Vache Folle at St. George Blog recently commented on my previouse post about the people who do not see the state for what it is. He stated that, "To problematize the state is to call into question their basic assumptions about social reality. They have to be reprogrammed." I think by using the word reprogrammed, he meant what Harry Browne used to mean by saying that people need to un-learn certain things about history in order to have a clear view of the current state of things.
That being said, Joe Sobran has written a piece titled How Tyranny Came to America that I think does a fine job of explaining how we got from a society with a relatively small and insignicant central government to one of massive size and scope. While I'm sure most of the readers of this blog have already un-learned most of their American history, this article makes for a good refresher course in constitutional chaos.
read more | digg story
Monday, June 11, 2007
Sunday, June 03, 2007
Why Aren't Your Views Mainstream?
I recently forwarded a link containing clips of Ron Paul from the first Republican debate to a friend of mine. He in turn forwarded the same email on to his step father with a bit of his own words in the body. He stated that the ideas that Ron Paul put forth were simple, logical, and made about as much sense as anything that he had heard coming out of a politician’s mouth.
My friends step father responded to the email with one point. The response simply stated that if Ron Paul's ideas made so much sense, then why do the majority of our fellow Americans not agree?
I have been thinking about this response for the better part of the day, and I have come up with only one conclusion about it. My conclusion is simply this: how can someone respond to such a position with such a weak and hollow remark? It is exactly this type of thinking that advances the mindlessness of the American citizenry today. Rather than rationally and coherently respond with rebuttals and ideas of their own, those who come to the table with the statist point of view have no real coherent thoughts when it comes to thinking outside the statist box. My friend's father used the same hollow logic that Rudy Giulliani used when he labeled Ron Paul’s views about possible reasons why we were attacked on 9-11 as absurd. Ron Paul listed several sources, including the 9-11 Commission report, as backing for his rationale, but all the apologists of the welfare-warfare state can come up with is, "That is absurd, not in the mainstream!"
Where is the intelligent debate on the statist side? It seems that most of the time someone challenges their conventional way of thinking, all they can do is dismiss that persons views as “outside the mainstream.”
I wonder if these same people would have responded with these same hollow words towards people of pro-abolitionist views during the early 19th century. I can only imagine someone trying to persuade another that slavery is morally wrong and must be abolished, and the other person’s only line of reason for the continuance of slavery being, “If you are so right, why doesn’t the mainstream agree with you?”
My friends step father responded to the email with one point. The response simply stated that if Ron Paul's ideas made so much sense, then why do the majority of our fellow Americans not agree?
I have been thinking about this response for the better part of the day, and I have come up with only one conclusion about it. My conclusion is simply this: how can someone respond to such a position with such a weak and hollow remark? It is exactly this type of thinking that advances the mindlessness of the American citizenry today. Rather than rationally and coherently respond with rebuttals and ideas of their own, those who come to the table with the statist point of view have no real coherent thoughts when it comes to thinking outside the statist box. My friend's father used the same hollow logic that Rudy Giulliani used when he labeled Ron Paul’s views about possible reasons why we were attacked on 9-11 as absurd. Ron Paul listed several sources, including the 9-11 Commission report, as backing for his rationale, but all the apologists of the welfare-warfare state can come up with is, "That is absurd, not in the mainstream!"
Where is the intelligent debate on the statist side? It seems that most of the time someone challenges their conventional way of thinking, all they can do is dismiss that persons views as “outside the mainstream.”
I wonder if these same people would have responded with these same hollow words towards people of pro-abolitionist views during the early 19th century. I can only imagine someone trying to persuade another that slavery is morally wrong and must be abolished, and the other person’s only line of reason for the continuance of slavery being, “If you are so right, why doesn’t the mainstream agree with you?”
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Ron Paul on Real Time
One week after calling Ron Paul his new hero, Bill Maher invites Ron Paul back on Real Time to discuss his growing popularity for his non-interventionist position on foreign policy. The audience seemed to go crazy for Ron, causing Bill Maher to comment that that was the most applause his audience has ever given to a Republican. The icing came towards the end of the interview when Ron threw in a nice little jab back at Rudy for his lack of understanding of the unintended consequences of decades of intervening in the foreign affairs of other nations.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
The Neocon Moment is Over
Great article by Paul Mulshine on the fallout of the Paul / Giuliani feud.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Bill Maher on Ron Paul: "He is my New Hero"
So I just finished watching last Fridays rerun of Real Time on HBO, and was pleasantly surprised to hear Bill Maher defending Ron Paul's comments at the last Republican debate on Fox.
Maher was interviewing Chris Dodd (D-CT) at the beginning of the show when he made his comments about a man running for the Republican nomination named Ron Paul who has no chance of winning and can therefore speak the truth. He posed Paul's argument about America's foreign policy of interventionism that has served to drastically irritate much of the mid-east to a point where a 9-11 type attack became imminent. Dodd first disagreed on the grounds that he did not believe that 9-11 was a provoked attack, but host Maher quickly interjected by not allowing Dodd to in Maher's words, "do what the Republican's did to Paul." Maher told Dodd that Paul's words had been twisted. He explained that Paul's point was not to say that we were asking for the attack, but that we intervened to a point where someone was eventually going to respond.
Towards the end of the show Maher put together a stringed clip of the candidate's statements on the war on terror. Each candidate from Romney and Giuliani to McCain and on down the line repeatedly called for more use of torture to fight the war on terror. Romney actually suggested doubling the size of Guantanamo Bay. The clip ended with Ron Paul speaking of the Republican Party's tradition of being anti-war in the past. This was followed by the sound of crickets and dumb "dear in the headlights" looks on all of the other candidates faces.
After I finished writing this post, I noticed that Titanium Girl has posted the video clip from Real Time on her blog Titanium Thoughts. Check it out.
Maher was interviewing Chris Dodd (D-CT) at the beginning of the show when he made his comments about a man running for the Republican nomination named Ron Paul who has no chance of winning and can therefore speak the truth. He posed Paul's argument about America's foreign policy of interventionism that has served to drastically irritate much of the mid-east to a point where a 9-11 type attack became imminent. Dodd first disagreed on the grounds that he did not believe that 9-11 was a provoked attack, but host Maher quickly interjected by not allowing Dodd to in Maher's words, "do what the Republican's did to Paul." Maher told Dodd that Paul's words had been twisted. He explained that Paul's point was not to say that we were asking for the attack, but that we intervened to a point where someone was eventually going to respond.
Towards the end of the show Maher put together a stringed clip of the candidate's statements on the war on terror. Each candidate from Romney and Giuliani to McCain and on down the line repeatedly called for more use of torture to fight the war on terror. Romney actually suggested doubling the size of Guantanamo Bay. The clip ended with Ron Paul speaking of the Republican Party's tradition of being anti-war in the past. This was followed by the sound of crickets and dumb "dear in the headlights" looks on all of the other candidates faces.
After I finished writing this post, I noticed that Titanium Girl has posted the video clip from Real Time on her blog Titanium Thoughts. Check it out.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Cheating Dental Students
John Gibson at Fox News has written a story about some dental students at the Indiana University dental school. These students reportedly were involved in a cheating scandal and suspended from the school. The reason according to the professors is that President Bush lied about WMD in Iraq, therefore students now believe that lying and cheating is morally acceptable.
Of-course Gibson is contending that anyone who uses this type of rantionale has, in his words, "come off the rails." Now don't get me wrong, I believe strongly in a philosophy of personal responsibility, therefore I sympathize with Gibson's point of view. I only wonder if Gibson would have applied this same standard to the social conservative right who blamed President Clinton for the supposed rising rates of sexual activity among the nations youth.
Of-course Gibson is contending that anyone who uses this type of rantionale has, in his words, "come off the rails." Now don't get me wrong, I believe strongly in a philosophy of personal responsibility, therefore I sympathize with Gibson's point of view. I only wonder if Gibson would have applied this same standard to the social conservative right who blamed President Clinton for the supposed rising rates of sexual activity among the nations youth.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Radicals for Capitalism
I have been reading Brian Doherty's new book, "Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement." Mr. Doherty is a senior editor at Reason magazine, which is to say one of the fine libertarian publications of our time.
I have thoroughly enjoyed Doherty's history and commentary on the movement. He has basically put together an outline encompassing all of the known and not so well known characters that have contributed to libertarian philosophy over the past couple of centuries.
Albert Jay Knock's contributions have been of particular interest to me. Doherty writes in his book that "Knock was an anarchist, though he carefully distinguished the state, to which he was bloodily opposed, from government-the necessary functions for an orderly civilization historically usurped by the state."
I recommend this book to any students of libertarian thought and history.
I have thoroughly enjoyed Doherty's history and commentary on the movement. He has basically put together an outline encompassing all of the known and not so well known characters that have contributed to libertarian philosophy over the past couple of centuries.
Albert Jay Knock's contributions have been of particular interest to me. Doherty writes in his book that "Knock was an anarchist, though he carefully distinguished the state, to which he was bloodily opposed, from government-the necessary functions for an orderly civilization historically usurped by the state."
I recommend this book to any students of libertarian thought and history.
Monday, May 07, 2007
I'm Back
After a long hiatus from this blog, I have finally come back to this space where I can enjoy advocating my random anti-state pontifications.
So much has happened over the past few months that I don't know where to begin. I suppose the most exciting news of the past few weeks has been Ron Paul's recent frenzy of media publicity. I haven't been this excited about someone running for a political party nomination since, wait - never have I been this excited about anything happening within the realm of politics.
Ron Paul's presence at the GOP debate was absolutely remarkable. I could not believe I was watching someone of Paul's consistent, hard hitting libertarian ideology actually espousing his views upon the stage at the Reagan library on a nationally televised debate. Good times.
Ron Paul has been able to capitalize off of the internet in a big way in 2007. He must have mobilized and army of hardcore activists, as is evidenced by his placing first or second in most of the major media "Who won the GOP debate" polls. I was stunned by the results of many of those polls.
I only wish like the editors of Reason magazine do that it would be nice to live in a world where Ron Paul could actually win. I believe that for now, candidates like Ron Paul mainly serve as a stabilizing factor to keep the other Republican candidates from falling too far to away from small government libertarian principles. One of my favorite parts from the debate happened when host Chris Matthews asked the panel if they supported or opposed a national ID card for Americans. Almost all of them said that they supported it, until Ron Paul explained that a national ID card was inconsistent with a free society. He went on to place the proper role of government to protecting the privacy of the people, not protecting the privacy of government. At this point McCain and Giuliani had to backtrack and stumble around explaining that they only supported if for foreigners, not Americans. I loved it.
To those few who actually read my blog, I'm sorry to have fallen off the face of the earth for so long. I look forward to continuing this blog and interacting with others once again.
So much has happened over the past few months that I don't know where to begin. I suppose the most exciting news of the past few weeks has been Ron Paul's recent frenzy of media publicity. I haven't been this excited about someone running for a political party nomination since, wait - never have I been this excited about anything happening within the realm of politics.
Ron Paul's presence at the GOP debate was absolutely remarkable. I could not believe I was watching someone of Paul's consistent, hard hitting libertarian ideology actually espousing his views upon the stage at the Reagan library on a nationally televised debate. Good times.
Ron Paul has been able to capitalize off of the internet in a big way in 2007. He must have mobilized and army of hardcore activists, as is evidenced by his placing first or second in most of the major media "Who won the GOP debate" polls. I was stunned by the results of many of those polls.
I only wish like the editors of Reason magazine do that it would be nice to live in a world where Ron Paul could actually win. I believe that for now, candidates like Ron Paul mainly serve as a stabilizing factor to keep the other Republican candidates from falling too far to away from small government libertarian principles. One of my favorite parts from the debate happened when host Chris Matthews asked the panel if they supported or opposed a national ID card for Americans. Almost all of them said that they supported it, until Ron Paul explained that a national ID card was inconsistent with a free society. He went on to place the proper role of government to protecting the privacy of the people, not protecting the privacy of government. At this point McCain and Giuliani had to backtrack and stumble around explaining that they only supported if for foreigners, not Americans. I loved it.
To those few who actually read my blog, I'm sorry to have fallen off the face of the earth for so long. I look forward to continuing this blog and interacting with others once again.
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
GOP Sex Scandal – Big Distraction with Glimmer of Hope
I have to say something about this story given the current high level of intensity it has snowballed into at this point. I usually find this type of story very irritating when it comes out of Washington. It seems to serve as a big distraction from the real goings on of Congress. By that I’m referring to the plundering, regulating, dominating, intimidating, and controlling of the citizenry vis-à-vis new taxes and regulation – the usual activities of Congress.
This story is vaguely reminiscent of the big stink that was made of Trent Lott’s comments in praise of Strom Thurmond on his birthday back in 2002. Reminiscent because of the giant distraction in the form of national headlines it has created over nothing but a few words transmitted from one person to another.
Trent Lott caught all kinds of hell from his comments back then that many people including the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Gore viewed as racist at the time- big surprise. Now it seems the Republicans in general are going to pay a pretty price at the polls for the recent revelation that one of them is gay- and a sexual predator to boot! It seems that Rep. Mark Foley has been sending sexually explicit messages to a 17 year old page. Then the honorable Rep. Foley immediately checked into some kind of alcohol rehab program to avoid the firestorm that has come crashing down on him. A spokesperson for him stated that he was drunk when he sent the messages, but added that he was never intoxicated during official congressional business- right.
Speaker Hastert, who is responsible for oversight of the page program, has already been compared to the likes of Cardinal Law of the Catholic church for his role in allegedly ignoring allegations of sexual harassment sent his way from a 2005 page incident.
I suppose the most ironic aspect this whole story is the fact that Mr. Foley has been “credited with writing the sexual-predator provisions of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, which Bush signed in July.”
The only good thing to come out of this mess I suppose is that it has further undermined the credibility of the incumbent party, which happens to be the GOP. The public seems to be withdrawing support in larger numbers now of our current foreign policy and of Republicans in general.
Hopefully this time some of those people who are fed up will not go out and pull the lever in favor of the other big government party instead of looking for third options like the libertarians.
This story is vaguely reminiscent of the big stink that was made of Trent Lott’s comments in praise of Strom Thurmond on his birthday back in 2002. Reminiscent because of the giant distraction in the form of national headlines it has created over nothing but a few words transmitted from one person to another.
Trent Lott caught all kinds of hell from his comments back then that many people including the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Gore viewed as racist at the time- big surprise. Now it seems the Republicans in general are going to pay a pretty price at the polls for the recent revelation that one of them is gay- and a sexual predator to boot! It seems that Rep. Mark Foley has been sending sexually explicit messages to a 17 year old page. Then the honorable Rep. Foley immediately checked into some kind of alcohol rehab program to avoid the firestorm that has come crashing down on him. A spokesperson for him stated that he was drunk when he sent the messages, but added that he was never intoxicated during official congressional business- right.
Speaker Hastert, who is responsible for oversight of the page program, has already been compared to the likes of Cardinal Law of the Catholic church for his role in allegedly ignoring allegations of sexual harassment sent his way from a 2005 page incident.
I suppose the most ironic aspect this whole story is the fact that Mr. Foley has been “credited with writing the sexual-predator provisions of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, which Bush signed in July.”
The only good thing to come out of this mess I suppose is that it has further undermined the credibility of the incumbent party, which happens to be the GOP. The public seems to be withdrawing support in larger numbers now of our current foreign policy and of Republicans in general.
Hopefully this time some of those people who are fed up will not go out and pull the lever in favor of the other big government party instead of looking for third options like the libertarians.
Sunday, September 03, 2006
Minimum Wage
I was reading the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal today when I stumbled across an article titled Grappling Over Minimum Wage Builds as Republicans Disagree. The opening premise of the article is whether Republicans should try to pass an increase in the minimum wage after returning to the hill after Labor Day, or to let the issue pass and risk facing voters in November.
Apparently some Republicans in tough races are chomping at the bit for another chance to raise the minimum raise in order to "deprive democrats of a major campaign talking point." Where are their principles I say? Chris Shays-R Connecticut was quoted as saying, "I think it should be passed under our watch." The usual petty, party politics game in Washington is being played simply to maintain power, much to the dismay of low skilled workers who face potential job loss or work time reductions if such a measure is to pass.
Mr. Shays was also quoted saying, "... it’s not like we're increasing it in a way that would cause unemployment." I wonder how come Mr. Shays doesn't understand that the current minimum wage is causing unemployment. Of-course raising it would only serve to increase the unemployment that it is already causing. This is yet another example of a politician who does not understand simple economics.
This reminds me of the massive prescription drug plan the GOP passed in 2002 that pilfered the pockets of younger workers to line the wallets of the wealthiest group of Americans in our countries history. All the republicans cared about at that time was that they passed it first. Not much has changed.
A possible strategy for the Dems is to wait out the issue until a spending bill comes up that would provide for pay raises for legislators. The author of the article proclaims that the Dems would then be able to slam the Republicans for raising their own pay, while failing to do so for minimum wage earners.
Of-course no one in the mainstream media is going to point out the truth that law makers have no natural, legal authority to intervene in the affairs of private business in the first place.
Apparently some Republicans in tough races are chomping at the bit for another chance to raise the minimum raise in order to "deprive democrats of a major campaign talking point." Where are their principles I say? Chris Shays-R Connecticut was quoted as saying, "I think it should be passed under our watch." The usual petty, party politics game in Washington is being played simply to maintain power, much to the dismay of low skilled workers who face potential job loss or work time reductions if such a measure is to pass.
Mr. Shays was also quoted saying, "... it’s not like we're increasing it in a way that would cause unemployment." I wonder how come Mr. Shays doesn't understand that the current minimum wage is causing unemployment. Of-course raising it would only serve to increase the unemployment that it is already causing. This is yet another example of a politician who does not understand simple economics.
This reminds me of the massive prescription drug plan the GOP passed in 2002 that pilfered the pockets of younger workers to line the wallets of the wealthiest group of Americans in our countries history. All the republicans cared about at that time was that they passed it first. Not much has changed.
A possible strategy for the Dems is to wait out the issue until a spending bill comes up that would provide for pay raises for legislators. The author of the article proclaims that the Dems would then be able to slam the Republicans for raising their own pay, while failing to do so for minimum wage earners.
Of-course no one in the mainstream media is going to point out the truth that law makers have no natural, legal authority to intervene in the affairs of private business in the first place.
Sunday, July 09, 2006
The Da Vinci Code
Is this stuff for real?
I have been reading this book by Dan Brown called The Da Vinci Code, perhaps you heard of it. I am really enjoying learning about Da Vinci's art and all of the alleged hidden clues he left to tell the world the truth about the Church. I had up until now never heard of the sacred feminine or that Mona Lisa's name came from the fusion of the names of an Egyptian god and goddess of fertility, Amon and Isis which was once written as the pictogram for Lisa- Amon'Lisa.
All of this is new to me and I have not done any research for myself to find out how much of this novel is historically accurate, but I found one of Mr. Brown's premises quite telling. In chapter 55, one of the characters explains what he calls the fundamental irony of Christianity. This irony is said to be that the bible as we know it today was collated by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine the Great. He claims that Constantine simply declared Christianity as Rome’s official state religion to take advantage of Christianity’s growing popularity in order to stop the conflict between the Christians and pagans. Apparently Constantine foresaw Christianity’s rise, and fused it with pagan customs and symbols, which can still be found today, in order to appease and unite the two warring groups. It seems historians ever since have marveled at Constantine’s sales and marketing skills which allowed him to pull this off.
As I have stated, I do not know how much of this story is historically accurate, but it would not surprise me at all if in fact the head of one of the once most powerful governments on Earth altered the customs, symbols, and history of an entire religious movement in order to carry out his vision for Rome.
I have been reading this book by Dan Brown called The Da Vinci Code, perhaps you heard of it. I am really enjoying learning about Da Vinci's art and all of the alleged hidden clues he left to tell the world the truth about the Church. I had up until now never heard of the sacred feminine or that Mona Lisa's name came from the fusion of the names of an Egyptian god and goddess of fertility, Amon and Isis which was once written as the pictogram for Lisa- Amon'Lisa.
All of this is new to me and I have not done any research for myself to find out how much of this novel is historically accurate, but I found one of Mr. Brown's premises quite telling. In chapter 55, one of the characters explains what he calls the fundamental irony of Christianity. This irony is said to be that the bible as we know it today was collated by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine the Great. He claims that Constantine simply declared Christianity as Rome’s official state religion to take advantage of Christianity’s growing popularity in order to stop the conflict between the Christians and pagans. Apparently Constantine foresaw Christianity’s rise, and fused it with pagan customs and symbols, which can still be found today, in order to appease and unite the two warring groups. It seems historians ever since have marveled at Constantine’s sales and marketing skills which allowed him to pull this off.
As I have stated, I do not know how much of this story is historically accurate, but it would not surprise me at all if in fact the head of one of the once most powerful governments on Earth altered the customs, symbols, and history of an entire religious movement in order to carry out his vision for Rome.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Help Aaron Russo
We can all do something very simple right now to help get the preview for Aaron's new movie America: Freedom to Fascism in front of more eyes.
Simply go to Veoh where you can watch a 3 minute clip of the movie to help get the viewer rating up. Then register with Veoh so you can give the clip a 5 star rating and also leave a comment about the clip.
All of this only takes a few minutes and for what better cause is there?
Simply go to Veoh where you can watch a 3 minute clip of the movie to help get the viewer rating up. Then register with Veoh so you can give the clip a 5 star rating and also leave a comment about the clip.
All of this only takes a few minutes and for what better cause is there?
Monday, June 12, 2006
I've Been Tagged
One of those blog memes has passed my way due to my getting tagged by Titanium Girl
Four Jobs I’ve Had
K-Mart employee
Freelance Lawn Mower
Albertsons employee
West Teleservices CSR
Four Movies I can Watch Over and Over
The Matrix
V for Vendetta
Office Space
Equilibrium
Four Places I’ve Lived
Tulsa
Broken Arrow
yeah, pretty much just Tulsa
Four TV Shows I love
Greys Anatomy
I don't know if these count:
The O'Reilly Factor
Squawk on the Street
Mad Money
Four highly regarded and recommended TV shows I haven't seen (much of)
huh?
Four places I've vacationed
Utah
Hawaii
Missouri
Florida
Four of my favorite dishes
Salmon Patties
Beer Brats on the grill
salad wraps
hamburgers, (my recipe)
Four sites I visit daily
Lew Rockwell
Morningstar
Myspace
Yahoo
Four places I'd rather be right now:
nowhere
Four new bloggers I'm tagging
Titanium Girl
James Leroy Wilson
VACHE FOLLE
Four Jobs I’ve Had
K-Mart employee
Freelance Lawn Mower
Albertsons employee
West Teleservices CSR
Four Movies I can Watch Over and Over
The Matrix
V for Vendetta
Office Space
Equilibrium
Four Places I’ve Lived
Tulsa
Broken Arrow
yeah, pretty much just Tulsa
Four TV Shows I love
Greys Anatomy
I don't know if these count:
The O'Reilly Factor
Squawk on the Street
Mad Money
Four highly regarded and recommended TV shows I haven't seen (much of)
huh?
Four places I've vacationed
Utah
Hawaii
Missouri
Florida
Four of my favorite dishes
Salmon Patties
Beer Brats on the grill
salad wraps
hamburgers, (my recipe)
Four sites I visit daily
Lew Rockwell
Morningstar
Myspace
Yahoo
Four places I'd rather be right now:
nowhere
Four new bloggers I'm tagging
Titanium Girl
James Leroy Wilson
VACHE FOLLE
Monday, May 29, 2006
America: From Freedom To Fascism
Everyone needs to check out Aaron Russo's new movie titled "America: From Freedom to Fascism." Learn all about this eye opening project at this website url: http://www.freedomtofascism.com/index.html. Aaron Russo is not like Michael Moore who plays to the Left to increase polarization in America. He presents a truly American call to arms to wake up and take back our stolen liberties. He has already put up 100% of his own money just to make this film, now he needs the help of all those who still care about freedom to support the advertising and promotion of this project in any way you can. Pass this message along to everyone in your address book and tell everyone you know about the movie and website. If you can spare some extra money, then donate to this project. As I have said, Aaron has already put up his own money and given the last two years of his life to make this film, but it will take a lot more money to advertise and actually get the film to open in theatres all across America. Let's help Aaron open his movie this July with a bang all across America. This might be the best opportunity to come along ever to wake America up to the reality of what our government has done to our freedoms over past hundred years.
The Power of Now
I have been reading this interesting book on spiritual enlightenment by Eckhart Tolle titled The Power of Now.
The main premise seems to be that most humans are too caught up in worring about the past and the future. On the future side of things we seem to create this mental projection of different "what if" scenarios thas create fear inside us. We spend too much time dwelling and living in the past that we can do nothing about. According to the author the past and future do not exist, and the only thing that matters is this moment right now. To realize the present and discover Being is the ultimate achievement of true happiness and freedom from all forms of pain and suffering.
The author spends a few moments discussing what he calls psychological time in a section called "The Insanity of Psychological Time" that I thought would be appropriate for this blog.
When I bought this book I was not at all looking for material of political nature, but it appears to have found me. Funny how that works.
The main premise seems to be that most humans are too caught up in worring about the past and the future. On the future side of things we seem to create this mental projection of different "what if" scenarios thas create fear inside us. We spend too much time dwelling and living in the past that we can do nothing about. According to the author the past and future do not exist, and the only thing that matters is this moment right now. To realize the present and discover Being is the ultimate achievement of true happiness and freedom from all forms of pain and suffering.
The author spends a few moments discussing what he calls psychological time in a section called "The Insanity of Psychological Time" that I thought would be appropriate for this blog.
You will not have any doubt that psychological time is a mental disease if you look at its collective manifestations. They occur, for example, in idealogies such a communism, national socialism, or any nationalism, or rigid religious belief systems, which operate under the implicit belief system that the highest good lies in the future, and that therefore the end justifies the means. The end is an idea, a point in the mind-projected future, when salvation in whatever form - happiness, fulfilment, equality, liberation, and so on - will be attained. Not infrequently, the means of getting there are the enslavement, torture, and murder of people in the present.
For example, it is estimated that as many as fifty million people were murdered to further the cause of communism, to bring about a "better world" in Russia, China, and other countries. This is a chilling example of how belief in a future heaven creates a present hell. Can there be any doubt that psychological time is a serious and dangerous mental illness.
When I bought this book I was not at all looking for material of political nature, but it appears to have found me. Funny how that works.
Myspace.com hate Walmart Group
I have now left two separate posts in the group called "Walmart is the Devil" on Myspace.com, which I have also posted to this blog. It has been over 15 days since my last post, and not a single person has responded to it. I guess these people do not desire to debate the merits of their beliefs, and that is fine, I just thought that my comments would elicit some type of reponse from at least someone in this group. I was wrong.
Sunday, May 14, 2006
Walmart Must Ask Someone First
More comments from me in response to the current conversation taking place in the Myspace groupWalmart is the Devil. So far no one has responded to my previous comment in the forum, maybe this one will stir the pudding a little bit.
I agree that Walmart and Sams Club stores are large and zoo like, and I attempt to avoid them as much a possible for those reasons.
But I have a few questions for those who feel the same. Do we not live in a free country anymore? Can a business not purchase land and construct a building in which to sell goods to the local residents of the community in the free market without asking someone first?
Of-course they must ask someone first. Walmart, or Sams Club must ask the person or persons who they wish to purchase the land from (except in cases of local city councils abusing eminent domain) if that person or persons will sell them the land. Then they must ask or attempt to persuade the various individuals of the community to purchase items from their new store in order for them to stay in business. All of these various actions are voluntary on the part of all parties.
No ones natural rights to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness is being infringed upon by any of these aforementioned actions (once again, except in cases of eminent domain abuse on the part of local governments).
So I ask the members of this group, where is the tort? What has Walmart done to you that is worse than such programs as social security, which takes 14 percent of your income and gives it to someone else. When did you consent to this action? If you did not consent, which pretty much covers all of us, then that means this income redistribution program fell upon you by the use of deadly force.
What do I mean by Deadly Force? See what happens if you stop paying your taxes for a while. Eventually the IRS will contact you about the taxes you owe them. If you refuse to cooperate with them, a court date will be set to determine what to do about you not having paid your taxes. If you refuse to show up for court, eventually the guns will come out. Men with guns will come to your home to take away your liberty and pursuit of happiness.
That is called deadly force my friends.
Why can the government do all this without asking someone first? They did not ask me and they did not ask anyone else that I know if they could confiscate 14 cents of every dollar you and I earn to give to someone else.
Friday, May 05, 2006
The Hate Wal-Mart Mentality
I was wandering around Myspace tonight when I discovered an anti-Wal-Mart group. I am not a Wal-Mart shopper and I do not own stock in the company, but the hate Wal-Mart venom was so staunch that I had to post a reply. Most of the people speaking their minds about Wal-Mart were young, and I just wish that they would find someting much more noble to speak out against. Perhaps something that actually has the power to use deadly force to accomplish its' goals. My response was as follows:
I can't wait to find out why all of the "hate Wal-Mart" people give the government a pass on its' tyrannical activities, but torch Wal-Malt everyday.
Even though so many of you all seem to hate Wal-Mart so much, I find it odd that it sounds like some of you frequent the place more than I do - which is not very much. Almost everyone here seems to be forgetting a vitally important concept. In America we still have a slightly quasi-free market capitalistic society, and it is the consumers (read: you, me, and everyone else) who get to decide if companies such as Wal-Mart live or die. If you have such a problem with them, then I have the perfect solution for you - don't shop there. If you disagree with anything they are doing, you have the ultimate power to decide for yourself that you will give them absolutely no economic support.
It would be really wonderful if all of this hate Wal-Mart venom could be redirected at putting a stop to something much more painful and unjust to the American consumer. I'm talking mainly about the 15 cents that is taken from every dollar you earn before you even realize it is gone. I am talking about the ponzi scheme being pulled on us by our government otherwise known as Social Security. None of us has a choice to peaceably abstain from participating in this draconian program, and all of us know that it will not be there for us when we reach that sacred age of eligibility - what is the age this year 65 or have they raised it to 67 yet. How can it be right for the government to confiscate 15 cents from every dollar you earn as part of a retirement program, and not even be required to pass that money on to your next of kin should you die before you reach a certain age? Any company competing in the free market could not survive running a retirement program such as the government's social insecurity scheme, but we let the government get away with it.
Why?
I can't wait to find out why all of the "hate Wal-Mart" people give the government a pass on its' tyrannical activities, but torch Wal-Malt everyday.
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Rising Gas Prices
As the prices at the pump continue to rise, the people seem willing only to point their fingers at those greedy oil companies, rather than the government that has created the problem and then exacerbated it with outrageously high taxes on the product. How can Exxon Mobil justify such high gas prices, all the while paying CEO Lee Raymond a $400 million retirement package? Tom Doggett of Reuters called this action a "shamefull display of greed." But is it shameful for a successful and profitable company operating in a quasi-free market to reward its’ CEO for a job well done? Most people do not realize that the profits collected on a gallon of gasoline are actually lower than the tax collected by the government on that same gallon of gasoline. And now the politicians are playing on the ignorance of the American people by calling for a “windfall profit tax” on the oil companies to off set these rising gas prices. It is too bad that corporations do not pay taxes; they pass them on to consumers via higher prices. So how does this help the situation?
The focus of anger towards the oil companies at the problem of rising gas prices has been wholeheartedly misdirected by the people. When reporters like Doggett along with many other members of the media, and both Republican and Democrat politicians speak out against the oil companies as the root of the problem they fan the flames of an anti-capitalist, anti-free market mentality. They are doing the U.S. a great disservice with their rhetoric.
People should realize that it has been the government’s environmental policies that have created this problem, not the oil companies. Mandates set forth that have not allowed a new refinery to be built in the last thirty years have stifled competition in this industry. Regulations that require so many different blends of gasoline depending on the region the gas is sold in also contribute to higher costs associated with producing and distributing the product. Since only certain blends can be sold in certain areas, shortages are created – thus we pay higher prices.
Environmentalists have blocked oil drilling in Alaska for many years now. Floridians do not want U.S. oil companies to be able to drill for oil of the coast of Florida because they are afraid there might be an oil spill of some kind so close to their homes. Many people are probably unaware of the fact that Fidel Castro has signed agreements with Spain, Canada, and China to explore offshore drilling northeast and northwest of Havana just about 50 miles from Key West. I wonder how the Floridians feel now. They have blocked U.S. companies from exploration of this area due to fears of oil spills, but U.S. oil companies are much better equipped to safely drill for oil than China and Spain.
Now I support protecting our environment, but there has to be a way to do it without creating virtual monopolies and oil shortages as unintended consequences. World wide oil demand has increased to a point that these reckless environmental policies are going to create a gasoline price disaster. Something must be done, or better yet undone, to allow for more competition, and easier production and distribution of gasoline.
But perhaps the vilest aspect of this whole debate lies in the hidden truth about the secret taxes paid on a gallon of gasoline. I say secret because this is the one product consumers purchase that they are largely unaware of the tax rate they are paying. Why is this so? The federal government takes 18.4 cents of every gallon of gas sold and the states take an average of 27.5 cents per gallon. This is taken from consumers at the pump before they even realize that it is gone much like the federal withholding tax from their paychecks. It just so happens that the average profit made on a gallon of gasoline by the companies that produce the gas is only about 8 cents per gallon. And then these same companies pay taxes on those profits.
It is time for the American people to wake up and understand what is really going on here. We need to hold our government accountable for its’ unjust actions that have put us in this position, not the oil companies who are only responding to market forces and unjust government policies.
The focus of anger towards the oil companies at the problem of rising gas prices has been wholeheartedly misdirected by the people. When reporters like Doggett along with many other members of the media, and both Republican and Democrat politicians speak out against the oil companies as the root of the problem they fan the flames of an anti-capitalist, anti-free market mentality. They are doing the U.S. a great disservice with their rhetoric.
People should realize that it has been the government’s environmental policies that have created this problem, not the oil companies. Mandates set forth that have not allowed a new refinery to be built in the last thirty years have stifled competition in this industry. Regulations that require so many different blends of gasoline depending on the region the gas is sold in also contribute to higher costs associated with producing and distributing the product. Since only certain blends can be sold in certain areas, shortages are created – thus we pay higher prices.
Environmentalists have blocked oil drilling in Alaska for many years now. Floridians do not want U.S. oil companies to be able to drill for oil of the coast of Florida because they are afraid there might be an oil spill of some kind so close to their homes. Many people are probably unaware of the fact that Fidel Castro has signed agreements with Spain, Canada, and China to explore offshore drilling northeast and northwest of Havana just about 50 miles from Key West. I wonder how the Floridians feel now. They have blocked U.S. companies from exploration of this area due to fears of oil spills, but U.S. oil companies are much better equipped to safely drill for oil than China and Spain.
Now I support protecting our environment, but there has to be a way to do it without creating virtual monopolies and oil shortages as unintended consequences. World wide oil demand has increased to a point that these reckless environmental policies are going to create a gasoline price disaster. Something must be done, or better yet undone, to allow for more competition, and easier production and distribution of gasoline.
But perhaps the vilest aspect of this whole debate lies in the hidden truth about the secret taxes paid on a gallon of gasoline. I say secret because this is the one product consumers purchase that they are largely unaware of the tax rate they are paying. Why is this so? The federal government takes 18.4 cents of every gallon of gas sold and the states take an average of 27.5 cents per gallon. This is taken from consumers at the pump before they even realize that it is gone much like the federal withholding tax from their paychecks. It just so happens that the average profit made on a gallon of gasoline by the companies that produce the gas is only about 8 cents per gallon. And then these same companies pay taxes on those profits.
It is time for the American people to wake up and understand what is really going on here. We need to hold our government accountable for its’ unjust actions that have put us in this position, not the oil companies who are only responding to market forces and unjust government policies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
