I have never understood how Bernie Madoff could go to jail for extorting millions of dollars from people in an elaborate Ponzi scheme, yet when the federal government does the same thing, it is called "Social Security."
It is a complete fraud to its absolute core. For example, the modern concept of government-provided "social welfare" comes from the Prussian leader Bismarck, the godfather of the militaristic welfare-warfare state. While slaughtering thousands around Europe, he thought that he should throw his subjects a bone. At the time, the life expectancy of Prussians was 65, so he made "welfare" benefits available at 65. And voila, the great scam was born.
This is the inherent contradiction of the State. If any private person or group of individuals did what the federal government does to us on a daily basis --confiscate wealth and property, commit mass murder, lock people in cages-- we would be (correctly) outraged.
But stripped of its propaganda and PR about providing "public services" and "order," the State is nothing more than a gang of thieves writ large, as Murray Rothbard famously called it.
Here's the great Stefan Molyneux on what Social Security has done to multiple generations of the elderly:
Our Mad Bomber President is currently considering lobbing more kajillion dollar missiles in southern Yemen. And the Empire grows and grows, bringing death and destruction to starving villages, profits to weapons manufacturers, the increase of State power, and the eventual blowback of terrorism on our shores. Ah, it just makes you proud to be an American.
Last week, I blogged
about the anti-Muslim paranoia that is gripping the American media and
politicians about the so-called "Ground Zero mosque." It has been almost
a month since the issue was first brought up,
and all day long right-wing radio rants about using the coercive power
of the State on Muslims. Oh ya, and managing to get "free markets" and
"limited government" in the same breath.
Even the Democrats are getting in on it. From Congressman John Hall to Senator Harry Reid, they're coming with pitchforks.
This issue represents the status of American society, where every issue becomes nationalized and oversimplified.
First of all, it's NOT on "Ground Zero" and it's NOT a mosque. It is an Islamic YMCA, with more square feet of basketball court than prayer space,
surrounded by strip clubs, fast food joints, and bars. More
importantly, as many around the blogosphere have pointed out, how many
Ground Zeros have the U.S. government left near mosques all around the
globe?
The
cynical [Newt] Gingrich bellows that Cordoba House should not be built until
and unless a synagogue is allowed to be built in Saudi Arabia, knowing
perfectly well that the group behind the project is not Wahabi – the
Saudis’ strict sect – but Sufi, the most peaceful and anti-jihadist of
the various strains of Islam. That isn’t stopping him from trying to
revive his previously dead political career with yet another Republican
“wedge” issue.
Somewhere, Osama bin Laden is smiling,
delighted to discover a good chunk of American opinion agrees with him
that Islam, by its very nature, is antithetical to the US and everything
it stands for – a premise that puts us at war with over a billion
people. He’s smiling because Gingrich is doing his evil work for him,
striking a blow against our security far more effectively than anything
al-Qaeda has so far managed to pull off. Polls show bin Laden & Co.
are losing whatever popularity they once enjoyed in the Muslim world,
with only 6 percent considering the Evil One an admirable figure. Oh,
but don’t worry: Gingrich and the Anti-Defamation League are doing
everything they can to rectify that.
In other words,
Sufi Muslims are basically hippies and peaceniks, focusing on the inner,
mystical aspects of Islam with a lot of Eastern influence.
The
controversy over this Islamic Center is a racket, and like all rackets,
they distract from the real issue that Americans should be worried
about it. Like the deliberate manipulation and debasement of our
currency by the Federal Reserve and its fiat currency that funds empire
overseas and boom-and-bust cycles here at home.
The
"free market" is now not only run by monopolies, but also ad absurdum
by state "fines". In Europe, the use of free gold and silver currency is
neither wanted nor de facto practicable, due to the levying of VAT on
coins, among other things. In a free and truly liberal market, the
market actors would be able to "fairly" determine their own currency,
whether it be gold, silver, platinum or something else. In such a
market, people and their economy would be encouraged to be moderate and
to only serve the progress of the real economy. Needless to say, it is
not the advocates of a genuine currency who are making the absurd
attempt to escape back to the middle ages. Also, in the internet age, a
gold currency can be flexibly implemented as debit cards, mobile phone
or internet transfer systems are no longer a technical problem. The
question of money, which has preoccupied people for centuries, in
reality goes beyond the crude polarity between progress and regression.
Instead
of worrying about the neocon propaganda about the grand Islamic
caliphate that will put its boots on the necks of America, why not focus
on the ACTUAL boots on our necks from the federal government's militaristic empire, police state, taxation, regulation, and fiat currency?
Dear Leader, with a straight face, calmly told the plebeians that he
is ushering in the beginning of the end of war in Iraq. His Imperial
Court proudly echoed their boss, claiming he is "keeping his promise."
But an election is coming, which means that snakes in fancy suits go on
TV, smile, and lie to their subjects in order to maintain their power.
This is no different. There will still be over 50,000 combat troops in Iraq, still be bases built and maintained, still be thousands of mercenaries, and still be the transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to politically connected industries.
"Well, first of all we are not leaving," Gen. Petraeus replied.
"There are 50,000 U.S. troops that are remaining in Iraq albeit in a
support role rather than a leading combat role. But that's an enormous
capability."
This is how empires function. The U.S. still has
thousands of troops in Japan, Germany, and Korea, and thousands more
littered across the globe from previous smaller wars. Eventually,
Americans will forget all about Iraq and worry about the next third
world country the U.S. wants to incinerate (Iran?), and move on.
Obama, quietly maintaining the largest empire in the history of the
world, is simply changing the rhetoric and name of occupation in order
to help his party in the mid-term elections and possibly use it in his
likely re-election bid in 2012. I ended 'Bush's war,' he'll say.
Obama
is using the tools of all tyrants --the manipulation of language-- to
pump his chest and stroke his ego. Instead of Operation Iraqi Freedom,
it's Operation New Dawn. Instead of 50,000 combat troops, they are a
"counterinsurgency taskforce." But empire is empire is empire, and somewhere, George Orwell has his head in his hands.
In "the land of the free," you can be put in a cage for 16 years for photographing or videotaping an armed government agent. But the omnipresent state security cameras? The wiretapping of millions of phones? DC has many way to keep tabs on its subjects. But don't you dare spy on Big Brother.
One of the greatest myths that are forced upon the minds of countless government school zombies is that war is an economic stimulus. WW2 "got us out of the Depression." Military bases stimulate the economy and create jobs. Carpet-bombings put people to work.
Besides the fact that war is mass murder and the destruction of property, it is the heart of the State and its power.
Offensive war is paid for through compulsory taxation; it has to be, no one would voluntarily pay to occupy the globe with troops and military bases. It is parasitic, taking wealth from private individuals and transferring it to weapons manufacturers, and further discouraging the peaceful production of goods and services in the marketplace.
As Randolph Bourne famously said, "War is the health of the State."
When it comes to using propaganda and fear to stir up war hysteria and the expansion of state power, the Soviets and Nazis have nothing on the U.S. government.
To be fair, the U.S. government has been at it a lot longer, but this does not take away from its effectiveness.
In the first few years of the infant republic, Congress passed a series of laws, dubbed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which gave the federal government the authority to deport those "dangerous to the peace and safety to the United States," without a trial, during peacetime.
A little over a hundred years later, President Woodrow Wilson, in a stroke of originality, passed the Alien and Sedition Act, which gave the federal government sweeping powers to do what government enjoy doing: spying, snooping, and kicking in doors. Thousands who opposed Wilson's war machine were subsequently arrested and jailed for years.
Then there was the "Red Scare," where the U.S. government intentionally hyped up the Soviet threat and warned Americans of a vast communist conspiracy; there was a Red under every bed! Give us your liberty, sheeple, and we'll hunt them down. Give us your wealth and property too, and we'll incinerate some commie Asian villages too.
The latest scare campaign is the supposed controversy over the "ground zero mosque" being built in New York City. According to almost every news outlet that leans to the Right (i.e. authoritarian), this mosque represents a vast Islamic conspiracy to impose sharia law on Christian America. And did you know that the Imam refuses to "condemn" Hamas!?!?!?!
Never mind the defense of private property rights. Never mind that there are already hundreds of mosques in New York. Never mind (what's left of) our first amendment and the supposed protection of religous freedoms. Never mind that Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and other big government statists refuse to condemn the terrorism committed by the U.S. government. Mosque = Muslim = terrorist, and the club of the State needs to be used against these savages before they blow us up. Kill or be killed.
The fact that this ground zero mosque is even an issue is a sad testament to how anemic American debate is. Without any contradictory opinion, it is simply assumed that Islam was responsible for the savage murders of 9/11. But U.S. support for the Israeli government's crimes? Sanctions on Iraq? U.S. military bases in Muslim holy lands? Nah, these had nothing to do with it.
The ironic part of this whole controversy is that no one seems to be bringing up the very influential and powerful religious crazies here at home. Just listen to good ol' Pastor John Hagee:
Hagee has millions of evangelical Christian followers in the United States, and a lot of them vote and donate lots of money to political campaigns. This megolomaniacal nonsense also has significant presence in the Pentagon and the military (some have dubbed it the "Pentacostalgon"), where being anything other than a fundamentalist Christian is severely looked down upon.
And the fear-mongering just rolls on. If you ask me, no Muslim has ever confiscated part of my paycheck to fund empire and corporate welfare, regulated what I eat, smoke, or consume, restricted economic activity with licensing and taxation, or murdered 1/10,000th of the people "my" government has.
It is the 65th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, where two civilian cities were unnecessarily vaporized for the glory of the Amerikan Empire.
The usual talk of "it saved [insert large number here] of American and Japanese lives" is nonsense of course. The arrogant imperialists in the Roosevelt and Truman Administrations refused to accept the very modest terms of Japan's surrender (namely, restoration of their Emperor as head of state), and instead insisted on UNCONDITIONAL surrender.
So Hiroshima and Nagasaki (and Tokyo, and hundreds of other Japanese cities) burned. The result: a country in ashes, and the restoration of their Emperor as head of state, and the establishment of U.S. military bases and nuclear weapons going on six decades now.
So if it wasn't about ending the war, why were the atomic bombs dropped? The most likely theory, in my opinion, is that President Truman wanted to intimidate and impress the Soviet Union with military might.
Or that American Presidents tend to be evil and cowardly chicken-hawks who order other, better men to commit mass murder for them. It's probably a combination of both.
L. Reichard White at the Antiwar.com blog also brings up some points that I bet you didn't hear on the "news" media:
At 8:16 on the morning of August 6, 1945, the world got a glimpse of its own mortality. At that moment, the city of Hiroshima was obliterated by a fireball that sent waves of searing heat, then a deafening concussion, across the landscape. Three days later, a second bomb hit Nagasaki. … [President Dwight D.] Eisenhower said in 1963 "It wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing."
… Besides the Manhattan Project’s internal momentum was an external motive. Its leaders had to justify the $2 billion ($26 billion in today’s dollars) expense to Congress and the public… Byrnes…warned Roosevelt that political scandal would follow if it [the atomic bomb] was not used. … "How would you get Congress to appropriate money for atomic energy research [after the war] if you do not show results for the money which has been spent already?" …the U.S. had produced two types of bombs–one using uranium, the other plutonium. Whenever anyone suggested that the moment the bomb was dropped the war would be over, [bureaucrat] Groves countered, "Not until we drop two bombs on Japan." As [historian] Goldberg explains… "One bomb justified Oak Ridge, the second justified Hanford." Hiroshima was hit with the uranium bomb, nicknamed "Little Boy"; the plutonium bomb, "Fat Man," was used against Nagasaki.
From Why We Dropped The Bomb By William Lanouette, CIVILIZATION, The Magazine of the Library of Congress, January/February 1995
It’s hard for Americans who identify with the U.S. Government to accept the idea that that organization could have engaged in such horrendous acts – twice in three days – without pristine motives.
Here’s what Vietnam era U.S. Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara – who was part of Gen. Curtis LeMay’s command when the bombs were dropped – thought about it:
Elena Kagan has worked her way up the greasy totem pole of politics and managed to get herself elected to the highest government court in the U.S. today.
Her job is to sit on a raised bench and play politics with everyone's life and property. Oh, and she now gets to wear a big, fancy black robe!!!!!
She's an authoritarian, of course, like all Supreme Court justices. This is the problem with giving Dear Leader the power to pick who goes on to the bench. As the last few decades have shown, Justices have tended to side with giving the President and the federal government more power (shocking, I know) and fewer and fewer protections of life, liberty, and property.
University of Colorado at Boulder law professor Paul Campos described her publication record as "lifeless, dull, and eminently forgettable," and he's got a point. She has written only three law review articles, a few short essays and two brief book reviews. Despite this anemic record, she somehow managed to earn tenure at the University of Chicago Law School and the Dean of Harvard Law School.
In a government briefsigned by Kagan in the case of United States v Stevens, here is this gem:
“Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs.”
In other words, only speech that the state approves of is allowed.
So a rich, slimy, regime lawyer who can interpret the Constitution ANY WAY that she (and most likely the President himself) wants got elected to the Supreme Court, and has the power of the largest coercive instrument in the history of the world to enforce her (and the court's) decisions?
Yawn. Wake me up when the Supreme Court declares itself unconstitutional.
A federal jury in Hawaii has started deliberating in the trial of a former B-2 stealth bomber engineer accused of selling military secrets to China.
The jury is meeting Friday in U.S. District Court in Honolulu after hearing testimony over nearly four months in the trial of Noshir Gowadia.
Gowadia has pleaded not guilty to 17 counts, including conspiracy, violating the arms export control act and money laundering.
Prosecutors allege Gowadia helped China design a stealth cruise missile to raise money to pay for his luxurious home on the island of Maui.
The defense says Gowadia gave Chinese officials only unclassified information.
The India-born naturalized U.S. citizen worked on the B-2 from 1968 to 1986 at what is now Northrop Grumman Corp.
Gowadia will probably face some jail time in a minimum-security prison, publicly apologize for his error in judgement, and the issue will be forgotten.
This case may seem minor in the larger context of the vast military-industrial-complex, but it is just another example of the business-as-usual corruption that occurs in the armaments and empire industries. Nobody is even sure how many people work for the hundreds of "defense" and intelligence agencies, and the amount of wealth transferred --through confiscatory taxation-- from the people to feed the war appetite of the Pentagon and the merchants of death that supply the weaponry is incalculable.
UPDATE: So this is how it works in Amerika. Selling military secrets to foreign powers either gets you a slap on the wrist or re-election, but when a U.S. soldier leaks military secrets in order to save the republic and expose the war criminals in the U.S. government, he faces 52 years in prison. Ya, that makes sense.
The reaction to the Wikileaks exposure of US war crimes – and Afghan corruption – has been quite interesting: the President responded by averring that there’s nothing new here, that "the fact is these documents do not reveal any issues that have not already informed our public debate on Afghanistan," but the facts are quite different, as anyone who peruses even a small sampling of the documents – such as is offered by the Guardian via a convenient interactive map – can readily ascertain.
I'm sorry, Mr. President, but what public debate? I can recall you out-hawking the bloodthirsty John McCain on who wanted to bomb more villages, but I don't ever recall a "debate."
After all, the public debate was certainly not informed of the existence of "Task Force 373," an American assassination squad that roams the Afghan countryside wreaking murder and mayhem at Washington’s direction – and that killed seven children, as revealed by the Wikileaks document dump, in a strike at a supposed terrorist compound. And the public was definitely not informed that US intelligence had picked up evidence of Osama bin Laden’s personal participation in a series of meetings on the Afghan-Pakistan border as late as 2006, as revealed in the documents. Certainly the public debate could have been better informed if Leon Panetta’s interlocutor could have asked him about that when the CIA director, in a recent televised interview, denied having received any new information as to bin Laden’s whereabouts "in years."
The Pharoah is afraid. He currently presides over the largest domestic and international empire the world has ever seen, a combination of welfare-warfare corporatism and a large spying and policing apparatus at his fingertips. Who wouldn't be panicking if this power was under threat?
Presidents tend not to to enjoy when private citizens stand in their way. For over three years, Ramses Obama has been calling the war in Afghanistan "the good war," and has gotten his wish as it spills further into Pakistan. More war means more contracts, and more contracts leads to more contributions and re-election. Then more power. Then repeat.
So naturally, he's out to get rid of this little nuisance, whose work might just get more and more Americans to recoil from what "our" government does with our property and in our name. The Pentagon is now "desperately searching" for Julian Assange, the head of Wikileaks, for ruffling feathers and exposing their crimes.
Also, Julian Assange has recently put up an "insurance policy" on Wikileaks that catalogs and lists all of the leaks from the Afghan War Diary. He is probably aware of the large target on his chest, and is not taking chances in making sure that this information is spread. I urge anyone to download the file and keep it on their computers as a testament to the brave work of Assange, Bradley Manning, and Wikileaks.
UPDATE: The Pentagram is closing in. They just arrested one of Wikileak's editors, Jacob Applebaum. Here's Applebaum on the nature of political authority: "all governments are in a continuum of tyranny."
Recent Comments