested race, and many people feel with the issues at play—the war, health care, immigration—this election is the most important in living memory." Goddard went on to explain that the first-in-the-nation primary is one of the reasons New Hampshire was chosen as the target for the Free State Project. She adds, "New Hampshire residents are excited that help is on the way and have already reached out to welcome us. They know that the New Hampshire advantage needs to be guarded, and is always in danger of being taken away." Goddard cited voter complacency as a major component to that danger. The Free State Project is an effort to recruit 20,000 liberty-loving people to move to New Hampshire, where they will work to reduce the size and scope of government. The Project's website is freestateproject.org Free State Project
Those who label as terrorist any political opinion not approved by the likes of Glen Beck and his worshipers of the Police State are being dishonored at 911blacklist.org The blacklist of Brown shirt Talk Radio Jocks and advertisers who support them will continue until they change their ways. Those advertisers who withdraw support of Brown shirt Talk Radio Jocks will be whitelisted. The site is very easy to use. Julius No
Might be a good time to repost this. "How Much Do You Want To Keep Your Guns? by L. Neil Smith Steve Bub
Political Economics 2008 Part 3 Political liberty and economic liberty go and in hand. You need political freedom to get speak up against government actions that would unjustly deny you your economic opportunities. Conversely you need money to exercise many of your rights. Freedom of the press and to bear arms mean nothing if you can't afford to buy a printing press or gun. Political rights create economic freedom. In many societies people historically were bound to certain socioeconomic classes. They could not legally rise in class or seek to enjoy the "privileges" of the classes above theirs. This put a limit on how much wealth they could acquire. Once equal rights under the law were recognized (not created, recognized) the right of upward social mobility was brought out of dormancy. People could now acquire and use wealth constrained only by talent, effort, and luck. Freedom includes freedom to get rich. That's pretty much what happened in the US. However, economic rights do not necessarily create political freedom. That's because there is just one more problem. We need to be sure that this is done to guarantee your prosperity. We still need to restrict your rights this or that way to guarantee state security and the environment that creates prosperity. This is what is happening in China and other countries. Freedom will make you rich. Wealth will not necessarily make you free. Wealth and freedom are a great combination. You just need to pursue them in the right order. A.X. Perez
Alert From Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
December 6th, 2007 JPFO ALERT: Gun Control and the Supremes
No matter how it turns out, in the end, the year, 2008, will be historic. It will always be remembered as the year when all of the individual rights we think of as uniquely American were put on the chopping-block. Why? That's the topic of columnist and novelist L. Neil Smith's latest essay, here at JPFO.org. Smith contends that more is at stake in the District of Columbia v. Heller case presently before the Supreme Court than the Second Amendment and the right to own and carry weapons. In "Gun Control and the Supremes" Neil demonstrates exactly how tightly intertwined and mutually dependent three familiar elements of our political structure actually are: the Second Amendment, the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution. Damage or destroy one, and the other two will pop and disappear like fragile soap bubbles. All three must be staunchly defended or America itself will inevitably come to an end. Neil also discusses how utterly unreliable the Supreme Court has proven itself to be over the years, with regard to protecting our freedoms. Come. Read. Then roll up your sleeves and pass the word. Only at JPFO.org. The Liberty Crew PS—Don't forget our holiday store special: order videos and get
one or more free books! Go to
PPS—We have had to make a change of provider for getting alerts out in recent times, which has resulted in a regrettable hiatus for many. Please make sure to tell others to subscribe. Visit our alert archive / sign up to receive email alerts:
Please sign up for JPFO membership. If you like what
we do for you then please support us—it is less than
7c a day. Go to:
JPFO mirror site: www.jpfo.net JPFO
TLE AFFILIATE Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates. We cheerfully accept donations!
|
|
|
|
Contents
Next
