Ban guns and only the criminals will have guns

The second amendment is not about hunting.

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government. - George Washington

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. - Thomas Jefferson

Goodbye Freedom, Hello Dictator

Are you ready for a New Constitution? Well its coming, if not now then soon, unless citizens of the several states find a way to stop it.

This Phyllis Schlafly article should be widely read. There are people and organizations who maintain and pursue a goal to overturn the USA as a free and sovereign nation. Considering where we stand today as a nation, a constitutional convention would provide the perfect working platform to swiftly destroy our current form of government.

By the way, "USA" refers to the United STATES of America, not a single central government with the label "USA". The reference is to a group of sovereign states who agreed to maintain a central, federal government which was to be subservient to the states and the people. We lost that long ago.

The primary tool used to destroy us, which we stupidly handed over, was our productivity, transferred through the process of inflation. Our labor has funded our enemies; the enemies of freedom; the enemies of the United States.

What have we done?

The State is Wise and the Market is Stupid

George F. Will recently wrote:

In his wise book "Capitalism, Democracy & Ralph's Pretty Good Grocery," John Mueller, an Ohio State political scientist, notes that John Maynard Keynes's central theme, according to his biographer Robert Skidelsky, was that "the state is wise and the market is stupid." Mueller continues: "Working from that sort of perspective, India's top economists for a generation supported policies of regulation and central control that failed abysmally -- leading one of them to lament recently, 'India's misfortune was to have brilliant economists.' " Many of them were educated in Britain, by Keynes's followers. In America today, everyone agrees that the president-elect's economic team is composed of brilliant economists.

I don't know anything about John Mueller, but he is correct in noting John Maynard Keynes' central theme: the state is wise and the market is stupid.

In other words, Keynes operated as though government, politicians, bureaucrats, laws, regulations, favored elites etc. are wise.

And likewise, Keynes believed the market (if you are a producer, that means you) is stupid.

Maybe Keynes was right. Clearly the free market is more productive, efficient, just and stable than any economic order government will ever be associated with engineering and thereby perverting and destroying.

However, someone, working on behalf of "government", has made choices which enable an elite few to pillage the producers. Maybe Keynes was part wrong; "the government" is certainly not wise. Interventionist government is sly, coercive, deceptive and destructive. But Keynes may have been right that the market (that's us) is stupid.

Even if you are one of those persons who know how the game is played, meaning you know how to operate so that you are pillaging your neighbors rather than being pillaged, your knowledge is useless unless you keep playing the game. When you stop pillaging, you are pillaged. Even as you go about your business of accumulating wealth, you participate in a system that can only move closer to destruction. Anyone who knows the truth and remains silent is helping to produce for their children and fellow citizens a legacy of doom and destruction.

I am an ardent supporter of capitalism and wealth. I strongly oppose theft through currency debasement, otherwise known as inflation. I strongly oppose forced income redistribution.

Benchmarking by the ravages of inflation and burgeoning government, we are productive, efficient and stupid.

Not to speak poorly of mules, but we seem to just bear up silently under the load like an old mule.

What happened to men and women of honor?

Where are our leaders?

Why have the citizens of this nation (and many other nations) been silent for nearly one hundred years while our homes, businesses, property and heritage are pillaged and destroyed through the process of inflation?

It makes me angry to think about those questions.

Comparing Keynes and the Austrians

First let us note that we labor under the ideology of the Keynesian school of economics. John Maynard Keynes is the system’s namesake and is the "highly revered" economist and intellectual who is credited with bestowing on us our current system.

We begin by comparing two facets of the Keynesian school of thought to the Austrian school of thought. Our first item involves the respective views of the “crisis”.

In the Keynesian view the current crisis should never occur because the central banking system, i.e. The Federal Reserve System, has the sophisticated tools necessary to prevent any such crisis from occurring. Consider Bernanke’s recent comments about the control the Fed has over the economy.

“Like gold, U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper-money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and hence positive inflation.”

(Ben Bernanke, “Deflation: Making Sure ‘It’ Doesn’t Happen Here” [Remarks before the National Economists Club, Washington, D.C., 21 November 2002])

And when things do break, the apologists have been trained to suggest that it would really be worse if the Fed hadn’t saved us.

“David Henderson and Jeff Hummel have managed to ruffle quite a few Austrian feathers with their recent Cato briefing paper, and no wonder: that paper claims not only that Alan Greenspan's Fed was innocent of any role in encouraging the housing boom but that Greenspan had actually managed to do something Austrian monetary economists have long claimed to be impossible, namely, solve the monetary-central-planning problem. Greenspan, by their assessment, managed to mimic the kind of money-demand accommodating money supply growth that would occur under free banking, thereby achieving (according to their paper's executive summary) ‘a striking dampening of the business cycle.’”

Guilty as Charged Mises Daily Article by George A. Selgin

Never mind the factors which systemically dampen the business cycle like JIT inventory, changing ratios of non-cyclical sectors in the broader economy, and foreign trade and dollar holdings. Any dampening of the business cycle is because of the stellar performance of the Fed, or so we are told.

Fundamentally the Keynesian view says there should not be any more business cycles and those in the past were caused by the Fed having inadequate “tools” to prevent the crisis. The answer has always been more power in the hands of the Fed.

The Austrian view, on the other hand, predicts, explains and offers solutions to the Business Cycle.

The Austrian view recognizes that Fractional and Fiat money, enjoying legal monopoly through the coercive power of government, causes money to be unrealistically cheap. Cheap money leads to malinvestment because the signal given by abundant, low cost money is that there are real savings present which will sustain longer term or lower margin investments. Because creating Fiat or Fractional money ex nihilo is not the same as creating real savings, the investments are overpriced and are not sustainable. In addition, the explanation shows how and why the cheap money primarily affects capital goods.

The solution involves several components, but in simplest form, one could say the Austrian view is that natural money as private property without government intervention essentially solves the problem.

Now we move on to our second comparison.

The Keynesian view begins with the primacy of the state and therefore seeks to justify state action, thereby rendering a fragmented and conflicting series of economic models. Suffice it to say; when one needs to justify actions in any context, something is amiss. In addition, the lack of a single, unified economic model suggests that earning the accolade of being a credible “school of thought” should be out of reach. Instead Keynesianism is glorified. Such is the world in which we live…

The Austrian view, on the other hand, begins with the primacy of the individual in economic and social affairs. As such, the effort is made to observe and seek an accurate and true explanation of economics and related social order. The result is a single, unified economic model at its core.

Foundations of Thought

On one hand there is Keynes who says the business cycle should never exist because the central bank has the "tools" to prevent a crisis and in all cases Keynesians begin by justifying state actions.

On the other hand there are the Austrians who predict, explain, and resolve the business cycle and, with a unified core model, rigorously explain specific realities of economic and social order.

Who should we believe?

The Keynesian school of thought which is constantly out of line with reality and is clearly destructive to liberty and private property?

Or the Austrian school of thought which matches reality and identifies principles which protect liberty and property...

Br'er Rabbit

The stories of Br'er Rabbit are said to trace back to Cherokee Indian myths. The stories illustrate types of behavior we observe in people.

In one story Br'er Fox has captured Br'er Rabbit with a Tar Baby as a trap.

The Tar Baby is a doll covered in sticky tar that Br'er Rabbit gets tangled up with. When Br'er Fox comes out of hiding to gloat over his capture of Br'er Rabbit, he begins thinking of the things he can do to Br'er Rabbit. The stories include a variety of different possibilities ranging from hanging the poor old rabbit to roasting him for dinner.

Now we get to the point of the story which interests us.

Caught in the tar trap, Br'er Rabbit says "You can roast me, hang me, skin me, do anything at all, but PLEASE don't throw me in the briar patch!"

Well the fox wants to do the worst thing he possibly can to this wily, aggravating old rabbit, so Br'er Fox throws Br'er Rabbit right into the briar patch. And then silence...

But soon Br'er Rabbit is seen sitting up the hill on a log, cleaning the sticky tar out of his fur and smiling.

"I was born and bred in the briar patch!" said the sly old rabbit.

Briar Patch and Government Regulation

We have a tendency to think of Government Regulation as being bad for big business because we believe regulations keep them in check. We are told regulations punish big business when they operate "unfairly".

Br'er Rabbit and Big Business

Br'er Rabbit was "bred and born; born and bred" in the briar patch.

The briar patch provided a home and protection to the rabbit and his ancestors.

Regulation provides a home and protection to Big Business and its ancestors.

Br'er Fox, do anything to Br'er Rabbit, but PLEASE don't throw me in the briar patch!

Br'er Citizen, do anything to Br'er Business, but PLEASE don't Regulate me!

Greed and Control

Remember that for large corporations, Regulation is CHEAPER and more PROFITABLE than Competition.

Regulation is a tool used by those at the top of the economic system to reward favored corporations and punish troublesome corporations.

Small business and the consumers pay the price for these elite games. Consumers are rewarded with higher prices and lower quality services. Small business finds increasingly large barriers to entry in the marketplace.

In the end, regulation protects and benefits large corporations and powerful people, while harming citizens. Both consumers and small business are harmed by the very regulation that benefits big business; which is exactly opposite to what we are told.

Regulation to big business is like Br'er Rabbit in the Briar Patch!

They love it!!!

It is their home.

It provides them the protection to which they owe their very existence.

Oh, he's one of those

So I was talking to a friend this morning. I'll refer to him as John.

We talked about the money issue in the context of What else have we lost?. It turns out John and his girlfriend were talking about the same idea Thursday night. In our generation, John comes closer than anyone I know in working toward and desiring to preserve family as a community, much like the family units that built our nation.

As we talked, John mentioned a previous introduction he had to monetary issues and stories about the Federal Reserve and Jekyll Island. When John first heard about the subject from an acquaintance, John's initial response was "Oh, he's one of those".

Even so, John was intrigued enough to go and begin to do some research on his own. John discovered that what was being said about the Fed and money seemed to be true. However, he wasn't going to spend his time learning all about the Fed; after all, he has too much to do and we can't do anything about it anyway.

What does this brief conversation illustrate?

Let's think about the comments noted herein.

Oh, he's one of those...

Something, call it what you will, within our society teaches us to respond in a certain way to stories about money, the Federal Reserve and political power. We are taught to consider people who hold negative views about these subjects as crack-pots, whackos and fringe thinkers. Oh, he's one of those...

Remember, only a lie needs protection; the truth can stand on its own.

Some so-called "crack-pots" hold the view that the Federal Reserve System is a fraud. Why would a person holding such views come under ad hominem attacks, rather than having their positions responded to objectively? If their words and ideas are false, illustrate the error.

Don't call them names. Refute their arguments.

An honest scholarly analysis will reveal that arguments used in defense of a Keynesian economic model are absurd. Not only do economists, politicians and media types take these absurd arguments seriously, this is the system we labor under today.

When one points out objective flaws in the Keynesian model, the speaker's reward is marginalization and character assassination.

Think about what is happening.

Remember the $700 billion dollar bailout? Will that cause a wealth transfer? We all know it will. And the same thing happens incrementally everyday that we use costless fiat and fractional money. We have done this for nearly 100 years with our present central bank.

When inflating with costless money, the purpose of inflation is to use NEW MONEY to purchase REAL ASSETS at OLD PRICES, thereby causing a wealth transfer from the people who get the new money last, toward the people who get the new money first. - Shane Coley

How is it that we can see this pillaging so clearly, and yet when someone points it out and claims that the theft is intentional, we fall in line with the conditioners (which CS Lewis talked about in the 1940's) and say "Oh, he's one of those..."?

Our monetary system is Keynesian and Keynes wrote about the destructive effect of inflation at least as early as 1919.

Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some… Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.

The Economic Consequences of the Peace, John Maynard Keynes, 1919

I don't have time...

I agree that the typical citizen should not have to set aside large chunks of work time and family time and rest time to do exhaustive research about our monetary system, or any other issue for that matter. However, the reality today is that we will soon lose our remaining freedoms unless specific hidden knowledge is converted to common knowledge.

The protestant Bible points out in Hosea 4:6a My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.

What citizens need to know about our monetary system is not complex; it is hidden. The truth about our monetary system has been intentionally hidden because the whole fraudulent game will end the day people understand they have been robbed, pillaged and used.

If the knowledge is not intentionally hidden and obscured, why didn't the Fed protest make the major news? Who is the media answering to?

We can't do anything about it anyway...

When John pointed out that we can't do anything about it anyway, my response to John was this: "Sure we can do something about it. We already have three times in the past."

John said: "But not here...?"

And I said: "Yes here. We have stopped the reauthorization of three central banks, which each began with twenty year charters. One existed before the constitution and two after."

John's response? He was optimistic! I could hear in his voice the belief that maybe there is something we can do about this problem after all.

What do we do?

As soon as possible, we need to abolish the Fed, return to private sound money and eliminate fractional reserve banking.

But today, every citizen needs to learn the truth and spread the knowledge. We are being robbed. Let's work together to tell all the people the truth and then see what happens next.

Don't be conditioned and brainwashed into the belief that the Fed is our savior, banks are innocent and greedy business people caused all our problems. Such propaganda is just simply not true.

End The Fed - November 22 2008

You all saw the news last Saturday and in the days leading up to the major nationwide protest to End the Fed, right?

This protest in 39 cities across the nation was planned for months. This is the kind of civil unrest the major media search for to make exciting news and inform the public of critical issues, right?

You mean you didn't hear about this giant rally and protest?

Regardless of how you feel about the Federal Reserve System, why would this nationwide event not make the major news coverage?

Maybe the economy is not a front-burner issue these days... People have other things on their mind... The media wants to focus on things that we are interested in now. It's not like we have seen trillions of dollars evaporate from the retirement and investments of most US citizens and many people around the world.

Talking about the End The Fed rally

News about the End the Fed rally

Anthony Gregory's rally day speech This is an excellent read.

End The Fed