Full Transcript (via Campaign For
Liberty):
Farewell to Congress
This may well be the last time I speak on the House Floor.
At the end of the year I’ll leave Congress after 23 years in office over a 36
year period. My goals in 1976 were the same as they are today:
promote peace and prosperity by a strict adherence to the principles of
individual liberty.
It was my opinion, that the course the U.S. embarked on in the
latter part of the 20th Century
would bring us a major financial crisis and engulf us in a foreign policy that
would overextend us and undermine our national security.
To achieve the goals I sought, government would have had to shrink
in size and scope, reduce spending, change the monetary system, and reject the
unsustainable costs of policing the world and expanding the American Empire.
The problems seemed to be overwhelming and impossible to solve,
yet from my view point, just following the constraints placed on the federal
government by the Constitution would have been a good place to start.
How Much Did I Accomplish?
In many ways, according to conventional wisdom, my off-and-on
career in Congress, from 1976 to 2012, accomplished very little. No named
legislation, no named federal buildings or highways—thank goodness. In
spite of my efforts, the government has grown exponentially, taxes remain
excessive, and the prolific increase of incomprehensible regulations
continues. Wars are constant and pursued without Congressional
declaration, deficits rise to the sky, poverty is rampant and dependency on the
federal government is now worse than any time in our history.
All this with minimal concerns for the deficits and unfunded
liabilities that common sense tells us cannot go on much longer. A grand,
but never mentioned, bipartisan agreement allows for the well-kept secret that
keeps the spending going. One side doesn’t give up one penny on military
spending, the other side doesn’t give up one penny on welfare spending, while
both sides support the bailouts and subsidies for the banking and
corporate elite. And the spending continues as the economy weakens and
the downward spiral continues. As the government continues fiddling
around, our liberties and our wealth burn in the flames of a foreign policy
that makes us less safe.
The major stumbling block to real change in Washington is the
total resistance to admitting that the country is broke. This has made
compromising, just to agree to increase spending, inevitable since neither side
has any intention of cutting spending.
The country and the Congress will remain divisive since there’s no
“loot left to divvy up.”
Without this recognition the spenders in Washington will continue
the march toward a fiscal cliff much bigger than the one anticipated this
coming January.
I have thought a lot about why those of us who believe in liberty,
as a solution, have done so poorly in convincing others of its benefits.
If liberty is what we claim it is- the principle that protects all personal,
social and economic decisions necessary for maximum prosperity and the best
chance for peace- it should be an easy sell. Yet, history has shown that
the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which
are rarely if ever fulfilled.
Authoritarianism vs. Liberty
If authoritarianism leads to poverty and war and less freedom for
all individuals and is controlled by rich special interests, the people should
be begging for liberty. There certainly was a strong enough sentiment for
more freedom at the time of our founding that motivated those who were willing
to fight in the revolution against the powerful British government.
During my time in Congress the appetite for liberty has been quite
weak; the understanding of its significance negligible. Yet the good news
is that compared to 1976 when I first came to Congress, the desire for more
freedom and less government in 2012 is much greater and growing, especially in
grassroots America. Tens of thousands of teenagers and college age students
are, with great enthusiasm, welcoming the message of liberty.
I have a few thoughts as to why the people of a country like ours,
once the freest and most prosperous, allowed the conditions to deteriorate to
the degree that they have.
Freedom, private property, and enforceable voluntary contracts,
generate wealth. In our early history we were very much aware of
this. But in the early part of the 20th century our politicians promoted the
notion that the tax and monetary systems had to change if we were to involve
ourselves in excessive domestic and military spending. That is why Congress
gave us the Federal Reserve and the income tax. The majority of Americans
and many government officials agreed that sacrificing some liberty was
necessary to carry out what some claimed to be “progressive” ideas. Pure
democracy became acceptable.
They failed to recognized that what they were doing was exactly
opposite of what the colonists were seeking when they broke away from the
British.
Some complain that my arguments makes no sense, since great wealth
and the standard of living improved for many Americans over the last 100
years, even with these new policies.
But the damage to the market economy, and the currency, has been
insidious and steady. It took a long time to consume our wealth, destroy
the currency and undermine productivity and get our financial obligations to a
point of no return. Confidence sometimes lasts longer than deserved. Most of
our wealth today depends on debt.
The wealth that we enjoyed and seemed to be endless, allowed
concern for the principle of a free society to be neglected. As long as
most people believed the material abundance would last forever, worrying about
protecting a competitive productive economy and individual liberty seemed
unnecessary.
The Age of Redistribution
This neglect ushered in an age of redistribution of wealth by
government kowtowing to any and all special interests, except for those who
just wanted to left alone. That is why today money in politics far
surpasses money currently going into research and development and productive
entrepreneurial efforts.
The material benefits became more important than the understanding
and promoting the principles of liberty and a free market. It is good
that material abundance is a result of liberty but if materialism is all that
we care about, problems are guaranteed.
The crisis arrived because the illusion that wealth and prosperity
would last forever has ended. Since it was based on debt and a pretense that
debt can be papered over by an out-of-control fiat monetary system, it was
doomed to fail. We have ended up with a system that doesn’t produce
enough even to finance the debt and no fundamental understanding of why a free
society is crucial to reversing these trends.
If this is not recognized, the recovery will linger for a long
time. Bigger government, more spending, more debt, more poverty for the
middle class, and a more intense scramble by the elite special interests will
continue.
We Need an Intellectual Awakening
Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be
driven by economic law. A dollar crisis will bring the current
out-of-control system to its knees.
If it’s not accepted that big government, fiat money, ignoring
liberty, central economic planning, welfarism, and warfarism caused our crisis
we can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even
fascism with even more loss of our liberties. Prosperity for a large
middle class though will become an abstract dream.
This continuous move is no different than what we have seen in how
our financial crisis of 2008 was handled. Congress first directed, with
bipartisan support, bailouts for the wealthy. Then it was the Federal
Reserve with its endless quantitative easing. If at first it doesn’t succeed
try again; QE1, QE2, and QE3 and with no results we try QE indefinitely—that is
until it too fails. There’s a cost to all of this and let me assure you
delaying the payment is no longer an option. The rules of the market will
extract its pound of flesh and it won’t be pretty.
The current crisis elicits a lot of pessimism. And the
pessimism adds to less confidence in the future. The two feed on
themselves, making our situation worse.
If the underlying cause of the crisis is not understood we cannot
solve our problems. The issues of warfare, welfare, deficits, inflationism,
corporatism, bailouts and authoritarianism cannot be ignored. By only
expanding these policies we cannot expect good results.
Everyone claims support for freedom. But too often it’s for
one’s own freedom and not for others. Too many believe that there must be
limits on freedom. They argue that freedom must be directed and managed to
achieve fairness and equality thus making it acceptable to curtail, through force,
certain liberties.
Some decide what and whose freedoms are to be limited. These
are the politicians whose goal in life is power. Their success depends on
gaining support from special interests.
No More ‘isms’
The great news is the answer is not to be found in more
“isms.” The answers are to be found in more liberty which cost so much
less. Under these circumstances spending goes down, wealth production
goes up, and the quality of life improves.
Just this recognition—especially if we move in this direction—increases
optimism which in itself is beneficial. The follow through with sound
policies are required which must be understood and supported by the people.
But there is good evidence that the generation coming of age at
the present time is supportive of moving in the direction of more liberty and
self-reliance. The more this change in direction and the solutions become
known, the quicker will be the return of optimism.
Our job, for those of us who believe that a different system than
the one that we have had for the last 100 years, has driven
us to this unsustainable crisis, is to be more convincing that there is a
wonderful, uncomplicated, and moral system that provides the answers. We
had a taste of it in our early history. We need not give up on the notion of
advancing this cause.
It worked, but we allowed our leaders to concentrate on the
material abundance that freedom generates, while ignoring freedom itself.
Now we have neither, but the door is open, out of necessity, for an
answer. The answer available is based on the Constitution, individual
liberty and prohibiting the use of government force to provide privileges and
benefits to all special interests.
After over 100 years we face a society quite different from the
one that was intended by the Founders. In many ways their efforts to
protect future generations with the Constitution from this danger has
failed. Skeptics, at the time the Constitution was written in 1787,
warned us of today’s possible outcome. The insidious nature of the erosion
of our liberties and the reassurance our great abundance gave us, allowed the
process to evolve into the dangerous period in which we now live.
Dependency on Government Largesse
Today we face a dependency on government largesse for almost every
need. Our liberties are restricted and government operates outside the
rule of law, protecting and rewarding those who buy or coerce government into
satisfying their demands. Here are a few examples:
- Undeclared
wars are commonplace.
- Welfare
for the rich and poor is considered an entitlement.
- The
economy is overregulated, overtaxed and grossly distorted by a deeply
flawed monetary system.
- Debt
is growing exponentially.
- The
Patriot Act and FISA legislation passed without much debate have resulted
in a steady erosion of our 4th Amendment rights.
- Tragically
our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression,
with no complaints from the American people.
- The
drone warfare we are pursuing worldwide is destined to end badly for us as
the hatred builds for innocent lives lost and the international laws
flaunted. Once we are financially weakened and militarily challenged,
there will be a lot resentment thrown our way.
- It’s
now the law of the land that the military can arrest American citizens,
hold them indefinitely, without charges or a trial.
- Rampant
hostility toward free trade is supported by a large number in Washington.
- Supporters
of sanctions, currency manipulation and WTO trade retaliation, call the
true free traders “isolationists.”
- Sanctions
are used to punish countries that don’t follow our orders.
- Bailouts
and guarantees for all kinds of misbehavior are routine.
- Central
economic planning through monetary policy, regulations and legislative
mandates has been an acceptable policy.
Questions
Excessive government has created such a mess it prompts many
questions:
- Why
are sick people who use medical marijuana put in prison?
- Why
does the federal government restrict the drinking of raw milk?
- Why
can’t Americans manufacturer rope and other products from hemp?
- Why
are Americans not allowed to use gold and silver as legal tender as
mandated by the Constitution?
- Why
is Germany concerned enough to consider repatriating their gold held by
the FED for her in New York? Is it that the trust in the U.S. and
dollar supremacy beginning to wane?
- Why
do our political leaders believe it’s unnecessary to thoroughly audit our
own gold?
- Why
can’t Americans decide which type of light bulbs they can buy?
- Why
is the TSA permitted to abuse the rights of any American traveling by air?
- Why
should there be mandatory sentences—even up to life for crimes without
victims—as our drug laws require?
- Why
have we allowed the federal government to regulate commodes in our homes?
- Why
is it political suicide for anyone to criticize AIPAC ?
- Why
haven’t we given up on the drug war since it’s an obvious failure and
violates the people’s rights? Has nobody noticed that the authorities
can’t even keep drugs out of the prisons? How can making our entire
society a prison solve the problem?
- Why
do we sacrifice so much getting needlessly involved in border disputes and
civil strife around the world and ignore the root cause of the most deadly
border in the world-the one between Mexico and the US?
- Why
does Congress willingly give up its prerogatives to the Executive Branch?
- Why
does changing the party in power never change policy? Could it be that the
views of both parties are essentially the same?
- Why
did the big banks, the large corporations, and foreign banks and foreign
central banks get bailed out in 2008 and the middle class lost their jobs
and their homes?
- Why
do so many in the government and the federal officials believe that
creating money out of thin air creates wealth?
- Why
do so many accept the deeply flawed principle that government bureaucrats
and politicians can protect us from ourselves without totally destroying
the principle of liberty?
- Why
can’t people understand that war always destroys wealth and liberty?
- Why
is there so little concern for the Executive Order that gives the
President authority to establish a “kill list,” including American
citizens, of those targeted for assassination?
- Why
is patriotism thought to be blind loyalty to the government and the politicians
who run it, rather than loyalty to the principles of liberty and support
for the people? Real patriotism is a willingness to challenge the
government when it’s wrong.
- Why
is it is claimed that if people won’t or can’t take care of their
own needs, that people in government can do it for them?
- Why
did we ever give the government a safe haven for initiating violence
against the people?
- Why
do some members defend free markets, but not civil liberties?
- Why
do some members defend civil liberties but not free markets? Aren’t they
the same?
- Why
don’t more defend both economic liberty and personal liberty?
- Why
are there not more individuals who seek to intellectually influence others
to bring about positive changes than those who seek power to force others
to obey their commands?
- Why
does the use of religion to support a social gospel and preemptive wars,
both of which requires authoritarians to use violence, or the threat of
violence, go unchallenged? Aggression and forced redistribution of wealth
has nothing to do with the teachings of the world great religions.
- Why
do we allow the government and the Federal Reserve to disseminate false
information dealing with both economic and foreign policy?
- Why
is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority
and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority?
- Why
should anyone be surprised that Congress has no credibility, since there’s
such a disconnect between what politicians say and what they do?
- Is
there any explanation for all the deception, the unhappiness, the fear of
the future, the loss of confidence in our leaders, the distrust, the anger
and frustration? Yes there is, and there’s a way to reverse
these attitudes. The negative perceptions are logical and a
consequence of bad policies bringing about our problems.
Identification of the problems and recognizing the cause allow the proper
changes to come easy.
Trust Yourself, Not the Government
Too many people have for too long placed too much confidence and
trust in government and not enough in themselves. Fortunately, many are
now becoming aware of the seriousness of the gross mistakes of the past several
decades. The blame is shared by both political parties. Many Americans
now are demanding to hear the plain truth of things and want the demagoguing to
stop. Without this first step, solutions are impossible.
Seeking the truth and finding the answers in liberty and
self-reliance promotes the optimism necessary for restoring prosperity.
The task is not that difficult if politics doesn’t get in the way.
We have allowed ourselves to get into such a mess for various
reasons.
Politicians deceive themselves as to how wealth is produced.
Excessive confidence is placed in the judgment of politicians and
bureaucrats. This replaces the confidence in a free society. Too
many in high places of authority became convinced that only they,
armed with arbitrary government power, can bring about fairness, while
facilitating wealth production. This always proves to be a utopian dream
and destroys wealth and liberty. It impoverishes the people and rewards
the special interests who end up controlling both political parties.
It’s no surprise then that much of what goes on in Washington is
driven by aggressive partisanship and power seeking, with philosophic
differences being minor.
Economic Ignorance
Economic ignorance is commonplace. Keynesianism continues to
thrive, although today it is facing healthy and enthusiastic rebuttals.
Believers in military Keynesianism and domestic Keynesianism continue to
desperately promote their failed policies, as the economy languishes in a deep
slumber.
Supporters of all government edicts use humanitarian arguments to
justify them.
Humanitarian arguments are always used to justify government
mandates related to the economy, monetary policy, foreign policy, and personal
liberty. This is on purpose to make it more difficult to challenge.
But, initiating violence for humanitarian reasons is still violence. Good
intentions are no excuse and are just as harmful as when people use force with
bad intentions. The results are always negative.
The immoral use of force is the source of man’s political
problems. Sadly, many religious groups, secular organizations, and psychopathic
authoritarians endorse government initiated force to change the world.
Even when the desired goals are well-intentioned—or especially when
well-intentioned—the results are dismal. The good results sought never
materialize. The new problems created require even more government force
as a solution. The net result is institutionalizing government initiated
violence and morally justifying it on humanitarian grounds.
This is the same fundamental reason our government uses
force for invading other countries at will, central economic planning at
home, and the regulation of personal liberty and habits of our citizens.
It is rather strange, that unless one has a criminal mind and no
respect for other people and their property, no one claims it’s permissible to
go into one’s neighbor’s house and tell them how to behave, what they can eat,
smoke and drink or how to spend their money.
Yet, rarely is it asked why it is morally acceptable that a
stranger with a badge and a gun can do the same thing in the name of law and
order. Any resistance is met with brute force, fines, taxes, arrests, and
even imprisonment. This is done more frequently every day without a proper
search warrant.
No Government Monopoly over Initiating Violence
Restraining aggressive behavior is one thing, but legalizing a
government monopoly for initiating aggression can only lead to exhausting
liberty associated with chaos, anger and the breakdown of civil society.
Permitting such authority and expecting saintly behavior from the bureaucrats
and the politicians is a pipe dream. We now have a standing army of armed
bureaucrats in the TSA, CIA, FBI, Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, IRS, Corp of
Engineers, etc. numbering over 100,000. Citizens are guilty until proven
innocent in the unconstitutional administrative courts.
Government in a free society should have no authority to meddle in
social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. Nor should
government meddle in the affairs of other nations. All things peaceful, even
when controversial, should be permitted.
We must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity
just we do in the area of free speech and religious liberty. But even in these
areas government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political
correctness to regulate speech-a dangerous trend. Since 9/11 monitoring speech
on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required.
The Proliferation of Federal Crimes
The Constitution established four federal crimes. Today the
experts can’t even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books—they
number into the thousands. No one person can comprehend the enormity of
the legal system—especially the tax code. Due to the ill-advised drug war
and the endless federal expansion of the criminal code we have over 6 million people
under correctional suspension, more than the Soviets ever had, and more than
any other nation today, including China. I don’t understand the
complacency of the Congress and the willingness to continue their obsession
with passing more Federal laws. Mandatory sentencing laws associated with
drug laws have compounded our prison problems.
The federal register is now 75,000 pages long and the tax code has
72,000 pages, and expands every year. When will the people start
shouting, “enough is enough,” and demand Congress cease and desist.
Achieving Liberty
Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the
aggressive use of force. If one seeks liberty, a precise type of
government is needed. To achieve it, more than lip service is required.
Two choices are available.
1. A
government designed to protect liberty—a natural right—as its sole
objective. The people are expected to care for themselves and reject the
use of any force for interfering with another person’s liberty.
Government is given a strictly limited authority to enforce contracts, property
ownership, settle disputes, and defend against foreign aggression.
2. A
government that pretends to protect liberty but is granted power to arbitrarily
use force over the people and foreign nations. Though the grant of power
many times is meant to be small and limited, it inevitably metastasizes into an
omnipotent political cancer. This is the problem for which the world has
suffered throughout the ages. Though meant to be limited it nevertheless
is a 100% sacrifice of a principle that would-be-tyrants find
irresistible. It is used vigorously—though incrementally and
insidiously. Granting power to government officials always proves the
adage that: “power corrupts.”
Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to
mold people habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady move toward
tyrannical government. Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the
process and deny to the government this arbitrary use of aggression. There’s
no in-between. Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always
ends badly.
Today’s mess is a result of Americans accepting option #2, even
though the Founders attempted to give us Option #1.
The results are not good. As our liberties have been eroded
our wealth has been consumed. The wealth we see today is based on debt
and a foolish willingness on the part of foreigners to take our dollars for
goods and services. They then loan them back to us to perpetuate our debt
system. It’s amazing that it has worked for this long but the impasse in
Washington, in solving our problems indicate that many are starting to
understand the seriousness of the world -wide debt crisis and the dangers we
face. The longer this process continues the harsher the outcome will be.
The Financial Crisis Is a Moral Crisis
Many are now acknowledging that a financial crisis looms but few
understand it’s, in reality, a moral crisis. It’s the moral crisis that
has allowed our liberties to be undermined and permits the exponential growth
of illegal government power. Without a clear understanding of the nature
of the crisis it will be difficult to prevent a steady march toward tyranny and
the poverty that will accompany it.
Ultimately, the people have to decide which form of government
they want; option#1 or option #2.
There is no other choice. Claiming there is a choice of a “little”
tyranny is like describing pregnancy as a “touch of pregnancy.” It is a
myth to believe that a mixture of free markets and government central economic
planning is a worthy compromise. What we see today is a result of that
type of thinking. And the results speak for themselves.
A Culture of Violence
American now suffers from a culture of violence. It’s easy
to reject the initiation of violence against one’s neighbor but it’s ironic
that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with
monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people—practically at
will.
Because it’s the government that initiates force, most people
accept it as being legitimate. Those who exert the force have no sense of
guilt. It is believed by too many that governments are morally justified
in initiating force supposedly to “do good.” They incorrectly believe
that this authority has come from the “consent of the people.” The
minority, or victims of government violence never consented to suffer the abuse
of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority. Victims of
TSA excesses never consented to this abuse.
This attitude has given us a policy of initiating war to “do
good,” as well. It is claimed that war, to prevent war for noble purposes, is
justified. This is similar to what we were once told that:
“destroying a village to save a village” was justified. It was said by a
US Secretary of State that the loss of 500,000 Iraqis, mostly children, in the
1990s, as a result of American bombs and sanctions, was “worth it” to achieve
the “good” we brought to the Iraqi people. And look at the mess that Iraq
is in today.
Government use of force to mold social and economic behavior at
home and abroad has justified individuals using force on their own terms.
The fact that violence by government is seen as morally justified, is the
reason why violence will increase when the big financial crisis hits and
becomes a political crisis as well.
First, we recognize that individuals shouldn’t initiate violence,
then we give the authority to government. Eventually, the immoral
use of government violence, when things goes badly, will be used to justify an
individual’s “right” to do the same thing. Neither the government nor
individuals have the moral right to initiate violence against another yet we
are moving toward the day when both will claim this authority. If this
cycle is not reversed society will break down.
When needs are pressing, conditions deteriorate and rights become
relative to the demands and the whims of the majority. It’s then not a
great leap for individuals to take it upon themselves to use violence to get
what they claim is theirs. As the economy deteriorates and the wealth discrepancies
increase—as are already occurring— violence increases as those in need take it
in their own hands to get what they believe is theirs. They will not wait
for a government rescue program.
When government officials wield power over others to bail out the
special interests, even with disastrous results to the average citizen, they
feel no guilt for the harm they do. Those who take us into undeclared wars with
many casualties resulting, never lose sleep over the death and destruction
their bad decisions caused. They are convinced that what they do is morally
justified, and the fact that many suffer just can’t be helped.
When the street criminals do the same thing, they too have no
remorse, believing they are only taking what is rightfully theirs. All
moral standards become relative. Whether it’s bailouts, privileges,
government subsidies or benefits for some from inflating a currency, it’s all
part of a process justified by a philosophy of forced redistribution of
wealth. Violence, or a threat of such, is the instrument required and
unfortunately is of little concern of most members of Congress.
Some argue it’s only a matter of “fairness” that those in need are
cared for. There are two problems with this. First, the principle is used to
provide a greater amount of benefits to the rich than the poor. Second, no one
seems to be concerned about whether or not it’s fair to those who end up paying
for the benefits. The costs are usually placed on the backs of the middle class
and are hidden from the public eye. Too many people believe government handouts
are free, like printing money out of thin air, and there is no cost. That
deception is coming to an end. The bills are coming due and that’s what the
economic slowdown is all about.
Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate
use of force by government. It is the tool for telling the people how to
live, what to eat and drink, what to read and how to spend their money.
To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force
must be understood and rejected. Granting to government even a small
amount of force is a dangerous concession.
Limiting Government Excesses vs. a Virtuous Moral People
Our Constitution, which was intended to limit government power and
abuse, has failed. The Founders warned that a free society depends on a
virtuous and moral people. The current crisis reflects that their
concerns were justified.
Most politicians and pundits are aware of the problems we face but
spend all their time in trying to reform government. The sad part is that
the suggested reforms almost always lead to less freedom and the importance of
a virtuous and moral people is either ignored, or not understood. The new
reforms serve only to further undermine liberty. The compounding effect has
given us this steady erosion of liberty and the massive expansion of
debt. The real question is: if it is liberty we seek, should most of the
emphasis be placed on government reform or trying to understand what “a
virtuous and moral people” means and how to promote it. The Constitution has
not prevented the people from demanding handouts for both rich and poor in
their efforts to reform the government, while ignoring the principles of a free
society. All branches of our government today are controlled by individuals who
use their power to undermine liberty and enhance the welfare/warfare state-and
frequently their own wealth and power.
If the people are unhappy with the government performance it must
be recognized that government is merely a reflection of an immoral society that
rejected a moral government of constitutional limitations of power and love of
freedom.
If this is the problem all the tinkering with thousands of pages
of new laws and regulations will do nothing to solve the problem.
It is self-evident that our freedoms have been severely limited
and the apparent prosperity we still have, is nothing more than leftover wealth
from a previous time. This fictitious wealth based on debt and benefits
from a false trust in our currency and credit, will play havoc with our society
when the bills come due. This means that the full consequence of our lost
liberties is yet to be felt.
But that illusion is now ending. Reversing a downward spiral
depends on accepting a new approach.
Expect the rapidly expanding homeschooling movement to play a
significant role in the revolutionary reforms needed to build a free society
with Constitutional protections. We cannot expect a Federal government
controlled school system to provide the intellectual ammunition to combat the
dangerous growth of government that threatens our liberties.
The internet will provide the alternative to the government/media
complex that controls the news and most political propaganda. This is why it’s
essential that the internet remains free of government regulation.
Many of our religious institutions and secular organizations
support greater dependency on the state by supporting war, welfare and
corporatism and ignore the need for a virtuous people.
I never believed that the world or our country could be made more
free by politicians, if the people had no desire for freedom.
Under the current circumstances the most we can hope to achieve in
the political process is to use it as a podium to reach the people to alert
them of the nature of the crisis and the importance of their need to assume
responsibility for themselves, if it is liberty that they truly seek.
Without this, a constitutionally protected free society is impossible.
If this is true, our individual goal in life ought to be for us to
seek virtue and excellence and recognize that self-esteem and happiness only
comes from using one’s natural ability, in the most productive manner possible,
according to one’s own talents.
Productivity and creativity are the true source of personal satisfaction.
Freedom, and not dependency, provides the environment needed to achieve these
goals. Government cannot do this for us; it only gets in the way. When the
government gets involved, the goal becomes a bailout or a subsidy and these
cannot provide a sense of personal achievement.
Achieving legislative power and political influence should not be
our goal. Most of the change, if it is to come, will not come from the
politicians, but rather from individuals, family, friends, intellectual leaders
and our religious institutions. The solution can only come from rejecting
the use of coercion, compulsion, government commands, and aggressive force, to
mold social and economic behavior. Without accepting these restraints,
inevitably the consensus will be to allow the government to mandate economic
equality and obedience to the politicians who gain power and promote an
environment that smothers the freedoms of everyone. It is then that the
responsible individuals who seek excellence and self-esteem by being self-reliance
and productive, become the true victims.
Conclusion
What are the greatest dangers that the American people face today
and impede the goal of a free society? There are five.
1. The continuous attack on our civil liberties which threatens
the rule of law and our ability to resist the onrush of
tyranny.
2. Violent anti-Americanism that has engulfed the world. Because
the phenomenon of “blow-back” is not understood or denied, our foreign policy
is destined to keep us involved in many wars that we have no business being in.
National bankruptcy and a greater threat to our national security will
result.
3. The ease in which we go to war, without a declaration by
Congress, but accepting international authority from the UN or NATO even for
preemptive wars, otherwise known as
aggression.
4. A financial political crisis as a consequence of excessive
debt, unfunded liabilities, spending, bailouts, and gross discrepancy in wealth
distribution going from the middle class to the rich. The danger of central
economic planning, by the Federal Reserve must be understood.
5. World government taking over local and US
sovereignty by getting involved in the issues of war, welfare, trade,
banking, a world currency, taxes, property ownership, and private
ownership of guns.
Happily, there is an answer for these very dangerous
trends.
What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple
moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression. The retort to such a
suggestion is always: it’s too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical,
naïve, utopian, dangerous, and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal.
The answer to that is that for thousands of years the acceptance
of government force, to rule over the people, at the sacrifice of liberty, was
considered moral and the only available option for achieving peace and
prosperity.
What could be more utopian than that myth—considering the results
especially looking at the state sponsored killing, by nearly every government
during the 20thCentury, estimated to be in the hundreds of
millions. It’s time to reconsider this grant of authority to the state.
No good has ever come from granting monopoly power to the state to
use aggression against the people to arbitrarily mold human behavior.
Such power, when left unchecked, becomes the seed of an ugly tyranny.
This method of governance has been adequately tested, and the results are in: reality
dictates we try liberty.
The idealism of non-aggression and rejecting all offensive use of
force should be tried. The idealism of government sanctioned violence has
been abused throughout history and is the primary source of poverty and
war. The theory of a society being based on individual freedom has been
around for a long time. It’s time to take a bold step and actually permit
it by advancing this cause, rather than taking a step backwards as some would
like us to do.
Today the principle of habeas corpus, established when King John
signed the Magna Carta in 1215, is under attack. There’s every reason to
believe that a renewed effort with the use of the internet that we can instead
advance the cause of liberty by spreading an uncensored message that will serve
to rein in government authority and challenge the obsession with war and
welfare.
What I’m talking about is a system of government guided by the
moral principles of peace and tolerance.
The Founders were convinced that a free society could not exist
without a moral people. Just writing rules won’t work if the people
choose to ignore them. Today the rule of law written in the Constitution
has little meaning for most Americans, especially those who work in Washington
DC.
Benjamin Franklin claimed “only a virtuous people are capable of
freedom.” John Adams concurred: “Our Constitution was made for a
moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of
any other.”
A moral people must reject all violence in an effort to mold
people’s beliefs or habits.
A society that boos or ridicules the Golden Rule is not a moral
society. All great religions endorse the Golden Rule. The same
moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all
government officials. They cannot be exempt.
The ultimate solution is not in the hands of the government.
The solution falls on each and every individual, with guidance
from family, friends and community.
The #1 responsibility for each of us is to
change ourselves with hope that others will follow. This is of greater
importance than working on changing the government; that is secondary to
promoting a virtuous society. If we can achieve this, then the government
will change.
It doesn’t mean that political action or holding office has no
value. At times it does nudge policy in the right direction. But what is true
is that when seeking office is done for personal aggrandizement, money or
power, it becomes useless if not harmful. When political action is taken for
the right reasons it’s easy to understand why compromise should be avoided. It
also becomes clear why progress is best achieved by working with coalitions,
which bring people together, without anyone sacrificing his principles.
Political action, to be truly beneficial, must be directed toward
changing the hearts and minds of the people, recognizing that it’s the virtue
and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish.
The Constitution or more laws per se, have no value if the
people’s attitudes aren’t changed.
To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to
be overcome. Number one is “envy” which leads to hate and class
warfare. Number two is “intolerance” which leads to bigoted and
judgmental policies. These emotions must be replaced with a much better
understanding of love, compassion, tolerance and free market economics.
Freedom, when understood, brings people together. When tried, freedom is
popular.
The problem we have faced over the years has been that economic
interventionists are swayed by envy, whereas social interventionists are swayed
by intolerance of habits and lifestyles. The misunderstanding that tolerance is
an endorsement of certain activities, motivates many to legislate moral
standards which should only be set by individuals making their own choices.
Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are
authoritarians. Neither endorses voluntarism. Both views ought to be
rejected.
I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of
trying to figure out “the plain truth of things.” The best chance for
achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is
to pursue the cause of LIBERTY.
If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout
the land.
usias�$pMr b ��" ؏ Believers in military Keynesianism and domestic Keynesianism continue to desperately promote their failed policies, as the economy languishes in a deep slumber.
Supporters of all government edicts use humanitarian arguments to justify them.
Humanitarian arguments are always used to justify government mandates related to the economy, monetary policy, foreign policy, and personal liberty. This is on purpose to make it more difficult to challenge. But, initiating violence for humanitarian reasons is still violence. Good intentions are no excuse and are just as harmful as when people use force with bad intentions. The results are always negative.
The immoral use of force is the source of man’s political problems. Sadly, many religious groups, secular organizations, and psychopathic authoritarians endorse government initiated force to change the world. Even when the desired goals are well-intentioned—or especially when well-intentioned—the results are dismal. The good results sought never materialize. The new problems created require even more government force as a solution. The net result is institutionalizing government initiated violence and morally justifying it on humanitarian grounds.
This is the same fundamental reason our government uses force for invading other countries at will, central economic planning at home, and the regulation of personal liberty and habits of our citizens.
It is rather strange, that unless one has a criminal mind and no respect for other people and their property, no one claims it’s permissible to go into one’s neighbor’s house and tell them how to behave, what they can eat, smoke and drink or how to spend their money.
Yet, rarely is it asked why it is morally acceptable that a stranger with a badge and a gun can do the same thing in the name of law and order. Any resistance is met with brute force, fines, taxes, arrests, and even imprisonment. This is done more frequently every day without a proper search warrant.
No Government Monopoly over Initiating Violence
Restraining aggressive behavior is one thing, but legalizing a government monopoly for initiating aggression can only lead to exhausting liberty associated with chaos, anger and the breakdown of civil society. Permitting such authority and expecting saintly behavior from the bureaucrats and the politicians is a pipe dream. We now have a standing army of armed bureaucrats in the TSA, CIA, FBI, Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, IRS, Corp of Engineers, etc. numbering over 100,000. Citizens are guilty until proven innocent in the unconstitutional administrative courts.
Government in a free society should have no authority to meddle in social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. Nor should government meddle in the affairs of other nations. All things peaceful, even when controversial, should be permitted.
We must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity just we do in the area of free speech and religious liberty. But even in these areas government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political correctness to regulate speech-a dangerous trend. Since 9/11 monitoring speech on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required.
The Proliferation of Federal Crimes
The Constitution established four federal crimes. Today the experts can’t even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books—they number into the thousands. No one person can comprehend the enormity of the legal system—especially the tax code. Due to the ill-advised drug war and the endless federal expansion of the criminal code we have over 6 million people under correctional suspension, more than the Soviets ever had, and more than any other nation today, including China. I don’t understand the complacency of the Congress and the willingness to continue their obsession with passing more Federal laws. Mandatory sentencing laws associated with drug laws have compounded our prison problems.
The federal register is now 75,000 pages long and the tax code has 72,000 pages, and expands every year. When will the people start shouting, “enough is enough,” and demand Congress cease and desist.
Achieving Liberty
Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the aggressive use of force. If one seeks liberty, a precise type of government is needed. To achieve it, more than lip service is required.
Two choices are available.
- A government designed to protect liberty—a natural right—as its sole objective. The people are expected to care for themselves and reject the use of any force for interfering with another person’s liberty. Government is given a strictly limited authority to enforce contracts, property ownership, settle disputes, and defend against foreign aggression.
- A government that pretends to protect liberty but is granted power to arbitrarily use force over the people and foreign nations. Though the grant of power many times is meant to be small and limited, it inevitably metastasizes into an omnipotent political cancer. This is the problem for which the world has suffered throughout the ages. Though meant to be limited it nevertheless is a 100% sacrifice of a principle that would-be-tyrants find irresistible. It is used vigorously—though incrementally and insidiously. Granting power to government officials always proves the adage that: “power corrupts.”
Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to mold people habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady move toward tyrannical government. Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the process and deny to the government this arbitrary use of aggression. There’s no in-between. Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly.
Today’s mess is a result of Americans accepting option #2, even though the Founders attempted to give us Option #1.
The results are not good. As our liberties have been eroded our wealth has been consumed. The wealth we see today is based on debt and a foolish willingness on the part of foreigners to take our dollars for goods and services. They then loan them back to us to perpetuate our debt system. It’s amazing that it has worked for this long but the impasse in Washington, in solving our problems indicate that many are starting to understand the seriousness of the world -wide debt crisis and the dangers we face. The longer this process continues the harsher the outcome will be.
The Financial Crisis Is a Moral Crisis
Many are now acknowledging that a financial crisis looms but few understand it’s, in reality, a moral crisis. It’s the moral crisis that has allowed our liberties to be undermined and permits the exponential growth of illegal government power. Without a clear understanding of the nature of the crisis it will be difficult to prevent a steady march toward tyranny and the poverty that will accompany it.
Ultimately, the people have to decide which form of government they want; option#1 or option #2. There is no other choice. Claiming there is a choice of a “little” tyranny is like describing pregnancy as a “touch of pregnancy.” It is a myth to believe that a mixture of free markets and government central economic planning is a worthy compromise. What we see today is a result of that type of thinking. And the results speak for themselves.
A Culture of Violence
American now suffers from a culture of violence. It’s easy to reject the initiation of violence against one’s neighbor but it’s ironic that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people—practically at will.
Because it’s the government that initiates force, most people accept it as being legitimate. Those who exert the force have no sense of guilt. It is believed by too many that governments are morally justified in initiating force supposedly to “do good.” They incorrectly believe that this authority has come from the “consent of the people.” The minority, or victims of government violence never consented to suffer the abuse of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority. Victims of TSA excesses never consented to this abuse.
This attitude has given us a policy of initiating war to “do good,” as well. It is claimed that war, to prevent war for noble purposes, is justified. This is similar to what we were once told that: “destroying a village to save a village” was justified. It was said by a US Secretary of State that the loss of 500,000 Iraqis, mostly children, in the 1990s, as a result of American bombs and sanctions, was “worth it” to achieve the “good” we brought to the Iraqi people. And look at the mess that Iraq is in today.
Government use of force to mold social and economic behavior at home and abroad has justified individuals using force on their own terms. The fact that violence by government is seen as morally justified, is the reason why violence will increase when the big financial crisis hits and becomes a political crisis as well.
First, we recognize that individuals shouldn’t initiate violence, then we give the authority to government. Eventually, the immoral use of government violence, when things goes badly, will be used to justify an individual’s “right” to do the same thing. Neither the government nor individuals have the moral right to initiate violence against another yet we are moving toward the day when both will claim this authority. If this cycle is not reversed society will break down.
When needs are pressing, conditions deteriorate and rights become relative to the demands and the whims of the majority. It’s then not a great leap for individuals to take it upon themselves to use violence to get what they claim is theirs. As the economy deteriorates and the wealth discrepancies increase—as are already occurring— violence increases as those in need take it in their own hands to get what they believe is theirs. They will not wait for a government rescue program.
When government officials wield power over others to bail out the special interests, even with disastrous results to the average citizen, they feel no guilt for the harm they do. Those who take us into undeclared wars with many casualties resulting, never lose sleep over the death and destruction their bad decisions caused. They are convinced that what they do is morally justified, and the fact that many suffer just can’t be helped.
When the street criminals do the same thing, they too have no remorse, believing they are only taking what is rightfully theirs. All moral standards become relative. Whether it’s bailouts, privileges, government subsidies or benefits for some from inflating a currency, it’s all part of a process justified by a philosophy of forced redistribution of wealth. Violence, or a threat of such, is the instrument required and unfortunately is of little concern of most members of Congress.
Some argue it’s only a matter of “fairness” that those in need are cared for. There are two problems with this. First, the principle is used to provide a greater amount of benefits to the rich than the poor. Second, no one seems to be concerned about whether or not it’s fair to those who end up paying for the benefits. The costs are usually placed on the backs of the middle class and are hidden from the public eye. Too many people believe government handouts are free, like printing money out of thin air, and there is no cost. That deception is coming to an end. The bills are coming due and that’s what the economic slowdown is all about.
Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government. It is the tool for telling the people how to live, what to eat and drink, what to read and how to spend their money.
To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected. Granting to government even a small amount of force is a dangerous concession.
Limiting Government Excesses vs. a Virtuous Moral People
Our Constitution, which was intended to limit government power and abuse, has failed. The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people. The current crisis reflects that their concerns were justified.
Most politicians and pundits are aware of the problems we face but spend all their time in trying to reform government. The sad part is that the suggested reforms almost always lead to less freedom and the importance of a virtuous and moral people is either ignored, or not understood. The new reforms serve only to further undermine liberty. The compounding effect has given us this steady erosion of liberty and the massive expansion of debt. The real question is: if it is liberty we seek, should most of the emphasis be placed on government reform or trying to understand what “a virtuous and moral people” means and how to promote it. The Constitution has not prevented the people from demanding handouts for both rich and poor in their efforts to reform the government, while ignoring the principles of a free society. All branches of our government today are controlled by individuals who use their power to undermine liberty and enhance the welfare/warfare state-and frequently their own wealth and power.
If the people are unhappy with the government performance it must be recognized that government is merely a reflection of an immoral society that rejected a moral government of constitutional limitations of power and love of freedom.
If this is the problem all the tinkering with thousands of pages of new laws and regulations will do nothing to solve the problem.
It is self-evident that our freedoms have been severely limited and the apparent prosperity we still have, is nothing more than leftover wealth from a previous time. This fictitious wealth based on debt and benefits from a false trust in our currency and credit, will play havoc with our society when the bills come due. This means that the full consequence of our lost liberties is yet to be felt.
But that illusion is now ending. Reversing a downward spiral depends on accepting a new approach.
Expect the rapidly expanding homeschooling movement to play a significant role in the revolutionary reforms needed to build a free society with Constitutional protections. We cannot expect a Federal government controlled school system to provide the intellectual ammunition to combat the dangerous growth of government that threatens our liberties.
The internet will provide the alternative to the government/media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda. This is why it’s essential that the internet remains free of government regulation.
Many of our religious institutions and secular organizations support greater dependency on the state by supporting war, welfare and corporatism and ignore the need for a virtuous people.
I never believed that the world or our country could be made more free by politicians, if the people had no desire for freedom.
Under the current circumstances the most we can hope to achieve in the political process is to use it as a podium to reach the people to alert them of the nature of the crisis and the importance of their need to assume responsibility for themselves, if it is liberty that they truly seek. Without this, a constitutionally protected free society is impossible.
If this is true, our individual goal in life ought to be for us to seek virtue and excellence and recognize that self-esteem and happiness only comes from using one’s natural ability, in the most productive manner possible, according to one’s own talents.
Productivity and creativity are the true source of personal satisfaction. Freedom, and not dependency, provides the environment needed to achieve these goals. Government cannot do this for us; it only gets in the way. When the government gets involved, the goal becomes a bailout or a subsidy and these cannot provide a sense of personal achievement.
Achieving legislative power and political influence should not be our goal. Most of the change, if it is to come, will not come from the politicians, but rather from individuals, family, friends, intellectual leaders and our religious institutions. The solution can only come from rejecting the use of coercion, compulsion, government commands, and aggressive force, to mold social and economic behavior. Without accepting these restraints, inevitably the consensus will be to allow the government to mandate economic equality and obedience to the politicians who gain power and promote an environment that smothers the freedoms of everyone. It is then that the responsible individuals who seek excellence and self-esteem by being self-reliance and productive, become the true victims.
Conclusion
What are the greatest dangers that the American people face today and impede the goal of a free society? There are five.
1. The continuous attack on our civil liberties which threatens the rule of law and our ability to resist the onrush of tyranny.
2. Violent anti-Americanism that has engulfed the world. Because the phenomenon of “blow-back” is not understood or denied, our foreign policy is destined to keep us involved in many wars that we have no business being in. National bankruptcy and a greater threat to our national security will result.
3. The ease in which we go to war, without a declaration by Congress, but accepting international authority from the UN or NATO even for preemptive wars, otherwise known as aggression.
4. A financial political crisis as a consequence of excessive debt, unfunded liabilities, spending, bailouts, and gross discrepancy in wealth distribution going from the middle class to the rich. The danger of central economic planning, by the Federal Reserve must be understood.
5. World government taking over local and US sovereignty by getting involved in the issues of war, welfare, trade, banking, a world currency, taxes, property ownership, and private ownership of guns.
Happily, there is an answer for these very dangerous trends.
What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression. The retort to such a suggestion is always: it’s too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical, naïve, utopian, dangerous, and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal.
The answer to that is that for thousands of years the acceptance of government force, to rule over the people, at the sacrifice of liberty, was considered moral and the only available option for achieving peace and prosperity.
What could be more utopian than that myth—considering the results especially looking at the state sponsored killing, by nearly every government during the 20thCentury, estimated to be in the hundreds of millions. It’s time to reconsider this grant of authority to the state.
No good has ever come from granting monopoly power to the state to use aggression against the people to arbitrarily mold human behavior. Such power, when left unchecked, becomes the seed of an ugly tyranny. This method of governance has been adequately tested, and the results are in: reality dictates we try liberty.
The idealism of non-aggression and rejecting all offensive use of force should be tried. The idealism of government sanctioned violence has been abused throughout history and is the primary source of poverty and war. The theory of a society being based on individual freedom has been around for a long time. It’s time to take a bold step and actually permit it by advancing this cause, rather than taking a step backwards as some would like us to do.
Today the principle of habeas corpus, established when King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215, is under attack. There’s every reason to believe that a renewed effort with the use of the internet that we can instead advance the cause of liberty by spreading an uncensored message that will serve to rein in government authority and challenge the obsession with war and welfare.
What I’m talking about is a system of government guided by the moral principles of peace and tolerance.
The Founders were convinced that a free society could not exist without a moral people. Just writing rules won’t work if the people choose to ignore them. Today the rule of law written in the Constitution has little meaning for most Americans, especially those who work in Washington DC.
Benjamin Franklin claimed “only a virtuous people are capable of freedom.” John Adams concurred: “Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
A moral people must reject all violence in an effort to mold people’s beliefs or habits.
A society that boos or ridicules the Golden Rule is not a moral society. All great religions endorse the Golden Rule. The same moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all government officials. They cannot be exempt.
The ultimate solution is not in the hands of the government.
The solution falls on each and every individual, with guidance from family, friends and community.
The #1 responsibility for each of us is to change ourselves with hope that others will follow. This is of greater importance than working on changing the government; that is secondary to promoting a virtuous society. If we can achieve this, then the government will change.
It doesn’t mean that political action or holding office has no value. At times it does nudge policy in the right direction. But what is true is that when seeking office is done for personal aggrandizement, money or power, it becomes useless if not harmful. When political action is taken for the right reasons it’s easy to understand why compromise should be avoided. It also becomes clear why progress is best achieved by working with coalitions, which bring people together, without anyone sacrificing his principles.
Political action, to be truly beneficial, must be directed toward changing the hearts and minds of the people, recognizing that it’s the virtue and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish.
The Constitution or more laws per se, have no value if the people’s attitudes aren’t changed.
To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to be overcome. Number one is “envy” which leads to hate and class warfare. Number two is “intolerance” which leads to bigoted and judgmental policies. These emotions must be replaced with a much better understanding of love, compassion, tolerance and free market economics. Freedom, when understood, brings people together. When tried, freedom is popular.
The problem we have faced over the years has been that economic interventionists are swayed by envy, whereas social interventionists are swayed by intolerance of habits and lifestyles. The misunderstanding that tolerance is an endorsement of certain activities, motivates many to legislate moral standards which should only be set by individuals making their own choices. Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are authoritarians. Neither endorses voluntarism. Both views ought to be rejected.
I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of trying to figure out “the plain truth of things.” The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY.
If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout the land.
No comments:
Post a Comment