Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr. on the Failure of the Public Sector, the Coming Military Crackdown and How to Stop It
The Daily Bell is pleased to publish an interview with the distinguished libertarian attorney and activist, Edwin Vieira, Jr.
Introduction: Dr. Vieira holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School). For over thirty-six years he has been a practicing attorney, specializing in cases that raise issues of constitutional law. He has presented numerous cases of import before the Supreme Court and written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals. His latest scholarly works are Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2d rev. ed. 2002), a comprehensive study of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective, and How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary (2004), a study of the problems of irresponsible "judicial supremacy", and how to deal with them. With well known libertarian trader Victor Sperandeo, he is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered "crash" of the Federal Reserve System, and the political revolution it causes. He is now working on an extensive project concerned with the constitutional "Militia of the Several States" and "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms."
Daily Bell: Thanks for sitting down with us. Let's get right to it. In your view, what are the most critical domestic problems facing America?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: Two stand out. The foremost problem-because it is the source of, or contributes significantly to, almost every economic difficulty now plaguing this country-is the inherent and ineradicable instability of the present monetary and banking systems centered around the Federal Reserve System.
The second problem derives from the first. It is the ever-accelerating development of a first-class para-militarized police-state apparatus centered around the United States Department of Homeland Security, with its tentacles reaching down into every police force throughout the States and localities. Fundamentally, this apparatus is not, and never was, designed to deal with international "terrorism". If that were its goal, its first task would be absolutely to secure the southern border of the United States, which it has never seriously attempted to do. Rather, it is being set up to deal with what the political-cum-financial Establishment anticipates (and I believe rightly so) will be massive social and political unrest bordering on chaos throughout America when the monetary and banking systems finally implode in the not-so-distant future-surely in hyperinflation, and probably in hyperinflation coupled with a gut-wrenching depression.
Of these two problems, the second is actually the more dangerous. For if (on whatever pretext) this police-state apparatus does succeed in clamping down on America, the likelihood of effecting basic reforms in money, banking, or anything else favorable to the American people will be reduced to something approaching nil, absent a veritable political uprising in this country.
Daily Bell: How can these two problems be solved?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: The problem of money and banking breaks down into two interrelated parts: one economic, the other political.
Economically, the problem lies in the commonly accepted fallacy that debt-whether the private debt of banks or the public debt of governmental treasuries-can function as sound currency over the long term. "Money" is supposed to be the most liquid of all assets-which is why the best moneys have always proven to be the precious metals, silver and gold. "Debt", conversely, is not an asset at all, but is someone's liability, the value of which is contingent upon the debtor's ability and willingness to pay, and often the creditor's ability to force the debtor to pay. The attempt to put into practice the self-contradictory notion that a liability payable in money can be an asset that functions as money-and that the ultimate debtor or surety in this scheme can be a governmental treasury, which usually cannot be compelled to pay in any event-has been tried again and again, in country after country, and failed again and again. For Heaven's sake, it was tried in this country with the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and only about twenty years later utterly failed with the banking collapse of 1932, Franklin Roosevelt's seizure of the American people's gold, and the ensuing Great Depression that lasted throughout the 1930s! Right now, we are witnessing what will soon prove to be a more catastrophic failure of that same false idea embodied in that same pernicious institution. Apparently, as the old saw has it, "No one ever learns anything from history except that no one ever learns anything from history." Obviously, massive efforts in public education will be necessary to overcome this deplorable level of ignorance.
In our particular case, the problem also appears in a political form, actually dating from well before 1913: namely, the coupling of bank and state, whereby the government empowers private special-interests groups by statute to "manage" the monetary and banking systems-primarily for the economic benefit of those groups, but as well to the political advantage of the public officials, politicians, and political parties that support the system and receive support from it. The Federal Reserve System is such a coupling: the hermaphroditic creature of private enterprise and statute, at once both quasi-private and quasi-public in source, form, and functions.
Daily Bell: We call it mercantilism.
Edwin Vieira Jr.: Strictly speaking, it is a classic example of a corporative-state arrangement in the particular field of banking, exactly parallel to what Benito Mussolini set up throughout the economy of Fascist Italy, and to what Franklin Roosevelt established for all other American industries in the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 (until the Supreme Court declared that act unconstitutional in 1935).
The reason for this unholy alliance between bank and state lies in the operation of "debt as currency": namely, that using "debt as currency"-and particularly "debt as currency" that can be paid through the emission of new "debt as currency"-allows for the essentially unlimited redistribution of real wealth from society to the issuers of the currency and their immediate clients.
When the redistribution favors bankers and their clients among private businessmen, it is called "forced savings"-the average America being compelled by the system to lose real wealth so that the bankers and businessmen can employ that wealth in their own speculative ventures. When the redistribution favors bankers and their clients among public officials, it is called "hidden taxation"-the average America being compelled by the system to lose real wealth so that public officials can buy more votes with more governmental spending (with the bankers taking a cut of the proceeds). In both cases, by the system's very design, the financial and political classes always benefit, the masses are always looted.
The truly vicious nature of this scheme, though, is now appearing in all its ugly nakedness in the multi-trillion-dollar bailouts that the financial Establishment is extorting, and will continue to extort, ultimately from the taxpayers and the victims of inflation, on the threat that, without such payoffs, the entire economy will melt down into irremediable chaos.
So, here we see the ultimate practical truth of the matter: Private financial special-interest groups buy politicians; in public office these politicians empower the special-interest groups by statute to manipulate the monetary and banking systems; to the extent that these manipulations succeed, the profits are largely privatized; and to the extent that the manipulations fail, the losses are almost entirely socialized. In either case, the general public is held hostage to the racket, and foots the gargantuan bill for its operation. And the guilty parties escape scot free to steal again, and again, and again.
Daily Bell: So what is to be done?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: In principle, this problem can be solved, if America enforces her Constitution. In practice, implementing such a solution will take no little time and effort, though, because: (i) the Federal Reserve System cannot simply be "abolished" at one fell swoop without generating massive dislocations throughout the markets; and (ii) the necessary reforms cannot arise out of the snake pit of Congress in the foreseeable future. Instead, Americans need to create an alternative constitutional and sound currency-actually consisting of, not simply "backed by", silver and gold-to compete with Federal Reserve Notes in the marketplace.
This step must be taken at the State level, for several reasons. First, it cannot be done through Congress, because Congress is thoroughly in the vampiric embrace of the financial Establishment. Second, the States enjoy the legal authority to adopt an alternative currency-indeed, as the Constitution declares, "No State shall . . . make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts". Third, the States' exercise of their legal authority to adopt an alternative currency is constitutionally immune from interference by Congress, as even the Supreme Court has held on more than one occasion. Fourth, the States have a political and legal responsibility to their own citizens to protect the public health, safety, and welfare-which necessitates adopting a sound currency to replace the collapsing Federal Reserve Note before it is too late. And fifth, among the fifty States there must be at least a few in which the political and economic climate is such that State legislators can be convinced to take appropriate action.
Once the experiment has been tried and proven workable in one State, it will quickly spread to others, because no alternative exists, other than supine and stupid acquiescence in the collapse of the Federal Reserve System, with all the dire consequences that will entail.
Daily Bell: We at the Daily Bell are of a free-banking caste, and we often have discussions with what we call Brownians – those who, like Ellen Brown herself, believe that money is the province of the state and that gold and silver are merely commodities until the state stamps them with its authorized mark. We disagree. What do you say?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: The people who believe in "the state theory of money" need to study what the Austrian School of Economics teaches about money, and in particular "the regression theorem" that explains the origin of money. Gold and silver did not become money because some "state" first authorized them as such. Various states throughout history adopted gold and silver as money because markets (particularly in interregional or international trade) were using the precious metals for that purpose. Indeed, that is the explanation for the adoption of the "dollar" (actually, the silver Spanish milled dollar) as the unit of American currency, both under the Articles of Confederation and then explicitly in the Constitution.
More recently, of course, various states, including rogue public officials in the United States, have tried to "demonetize" and then demonize gold and silver in vain attempts to compel free markets to comply with officialdom's generally uneconomic and often blatantly tyrannical political policies. Roosevelt's gold seizure of the 1930s is the pre-eminent example in recent American history.
If gold and silver could function as money only because some state authorized such use, though, there would be no need for states to expend such efforts to "demonetize" the precious metals. Simply withdrawing a state's formal authorization would suffice. So, the veritable war that many states have felt it necessary to wage against specie money, and particularly gold, during most of the Twentieth Century renders rather implausible "the state theory of money".
Daily Bell: Do you believe the current push to audit the Fed will result in success? What would be the result of such an audit in your opinion?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: The Establishment doubtlessly will put up tremendous resistance to a comprehensive audit of the Federal Reserve System, if that audit includes a thoroughgoing investigation and public exposition of the ulterior motives for and untoward consequences of the System's twists and turns in "monetary policy" over the years. I wonder, however, what such an audit would accomplish, and whether it is really necessary. If ten economists examined the System's decisions, they would probably give a dozen different opinions as to what motivated those decisions, and whether the results were good, bad, or indifferent. So the upshot of an audit could be nothing more than confusion twice confounded.
For all the journalistic shortcomings of its aggressively "liberal" perspective, the old expose by William Greider, The Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country (1987), tells us enough about the motivations and performance of the banking cartel, even without a formal audit, to justify the conclusion that it must be disestablished post haste. Actually, anyone who studies the Federal Reserve Act of 1913-particularly in the context of earlier banking and monetary legislation-should conclude that it always was and remains unworkable and doomed to failure, besides being utterly unconstitutional. So an audit is superfluous. On the other hand, if the results of, or the even demands for, an audit would galvanize public opinion into doing something positive in the area of monetary reform-such as supporting adoption of an alternative currency in the States-it probably would be worth the effort. But that is a very large "if".
Daily Bell: Ugh, that was a terrible book. He catalogues what's wrong for hundreds of pages and then decides having the Fed around is better than the alternative. We think it's central banking in large part that has given the elite the funds to take America down the wrong path, and that the velocity is accelerating – given the creation of Homeland Security, etc.
Edwin Vieira Jr.: In my estimation, dealing with the domestic-police-state-in-the-making is an even more critical concern than dealing with the problems engendered by the Federal Reserve System. This, because the present monetary and banking regime, being nothing more than a confidence game, could implode at any moment, and certainly could collapse before an alternative currency were in operation, thereby plunging the country into the sort of economic, political, and social chaos which would serve as the pretext for the imposition of all-round police-state repression. Therefore, if Americans do not have a plan in place, and very soon, for preventing that repression, everything could be lost.
That is not all. Even the Establishment could be hoist with its own petard. The police state now being elaborated from Washington, D.C., does not consist solely of civilian law-enforcement agencies. Rather, the deep thinkers in the "homeland-security" business are working feverishly to insinuate the Armed Forces into their schemes for nationwide domestic oppression. As a practical matter, this is probably necessary (from their point of view), inasmuch as a general economic, political, and social breakdown would set off eruptions of violent unrest beyond the capabilities of most if not all State and local police departments to put down.
Daily Bell: So you believe that the Establishment realizes how large a divide is growing between "average Joes" and America's elitists?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: Of course. Anyone even randomly surfing the Internet will stumble upon massive evidence of the irreconcilable antagonism and rancor rising at a fever pitch among common Americans against the economic and political "leaders" who have sold them and their country down the river. (Which is one of the main reasons the Establishment is desperate to come up with some rationalization and means to censor the Internet.) The Establishment knows that it stands on shaky ground-and that if it can no longer depend on the good will of the people, it must hope to be able to suppress collective manifestations of their ill will. This will require vast numbers of "boots on the ground". Thus, the ever-mounting emphasis by officials in "homeland-security" agencies on involvement of the Armed Forces in domestic "peacekeeping".
As Richard Weaver observed, though, "ideas have consequences"-and, one might add, particularly stupid ideas very often have extremely bad, albeit unintended consequences. The lesson that history teaches, but that the big brains in Washington apparently have not absorbed, is that once politicians (in any country) have turned to the Armed Forces to control domestic dissent arising out of failed economic and social policies, the Armed Forces quickly conclude that they are able and even entitled to become political powers in their own right. After all, why should the Armed Forces not exercise control over the policies and other decisions civilian officials make concerning the deployment of the Armed Forces, particularly when those officials' incompetence or corruption has brought about the domestic disturbances the Armed Forces are expected to risk their lives to quell? And then why should the Armed Forces themselves not promulgate, or at least oversee, policies on all economic and social matters in the first place? Could they fail any more miserably than have the civilian officials?
Furthermore, here in America, if the Armed Forces are deployed to suppress widespread civil unrest emanating from a major breakdown of the economy that threatens the continued viability of the military-industrial complex, the Brass Hats will have a particularly compelling institutional incentive to maintain themselves in positions of political leadership: namely, securing their reason for being and the source of their importance, power, and benefits. In addition, thoroughly politicized Armed Forces will likely feel the need to justify the expensive existence of the military-industrial complex by inserting themselves into, if not instigating outright, ever-expanding overseas military adventures. Thus, "the war on terror"-in addition to whatever other forms of aggressive imperialism can be fomented, ostensibly to "defend our freedoms" in a "homeland" no longer free-will drag on forever, at untold costs in lives and treasure.
Of course, as has proven true everywhere else, politicized Armed Forces in this country will be unable to solve the underlying economic and social problems that rationalized their politicization in the first place. So America will be wracked with chronic political chaos: token civilian regimes staffed with incompetent puppets and "yes men", followed by new bouts of military string-pulling or outright intervention aimed at cleaning up the last crisis, and so on, along the sorry lines South American republics such as Argentina have followed for generations.
For that reason, people worried simply about the likelihood of hyperinflation, depression, or hyperinflation coupled with depression-and about how they might be able to protect their incomes and accumulated wealth under such circumstances-are viewing their world through rather ill-fitting rose-colored glasses. When hyperinflation or other economic calamities strike, and the Armed Forces are politicized as instruments of domestic repression, merely maintaining his income and securing his accumulated wealth will become matters of very low priority for anyone with high economic, social, or political visibility who has or might run afoul of the regime. So those myopic people who are trying to figure out how they can personally profit from the coming collapse of America's economy had better start thinking instead of how they can contribute to the effort to prevent that collapse, to fend off a police state that collapse will engender, and to return this country to the rule of constitutional law-right now, before time runs out.
Daily Bell: How can a police state be fended off?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: Actually, the constitutional solution for dealing with the emerging police state is even simpler than the solution for dealing with the collapsing Federal Reserve System. Now, I do not believe that, at the present time, the upper echelons of the Officer Corps in America's Armed Forces contain significant numbers of potential Bonapartists. The patriotic sense of "duty, honor, country" doubtlessly still prevails. But this circumstance could change. It has changed in other countries. As the Second Amendment to the Constitution declares, "[a] well regulated Militia" is "necessary to the security of a free State". Not the regular Armed Forces, but "[a] well regulated Militia".
"A well regulated Militia" is the only thing the Constitution identifies as "necessary" for any purpose, and the only thing it identifies as serving the specific purpose of "security". So, if Americans want a stable and prosperous economy, they want a free economy (that is, one based on the free market). If Americans want a free economy, they want "a free State", that being the only kind of political system that will support and defend the free market. And if Americans want "a free State", they want "[a] well regulated Militia" in every State. And what is "[a] well regulated Militia"? As Article 13 of Virginia's Declaration of Rights (1776) so aptly put it, "[a] well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state". That is, "[a] well regulated Militia" consists of We the People ourselves-in the final analysis, the only possible guarantors of freedom in a self-governing society.
Moreover, for all of these reasons, the members of the Armed Forces-all of whom take an oath to support the Constitution-should want "[a] well regulated Militia" in every State, too. Unfortunately, "[a] well regulated Militia", fully formed and operated according to proper constitutional principles, does not exist in even a single State today. (No, Virginia, the National Guard is not, never was, and cannot be the Militia.) So a great deal of work remains to be done in this area, as well.
Daily Bell: If these problems could be solved by application of the Constitution, then why did the Constitution not prevent them from arising in the first place? Has not the Constitution proven itself ineffective?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: We have had the benefit of the Ten Commandments since the days of Moses; but has their mere existence prevented all, or even most, sinful behavior? No. Whose fault has that been? God's or the sinners'? And shall we now blame the Ten Commandments-or worse, jettison them entirely-because some, even many, individuals continue to murder, to steal, and so on, whether in public office or private occupation?
The same reasoning applies to the Constitution. The Constitution is a set of instructions for running a complex political machine. This machine has as workmanlike a design as political science has ever recorded throughout the ages; and the instructions for its operation are concise and clear. So if, from time to time, the operators of the machine, through incompetence or malevolence, fail or refuse to follow those instructions, with deleterious results, does the fault lie with the instructions or the operators? Now, at one level, the operators of the constitutional machine are public officials. But they are subject to control by a higher level of operators: We the People, the selfsame We the People who (as its Preamble attests) "ordained and established th[e] Constitution" in the first place. So, if compliance with the Constitution's instructions has not been had, then ultimately We the People, not the Constitution, are to blame. Which is very fortunate, because We the People are in an unique position to do something about this situation.
We the People are the voters who select legislative, executive, and some judicial officers for government at every level of the federal system. We the People are in actual physical possession of most of the valuable property in this country. We the People constitute the Militia, which imposes upon us the direct responsibility to maintain "the security of a free State". And, with a little organization pursuant to statutes enacted in the States, We the People can effectively enforce Nancy Reagan's dictum: to "just say NO!" to further economic and political incompetence, corruption, and downright oppression in this country, emanating from Washington, D.C., New York City, or anywhere else.
Daily Bell: But is not the Supreme Court the final legal authority on what the Constitution means, and therefore legally superior to the people?
Edwin Vieira Jr.: Balderdash. A judicial opinion about the Constitution is precisely that, and no more: just an opinion of some fallible human beings who happened to occupy the Bench at that time. It may be correct-or it may be incorrect. The Supreme Court does not determine what the Constitution means; rather, the Constitution determines whether a decision of the Supreme Court is right or wrong. Even the Supreme Court has recognized that "[t]he power to enact carries with it final authority to declare the meaning of the legislation". Propper v. Clark, 337 U.S. 472, 484 (1949). And We the People-not "we the judges"-enacted the Constitution. It is our supreme law, not theirs.
We are the principals, they merely our agents. So we are the ultimate interpreters of the Constitution, and the ultimate judges of whether public officials are complying with it. As Sir William Blackstone, the Founding Fathers' primary legal mentor, observed: "whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself: there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to". Commentaries on the Laws of England (1771-1773), Volume 1, at 212. Any self-governing people should know as much without being reminded. One can only hope that the present economic crisis will focus people's minds on this basic truth to a degree sufficient to make a difference.
Daily Bell: Thank you for this interview.
Edwin Vieira Jr.: It was my pleasure.
It is interesting to interview someone so honest and informed as Dr. Vieira because one is exposed to a verity of human intelligence – the smarter the individual the clearer the vision. Speak to someone who is less well versed in the history of human legislative interaction and you will get all sorts of ideas spouting forth like firecrackers – and often none of it means much. The noise is random and the thoughts sparkle and trail off like sparklers, then die. But Dr. Vieira understands the basic thrust of what is going on and has a clear idea of where it's headed and what to do about it.
The interview speaks for itself. But to summarize – reading slightly between the lines – Dr. Vieira seems fairly certain that there will be some sort of social upheaval in America as a result of the economic and military forces now in play. He seems to believe that this could, to begin with, result in some sort of Latin-American style junta (they are familiar to Europe, too) and obviously believes the only way to avoid such a catastrophe is for "the people" to take back Constitutional rights.
In fact, this perspective is shared by many American libertarians with greater or lesser degrees of urgency. Certainly, there has never in our experience been the level of vituperation that one now witnesses on chat boards and in feedbacks whenever government programs and policies are mentioned. George Bush with his incessant meretricious spending, endless warring and ongoing endorsement of the regulatory state ended his time in office literally unable to speak anywhere except at military graduations. President Obama is rapidly approaching a point where he will not be warmly welcomed either in most American enclaves – and will likely have to restrict his speechifying to television.
And what then? Are the Republicans going to elect another compassionate conservative like George Bush? No, after three Internet presidencies we expect a tidal wave of support for a libertarian conservative. We know Sarah Palin is being groomed to take advantage of this wave, but as a proponent of the military police state and Homeland Security, we wonder if the contradiction in terms will not prove too much for her. And even if she is elected, or some like her who pays lip service to libertarian ideals, it will not paper over the growing divide in America between those who wish for freedom and those who espouse its cause (ludicrously) within the context of an activist IRS, a central bank, a domestic surveillance apparatus and a global, warlike military.
The point is, as Vieira notes, the sociopolitical consensus holding America together is falling to pieces. The political process is gradually grinding to a halt. It offers no answers. Obama's "change" is uniting his nation, but not in a way that the power elite might hope. People are increasingly aware of sociopolitical alternatives. Of course, we attribute this directly to the Internet and also to the difficulty that the power elite has had in creating war mobilization – the usual method of dealing with social disaffection and economic crises. The situation from our perspective is analogous to the inexplicable 30-year pan-European peasant war that somehow broke out – mysteriously – when the Gutenberg press began to erode the credibility of that era's power elite.
The Internet itself and the difficulty in creating a world war without an implacable enemy and within a nuclear environment has made the power elite's task far more difficult. There is a war going on, but it is not a very satisfactory one and the enemy keeps changing, as do the battle fronts. This is giving rise to skepticism, so much so that we wonder for how long such a war can continue as a viable promotion. From a power-elite perspective, it may eventually tend to cause more problems than it solves.
Vieira proposes that there may be increased civil unrest in America and Europe, leading up to a potential military takeover. In fact, in Europe we believe it has already started. And yet ... we are in favor of Vieira's alternative scenario – that civil unrest need not lead to endless martial law and South American-style banana republics.
The hallmark of a promotion is that it ignores factual reality, so we anticipate all these promotions and more will continue to progress legislatively. But as we have pointed out before, authoritarian implementation of such promotions does the power elite little good. Without a "buy in" a promotion is merely an enforcement. The populace may be cowed, but the resentment burns. It is certainly possible to keep billions cowed by fear (that's what the promotions are all about), but if the fear is merely administrative, then the danger to the power elite increases dramatically. You end up with a dictatorship. Dictators are targets.
The power elite for the most part stepped away from direct leadership hundreds of years ago. It was too dangerous. But now the Internet has exposed the leadership all over again. This is not a tolerable position for a handful of extraordinarily powerful people to be in. They will have to do something other than business as usual. Right now they are moving forward with an almost incomprehensible haste. But one might speculate they are still in denial. With acceptance will come an understanding that the timeline will have to be recalibrated.
Vieira is correct that Americans can take their Constitution back. One of the obstacles is fear, but fear erodes as the Internet educates and certain fear-mongering websites lose their grip. In fact, there are no more George Orwells for the power elite to promote. A British socialist spymaster who told us just what the power elite had in store (in order to make us cringe in fear), his narrative is beginning to seem outdated as reality overtakes prognostication.
Repetition, Internet-style, breeds familiarity – and familiarity breeds contempt. The dominant social themes and accompanying memes will not stick in such an environment. Mass martial law descending on hundreds of millions, or billions, is simply not feasible long term. Even "soft" martial law is a difficult environment to maintain long-term. The USSR's leaders found it out. The Chinese know it, and are troubled by it.
It took the Gutenberg press a full century to do its damage, but the Internet may only take 25 or 30 years. And the result may well be something entirely unexpected – not the gulags and martial suppression of the USSR (as predicted by Orwell and certain suspicious, perfervid ‘Net outlets) – but something more exciting and life-affirming.
Posted by Merrill Ellis on 01/30/11 09:35 PM
I have not, in over 5 months of searching (I know, I'm a come-lately, but I am here now) found a more concise yet very informative article and discussion as this one.
I only wish I knew how to get this to more people. I will do what I can but it seems miniscule to the challenge at hand (getting this kind of information and education to the People as fast as possible).
I am taken by the intelligent thought of all here. I applaud everyone. I feel by comparison, to all here, a 'simpleton'. However, I like to inject (yes only 'inject') my thoughts.
We the People cannot wait any longer. I am not sure if the 2012 elections will be soon enough to stop the lawbreakers and get on the road that will eventually save our liberties! I truly believe that we must act now because the de facto leaders are trying desperately to hurry and crush us now.
I would like to believe that good things come to those who wait, but I don't. So, here is my advice to those of you who can influence by educating and informing: "Please, please, save your intellectual differences for personal correspondence and find the common ground now so that you can combine your efforts to organize the People for the great works of saving or liberties that absolutely, without a doubt lies ahead of us all. You all agree, except for an odd (no offense) post, that we need to get control of our future and take the power away from the 'leaders' and restore leadership and power to the People.
If you are aware of the "Republic of the united States of America" please advise, and let us (those of us who want to save the Country) know whether you agree with the movement or not. If not, can we still work with it either as members or as a parallel movement?
Thanking you in advance for your input and your knowledge.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks for commenting.
Posted by Rene Guerra on 01/25/11 04:30 AM
Excellent cogent ratiocination by Dr. Vieira on the Federal Reserve System vis-a-vis monetary theory in a democratic, free-market economy as ours is supposed to be. And excellent also the remedies he proposes.
In terms of a likely use of OUR --We the People's-- Armed Forces by the Obama regime to attempt to repress us, We the People, think that Obama and those in his inner circle and at the ideological marrow of the Democrat Party --which now is the spearhead of hardcore leftism, with the PCUSA, PSUSA, Peace and Freedom, the Green Party and others, relegated to mere decoys-- are hardcore-Left ideologues and operatives.
As such, they for sure subscribe to the Marxist, and particularly Marxist-Leninist, take of Hegelian dialectics, that is, Marxist materialistic dialectics.
They see themselves as the revolutionaries and inevitably see us, the 80% of non-leftist Americans, as the "contras", that is, as the counterrevolutionaries in the Hegelian binomial of the case, hence, ineluctably subject to repression, interaction which shall, they think, will result in the destruction of the bourgeoisie (i.e., the middle class and up) and the triumph of socialism. It is the universal, unavoidable law of Hegelian dialectic they "reason".
Cuckoo as it seems, that's the cuckoo way those hardcore-Left ideologues "reason". Repression in inevitable in a revolutionary process, which is what Obama and his retinue do believe have initiated in America.
Even softcore-Left ideologues don't escape contamination, as by "second-hand-smoking", by that sick type of thinking; a conservative columnist cites the late "democratic"-socialist Robert Heilbroner stating openly in an essay:
"Socialism...must depend for its economic direction on some form of planning, and for its culture on some form of commitment to the idea of a morally conscious collectivity....
If tradition cannot, and the market system should not, underpin the socialist order, we are left with some form of command as the necessary means for securing its continuance and adaptation. Indeed, that is what planning means...
The factories and stores and farms and shops of a socialist socioeconomic formation must be coordinated...and this coordination must entail obedience to a central plan...
The rights of individuals to their Millian liberties [are] directly opposed to the basic social commitment to a deliberately embraced collective moral goal... Under socialism, every dissenting voice raises a threat similar to that raised under a democracy by those who preach antidemocracy."
It is therefore that repression --as Vieira proposes-- in in store for the American people; its unleashing to be triggered by any excuse the Obama regime can use within the tenor that "a good crisis should not go to waste".
That this is America and that such scenario cannot happen here?
The same must have thought the Romans when the barbarians were at the gates of Rome...with the much worse situation here that, in this case, the barbarians are already in the White House, the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Judiciary and also in all instances of governance at all other levels (i.e., city, district, county/parish/borough, state) of governance.
And Vieira is right that We the People can and must stop it --lawfully and peacefully, of course, in the 2012 elections...when we must sack Obama and clean up all instances of government off leftist and RINO elected officials-- from happening, for We the People are supreme sovereigns in this constitutional representative-effective-democracy republic of ours; We the People are designed to be the boss and the government, in any manifestation, our servant.
And let's make it entirely clear that government officials are not "our leaders"; We the People are the leaders in the relationship We-The-People/government-officials.
The remark is felicitous here inasmuch as whoever wrote the afterthoughts to the Vieira interview --despite Vieira's more than substantive exposition on the supreme sovereignty of us, We the People-- insinuates that government officials are "the leadership" as shown in the sentence he wrote: "...But now the Internet has exposed the leadership all over again."
That crass chronically endemic stupidity of Americans of deeming government officials as "our leaders" has been in great part one of the causes of the horrid erosion of our sovereignty in the hands of government, with "our leaders" deeming us, We the People, their mounts, and them, our masters.
Americans must awaken and realize --once and for all-- that any government official, elected or not, is our servant, and not "our leader".
We the People must drastically reject the revolting notion of "leaders" dragging us around from nose rings, like cattle.
We are the leaders and they are our servants...voila!
Posted by Don Milsop on 04/28/10 07:34 AM
All of this would have been unnecessary had the Founders inserted Article V of the Virginia Declaration of Rights into the United States Constitution. Alas, if George Mason had prevailed upon Madison to include that along with the 2nd Amendment, we would probably not be having his discussion.
That being said, I don't think in an economic collapse today, the value of silver and gold would retain it's worth as it has in the past. Maybe after things settle down, but not during the first six to twelve months.
Posted by Kenneth W. Royce on 03/13/10 10:31 AM
I believe that Hamilton's back-and-forth travel to Philadelphia (and not always for convention attendance) was suspicious. This is described in detail in "Hologram of Liberty". If he had links to English banking circles, it wouldn't surprise me.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Interesting, thanks. It seems obvious.
Posted by Kenneth W. Royce on 03/05/10 04:11 PM
Perhaps 1790 Madison was not as disingenuous as Hamilton, and he did later team with Jefferson in writing the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in opposition to Adams's Sedition Act. I gave Madison a bit of a break in my book, but nonetheless he did write about a third of "The Federalist".
Hamilton remains the primary sly character at hand."Federation" and "conferdation" were virtual synonyms back then, hence the self-applied "Federalist" moniker (to "spin" the proposed Constitution as a confederation).The whole tariff "crisis" between the 13 States was an overblown excuse to chuck out the entire Article of Confederation.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Interesting. Think Hamilton was a kind of foreign agent?
Posted by Kenneth W. Royce on 03/05/10 03:03 PM
Thank you, Daily Bell.
I agree. However Hamilton and Madison (of "The Federalist") sold the new arrangement as much more of a federation than a constitutional union - when the opposite was demonstrably true.
That misleading carried forth into the history books, and thus the mythology still believed today that the States are more than administrative lines on a map.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Interesting you lump Madison with Hamilton. We had a better impression of the former than the latter. The confederation of course preceded the constitutional union. And before that there were separate states trading with one another, etc. -- and what was wrong with that?
(Our bad, by the way, we meant confederation not federation - sorry to have confused you.)
Posted by Kenneth W. Royce on 03/05/10 02:39 PM
A good interview; thank you Daily Bell.Vieira's notion about a salvational People's militia is valid. Whether or not the People have the mettle (and metal) for this . . . time will tell.I disagree, however, with Vieira's general "all we need to do is defend the Constitution" premise.
The Constitution was not designed to protect the State and the People from a large federal government -- rather, it was designed to create a large and unchallengeable federal government.
Vieira and I had an extensive and vigorous email exchange about ten years ago regarding the Philadelphia Conventioneers' design of constitutional money. It was brokered by a mutual friend/colleague famous in the honest money movement, who enjoyed being cc'ed everything.
I argued that Hamilton all along envisioned central bank credit and the demise of specie; whereas Vieira countered that such was an unintentional result generations later. I notice with sadness that Vieira continues to defend the mythological integrity of the Constitution. Vieira still believes in the Founding Lawyers' neutrality?!
They were Federalists who designed an emerging central state with corporate capitalism. The Constitution was the programming to make that happen, eventually, regardless of what the States and the People preferred instead.
"Concise and clear" instructions? Oh, like Article III for the judiciary? The commerce clause? The 10th Amendment?The division of state/federal power was anything but "clear" -- it was purposely muddy.
The fault, of course, lies with both the instructions and the operators. However, the federally-leaning instructions are what attracted bad operators, while thwarting good operators. Today, the good operators are nearly locked out of the game entirely.
The point of my 1997 book "Hologram of Liberty: The Constitution's Shocking Alliance With Big Government"
(Click to view link or Click to view link
is that the instructions could have been coded to lean towards the States and the People, thus always attracting the better operators (who would still have to remain vigilant, of course).
The Swiss did precisely this, and suffer no leviathan central government to this day. Their federal government is strictly limited by the Swiss constitution, leaving residual and real powers to the cantons (states).
I challenge Dr. Vieira and Thomas diLorenzo (author of "Hamilton's Curse") to an online debate about the issue of the Constitution's alleged protection of the States and the People and lack of favoritism towards the federal government.
My "Hologram of Liberty" conclusion back in 1997 is that the States and the People must step up to assert their rights, as there is no longer any Federal/national solution. Vieira seems to agree, however arriving there via different route.
Reply from The Daily Bell
An eloquent statement of something we suspect as well: the Federation was preferable to the constitutional union.
Posted by Charles Pisano on 02/06/10 02:31 PM
We need to (somehow) put Dr Vieira and people like him at the helm of this once great country. And what good is gold and silver amongst chaos (assuming a collapse). I can no more eat a dollar than I can some gold.
Wouldn't valuable skills that one can barter be more of an asset in a time like that. I can't do much with a a hunk of metal. Yea I can trade it for some food. But you can grow and hunt food, repair things and trade your skills for other things you might need. I'll take a good set of tools, a good skill set, a lot of ammo, a stockpile of rations and good common sense over shiny metals in a time of uncertainty.
(IMO)A better, albeit, personal preparation for the inevitable uheaval might be to invest in oneself (by aquiring those skills) rather than accumulate gold which can be stolen...
Reply from The Daily Bell
Gold and silver have traditionally retained value during times of crisis.
Posted by Giro on 02/03/10 03:39 PM
What are we supposed to do. :( Id do what i chould if I even knew where to begin, but it feels like trying to empty the ocean with an eye dropper. i suppose informing poeple would be a start.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Education is very important.
Posted by Patrick Henry Lives on 01/29/10 10:25 PM
I think the bigger issue here is the over-all decline in traditional Christianity across the general population. Nations go through cycles of struggle, posperity, wealth, decedency, decline. We sold our souls for wealth. The economy is more important than basic moral values. Instead of willingness to stand upon principle, we are too worried about the almighty dollar. Only a vital Christianity can provide the energy necessary to rebuild the basic stuff that allows us to be a free people under God. A people that will not be rule by God are destined to be ruled by tryants. William Penn. Repent America!
Posted by Glenn W. Murphy on 01/29/10 02:52 AM
Day Break after The Long Night is where we stand. We The People have been held in the dark by elites for untold centuries and millenia. Humanity, once The Slaves Created, now stand abandoned by our overwhelming No Longer Needed status. "They" have the machines to create the machines, and it has left "Them" dry."
What to do with these "Useless Eaters" now? Why, KILL THEM, of course. But kill them by having them kill each other, it's SO ENTERTAINING. They, thanks to our eugenics programs and our brilliant manipulations too numerous to count, are nothing more than pests to be controlled by our awesome superiority...."Never has such arrogant Pride gone before such a FALL.Ed is right, in the strict sense of Here And Now, about What Must Be Done.
The People must ACT, and The Caution so prevalent in the time period of deciding "Which Action First?" is fraught with Chess Strategies, looking down the game timeline to the consequences of this move or that. But, this is not a game of chess, it is the Game Of Life. Things that truly matter to Everyman hang in balance, and Everyman is searching the Net, looking for clues at The Scene Of The Crime(s).
We are empowered as never before, by communication "In The Raw". The Ultimate Teacher has arrived because the Student is ready. The stable boy has a DSL connection and is learning all about the thatcher, the lumberman, and the shipright's jobs, in strict violation of the "Off With His Head!" ban by the over-bloated, priest-run "King". Problem is, the Executioner is trading emails with the stable boy, and they know they have been had. In battle, sheer numbers always hold the advantage, even given a disparity in arms, as evidenced by the latest "Gun Grab" legislation by our own "Leaders" here in Washington state.
Why would they care, if they are able to use "Super Weapons" such as HAARP, among a host of others, if we have guns with a pistol grip?Because they can't do the dirty work themselves. The designated executioners are getting edgy, no longer convinced the Royals can provide the "sure thing" of a rigged contest.In justice, as well, sheer numbers hold the advantage.
Ed knows well that in a jury case, the jury can stand up to "special instructions" by a corrupt judge, IF the jury knows it can. Much to the "Elites" chagrin, the stable boy, (and the jury), now knows they can, and are growing into their new-found power like the stable boy turned tournament jouster chafes at his first set of armor.Unaccustomed to wielding the lance instead of handing it to the "royal" for use, he checks the weight of it, feels the power of his new situation atop the steed, and, having more in common with the steed he cared for than the Royal who used to ride it with disregard, he looks back at his old life, realizes it's gone forever, and whispers the Genuine promise of a sweet bunch of carrots to his mount before apologizing for the tap of spurs required to respond to the opponents' attack. The steed and Jouster are now one in intent and endeavor, comrades who know all too well the arrogance of the Royal, and the price of his continued domination.
It's just a matter of two hearts beating as one versus one cold heart driving another for all it can give before failure.The Elite are doomed. They have taken the horse for granted, abdicated it's care to their "Lessors", and yet expect the horse to put his heart into it, to defeat the Stable Boy who has cared for the horse from his heart.Such is our military. McCrystal just abdicated to the Taliban in Afganistan, in pursuit of peace as the only viable alternative to the insanity running down from on high.
The horse has quit the Royal, preferring to hang with the stable boy who truly loves it.America loves their military, and the military knows it, loves America in return, and knows their "leaders" care less for them than Royals of old cared for their horses.The promise of care, and carrots, genuine, trumps the tin medals and hollow adulation of false "leaders" who would dispose of the Military itself, and it's only source of love and respect, The People, as they would an empty Perrier bottle. Soldiers love battle, it's the question of; "Whose The Real Enemy?" that they now consider.
The only Real Terrorists are in Washington D.C., and London. I think that the ruse of pointing to the middle east will not last much longer. Sorry for the wandering, the hour is late. My money is on America and her people, because when the chips are down, heart carries the day. The "royals" have not this advantage in the least.Their only advantage ever was the control of knowledge, and that control is now Long Lost. Ross Perot said it ahead of his time: "It is time to clean out the barn..." The Day Of The Stable Boy is at hand, he's just getting a feel for the lance.
Posted by Seadragonconquerer on 01/23/10 06:42 PM
Excellent analyses of our current economic-political dead-end by Dr. Vieira and Scott Smith. Still, Thomas Jefferson and Mao Tse-tung said it all before and in far fewer words: "From time to time, the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants." "A single Click to view linkn start a prarie fire."
Posted by Joshua Fielden on 01/22/10 05:54 AM
The starting point for all Americans is to reopen the 9/11 Inquest with subpoena power. If enough people demand it, it will happen.For those who still believe the "official" story, go to Click to view link and spend some time seeing that there was a controlled demolition of all THREE buildings (only 2 aircraft !)
To whet your appetite start I suggest, with
Click to view link
a short video by David Chandler. Bone up on their very careful research on the physics, math and chemistry tied in with a thorough forensic investigation. No ! The official investigation was bogus and a deliberate cover Click to view link is vital to pass this information on to as many people as possible.
Posted by Donald Chamberlain on 01/19/10 11:52 PM
If the USA constitution always was a farce, then 100 of the people would be as corrupt as the power elite, and they are not.
Posted by Newworlddaughter on 01/17/10 10:00 PM
If you want to animate Dr. Vieira's plan, join Click to view link as a volunteer. Dr. Vieira is our honorary advisor.
Posted by Don Milsop on 01/17/10 11:14 AM
I read the article and found it very interesting. I also looked at his paper from 2005. There are a number of areas I'd like to review with Dr. Vieira, and give my position. I would appreciate any return comments from both you and the Dr.
First, I believe that if there was a general economic collapse, it wouldn't matter what currency standard existed. Our system would collapse so fast that gold would be pretty much worthless. The store shelves would empty fast, and nothing would be available to restock them. Industry would quickly grind to a halt. Our society is so complex, so interconnected, that the government could not keep enough people on the job, even by force of troops. A society that is hungry, without food and water, is not going to be made to stay at home or go to a factory to make things when there is no money and nothing to buy. And there simply aren't enough troops to enforce that.
And as the population fled to the countryside in search of food and water, they would denude the land of any and all flora and fauna that is edible, and much that isn't. The starvation and disease would just be beyond the ability of the nation to cope. The only way to survive this at all is to have purchases sufficient supplies in advance of the collapse. Once the store shelves are empty, all the gold and cash in the world isn't going to help. The currencies of that time will become food, water, firearms, ammunition, tools, clothing, hardware, medicines and medical supplies, and other construction material. Gold won't be worth anything at that point.
As for the military, I have had extensive discussions with former and present military officers over the last 20 years from general level down to lieutenants. It was the general opinion that in the event of widespread public unrest, and the military felt that failed government policies were likely at the root of it, that the military would create a constitutional crisis by refusing to aid the government at any level other than humanitarian.
If the government ordered the JCS to step down, they would refuse and there wouldn't be any power the POTUS would have to force it. What the mobilization of the various guard units would do was unknown. However, it was felt that the JCS would put a stop to any guard units would sought to cooperate in truly subjugating the civilian populace versus just protecting people and property.
During the Great Depression, we were 80 rural and 20 urban. Now we are more like 88 urban and 12 rural. American just can not feed itself in an emergency. I would estimate that 90 of the population would be gone in the first six months. I do believe though that we would rebound fast in a historical context.
The real wild card would be all those hungry nations, and the nuclear weapons existing today. It's a horrible scenario that would be really beyond comprehension. In nuclear war, it's over fairly quickly. I pray that none of this ever comes to pass, but if it does, only those who are thoroughly prepared will make it. It takes time, money, people, supplies, and organization to be prepared. Not many will be in that position.I hope our government turns around and my fears never become my reality.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Sir, no one knows what the future holds, but gold and silver do tend to hold their value, even in a crisis. Your insights into the American military are encouraging. Thanks for writing.
Posted by Pjr on 01/16/10 08:16 PM
"Click to view link took the Gutenberg press a full century to do its damage, but the Internet may only take 25 or 30 years. And the result may well be something entirely unexpected - not the gulags and martial suppression of the USSR (as predicted by Orwell and certain suspicious, perfervid 'Net outlets) - but something more exciting and life-affirming. ..."
Or they can implement their "thinning of society" mandates that eliminate any need to "control the masses". If the masses are "trimmed" to the 500,000,000 (five hundred million) level that the elites are purported to "need" to run their "utopian" society (or more commonly known as the "New Order World"), what need is there to "control" the masses on such a massive scale as would be required if no "thinning" were done?
Reply from The Daily Bell
Are you sure these elaborately distributed genocidal plans are not a promotion of themselves - a way of further sowing fear, doubt and, of course, psychological paralysis? It is all very ... elaborate.
The Georgia Guidestones...
Click to view link
On one of the highest hilltops in Elbert County, Georgia stands a huge granite monument. Engraved in eight different languages on the four giant stones that support the common capstone are 10 Guides, or commandments. That monument is alternately referred to as The Georgia Guidestones, or the American Stonehenge. Though relatively unknown to most people, it is an important link to the Occult Hierarchy that dominates the world in which we live.
The origin of that strange monument is shrouded in mystery because no one knows the true identity of the man, or men, who commissioned its construction. All that is known for certain is that in June 1979, a well-dressed, articulate stranger visited the office of the Elberton Granite Finishing Company and announced that he wanted to build an edifice to transmit a message to mankind.
He identified himself as R. C. Christian, but it soon became apparent that was not his real name. He said that he represented a group of men who wanted to offer direction to humanity, but to date, almost two decades later, no one knows who R. C. Christian really was, or the names of those he represented. Several things are apparent. The messages engraved on the Georgia Guidestones deal with four major fields:
(1) Governance and the establishment of a world government,
(2) Population and reproduction control,
(3) The environment and man's relationship to nature, and
In the public library in Elberton, I found a book written by the man who called himself R.C. Christian. I discovered that the monument he commissioned had been erected in recognition of Thomas Paine and the occult philosophy he espoused.
Indeed, the Georgia Guidestones are used for occult ceremonies and mystic celebrations to this very day. Tragically, only one religious leader in the area had the courage to speak out against the American Stonehenge, and he has recently relocated his ministry.
THE MESSAGE OF THE GEORGIA GUIDESTONES
1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature - Leave room for nature.
They are perhaps Rosicrucian, BTW ...
Click to view link
Posted by Brenda on 01/15/10 11:42 AM
As a member of many social websites it is evident that many Americans are certain that the time will come when they must pick up arms and "take their country back".
In fact most are preparing for that time, feeling that to preserve our great country it is not if this will happen but when. The ruling class showing contempt for ordinary Americans may bring about the civil unrest. Judging from readings Americans are no longer afraid, they are simply waiting.
Sure that the moment will come when they must fight for their freedom, some believing they were born for this moment in time.
It is rather frightening to read the many blogs, and discussions of people purchasing guns, ammo, food, water, etc.. Watching the elites in Washington make corrupt deals that the people do not expect to follow, knowing the people are expecting a war in America. The people no longer trust their government, and are preparing for the worst.
Reply from The Daily Bell
It is probably good not to trust government. But a collapse may be inevitable even without great violence.
Posted by Bill Ross on 01/13/10 12:46 PM
This is also the script according to Machiavelli (strategically denied bible of arbitrary power " politics):Machiavelli Paraphrased: 'Arbitrary power can get away with ANYTHING, so long as it appears 'necessary to intellectually crippled populations (falsely framed arguments, based on lies for input facts, flogged by corrupt experts, shilling and prostituting their academic degrees for power, blind trust of populace, a social disease and mental illness I call 'expertitus) .
In essence, all such arguments are a house of cards, false assumptions built upon false assumptions, the false equating of speculation to REALITY.The is the exact same algorithm used to rationalize the initiation of aggression against Iraq, a war crime. The same false 'argument is being carefully constricted against Iran.
Embargo, the first step of war, initiated.With the discrediting of socialism, all pretexts regarding slavery of the productive to 'help the unfortunate (who adapt to dependency, collapsing civilization) have been replaced by pretexts 'to avoid terror such as necessity for preemptive justice, war or 'save the environment (AGW fraud, etc).In these false arguments, the 'bad guys always have something to steal. The 'good guys are those who intend to profit by the thievery.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Re: Iran, see tomorrow's Bell
Posted by Bill Ross on 01/13/10 08:53 AM
Doubt you will publish this, but, there are deeper truths (and remedies) that beg understanding. Opinion (backed by force) is confused with TRUTH.
Arbitrary power is at WAR with reality. We, the people are collateral damage. At least forward to Dr. Vieira. Here's the underlying REAL reason that freedom (equals survival) will win against imperialism and servitude.
In reality, the 'choosers of the west reasons are economic and predatory. We are, and have been, for all of history, involved in an eternal war between the productive (those who produce more than they consume) versus the greedy (those who consume more than they produce).
Civilizations rise (honesty in control) and fall (predators in control) according to the choices taken according to:Mathematics of Rule (explains current economic stall):
Click to view link warfare works thusly:
Spend a $ on creating random / unpredictable threats. Dogmatic thinkers who are enslaved by process and control must spend $millions on futile systems / process to prevent the unpredictable.
The same 'thinkers are also corrupt and treat problems as opportunities for self-enrichment and make flawed choices, to their benefit and civilizations detriment. The 'terrorists know us far better than we know ourselves.
Heres's the BIG picture and factors that lead to it:The "rule of law" is a precisely defined law. It is the highest law of mankind, stated below: 'the suppression of forceful and fraudulent methods of goal seeking -- all are treated equally by the law.
This means ALL, including king and judges'absolute property rightsThis in turn is based on the fact that human behavior (the topic of law) is about goal seeking. In the seeking of any goal, there are only three possible methods: force, fraud and honest trade.
Any transaction that is not an honest, mutually agreed trade will cause a self-defensive response (conflict) from the victim whose survival has been affected."The Rule of Law" is the glue that keeps all of mankind acting together in common interest, tied together by mutual dependence of trade, on an evolutionary path to excellence.
Force and fraud creates conflict and destroys civilizations. Mankind is now on a devolutionary path to extinction because the co-operation once forced by "the rule of law" has been replaced by legitimizing force and fraud for those who incorrectly believe they wield Click to view linkle of Law, Defined:
Click to view link of, Reasons For:
Click to view link of Rule (explains current economic
stall):Click to view link to THINK and solve
problems:Click to view link
Justice Defined: We are all free to profit or suffer and learn (adapt to excellence) by facing the consequences of our OWN choices. Injustice is to be forced to suffer the consequences of choices of unaccountable (irresponsible) others.
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern. The law of liberty tends to abolish the reign of race over race, of faith over faith, of class over class."
~ Lord Acton Now you know (for SURE)
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks for the eloquent feedback.