Thanks for the visit. And listenin' to a story from this ol' fart. I'll try to make it useful to you! Or at least somewhat entertaining.
If I wanted to be more topical, I could have titled this, "Why your Village Idiot Would be a better Bet for Your Local Mayor than Relying on DC to Govern Your Town 'Long Distance'." BTW, this story has no politicians and is free of sex. Wha...wait!! Where ya' runnin off to? Come back!!
There. Didn't know I was so handy with a rope, didya? The ol' dog still has a few tricks. Relax, I'll untie you after the tale I'm about to tell. Long as you first tell me it was life-changin for ya'.
----
Some of you may recall my telling you that in '74 when I moved from Richmond VA to southern Maine and New Hampshire, I found I actually
had to dumb down my vocabulary to communicate effectively in the social and commercial sense. So I unlearned, and after a while became quite good at keeping it real simple. I've only recently recaptured the fun of using synonyms. Fact is, since I've become lax in controlling my free range vocabulary, I'm enjoying myself immensely, even if it annoys...
Which brings me to "Dem are Soff."
As you know in your own occupation, the reality is far removed from the public perception, and typically a solar system away from what you're taught in academia. (Look who populates DC---get my meanin', Vern and Vernette?) What it takes to really succeed is totally unrelated to perceptions of the casual perceiver. One of the ingredients that is sorely underrated is experience in the field---actually DOING the thing yer talkin' about doin'.
OK,OK... I know the rope burns are actin' up. I'll get to the crux.
I started selling Dodges at the dealership in Portsmouth, NH (made me even more grateful for the less than comfortable training I had received in my one year at a fast-track Richmond C-P dealership 2 years earlier).
My alcoholic General Manager and the Owner, were very smart. I learned from them that a big part of marketing cars is knowing the approximate value of trade-ins. At YOUR dealership. The person who merely looks in a book and attributes national averages to his appraisal, in lieu of field experience, is either a novice, a banker, or a future bereaucrat. If he's actually doing the brain work of "knowing" the market at his own dealership, by relying on a book of national averages he'll inevitably cost the owner and himself, as well as all employed there, dearly. By as much as, can you believe, 33%?
When the guy charged with "putting the number on the trade" underappraises the local market value, one of 2 things will happen, both not so good. (1) he'll miss the deal, losing it to a savvier dealer who wisely offers the trader more money, or (2) he'll cost his store hundreds, if not thousands of dollars in lost revenue by underpricing the trade to the retail market, or worse, underpricing it to the wholesale market to the real professionals of the industry.
If our naive appraiser "overvalues" the trade relative to his dealership's capabilties in the local market, the owner, depending on his vigilance level, may find he's had thousands of dollars of his finite, precious capital, frozen for months because of an over-priced car sitting on his lot, losing more value by the day. If your appraiser has graduated to mid-level shrewdie, he packages "mistakes" in bundles which he wholesales, usually "breaking even"---first sign there's something amiss.. The owner never knows what happened to him.
"Dem are soff."
Years later, after a rip-roaring success at turning around other people's dealerships at the GM level, I went to work at a southern Maine AMC/Jeep/Dodge store I was considering buying, to get the lay of the land you could say.
The owner was a New England French Yankee good ol' boy, who had reluctantly given up dirt track racing when Daddy turned over the keys to the dealership to him. Now before you think I'm telling you he was stupid, there was one thing he did that had kept him in business against more 'sophisticated', by a gnat's nose, competitors by whom he was surrounded. Since he didn't trust anyone else, he was involved in the store's working right down to having the secretarial staff burn the Bic Pen ballpoints to get the last drop of ink out before the user would get another one. And lest I forget one of his proudest moments, on the busiest day of the week, he pulls me off the floor to inspect his newest accomplishment: a commode he'd just installed in the service department. You can't make this stuff up, right?
Where this anal approach really saved him was that NO ONE was allowed to buy or wholesale inventory, order new factory inventory, and most importantly appraise the potential trade-ins, but him. And when we were negotiating with a customer, too often we'd hear the dread:
"Dem are soff." (read "Them are soft")
That meant that the trade in question was worth less at his dealership, and locally, than whatever the book might say for a national average. Yeah, it cost us 'deals' usually the ones you regret later if you're the owner. Let some other wet-behind the ears owner/manager put the mistake on his lot. So despite his relative illiteracy and total lack of personnel management skills, and did I mention no Harvard Business School degree, this fella had been eking out a fairly decent living from his Dad's gift for years. It ain't easy, and you can't do it by remote control.
I'm sayin' that within one's own bailiwick, knowing when "Dem are Soff" is far more useful than a law degree.
Here. Tell me you enjoyed my little story and I'll cut ya' loose. Y'all come back now!!
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
The Secret to Being Heard
Feel like you have some important news for people? Perhaps urgent news? Like our entire civilization is on the brink and the folks don't recognize the symptoms?
Having trouble getting through?
Swallow hard. We can learn a lot from professional salespeople. Now I'm not referencing the stereotypical salesperson, half bully, half scoundrel. I'm talking about the sales folks who are the real pros, so much so that you feel quite comfortable with them and may even feel a kinship to them. What's their secret?
Well, first, let's recognize they do have an agenda. They want you to buy a product or service from them. They do not hide this agenda, or try to disguise it in hypocritical "I'm doing this for you" BS that you and I can see through. In a word, they're honest, within the bounds of reason.
The technique they employ is simple: they listen first. They ask you questions about you, what you're really looking for, and why. Prior to that, they've found some other neutral common ground with you---family, weather, sports, recreational activities, etc. They visibly respect your humanity. They achieve this the same way: by asking questions. Then really listening.
People fall in love with people who listen to them. Most of the time we feel processed, talked at, by folks going through the motions. This goes for family, friends, as well as business situations. We don't feel respected, and return the ambivalence in kind.
Professionals in sales as well as in other professions, prove their interest by asking open-ended questions. Questions that require more than a yes or no answer. Typically they'll start with "Why" or "How" for example. But it doesn't stop there. When they HEAR the answer, they ask more "Why/How" type questions. In the beginning, this is not easy to do. There can be a learning curve that, like all learning processes in the beginning, can be quite uncomfortable, even discouraging. If you already employ this technique in your life, you know the original discomfort pays huge dividends long-term.
The chemistry of pro-active listening provides you the information you need to focus on your commonality of interests and the benefits that your idea, good or service will represent to your listener. More importantly, your subject owes you a hearing and is happy to listen to someone who has shown a demonstrable interest in them, as well as respect for who they are.
If all this sounds a tad premeditated, it is. How can you help other people if they're shut off from you because you don't know how to communicate the authenticity of your caring (by showing an active interest in who they are)? If you have successful family interraction, friendships, business relationships, you are already using these fundamental techniques, knowingly or otherwise. And, if you're encountering obstacles in these areas, or with communicating your political insights to others, this may be your lucky day.
Examine how you approach potential 'sales'. Maybe you haven't shown the respect and interest you want yourself, by LISTENING to the other person!!
As always, anything you can add, suggestions, other viewpoints, is always welcom on The Front Porch! Hope to see you here this evening!!
Having trouble getting through?
Swallow hard. We can learn a lot from professional salespeople. Now I'm not referencing the stereotypical salesperson, half bully, half scoundrel. I'm talking about the sales folks who are the real pros, so much so that you feel quite comfortable with them and may even feel a kinship to them. What's their secret?
Well, first, let's recognize they do have an agenda. They want you to buy a product or service from them. They do not hide this agenda, or try to disguise it in hypocritical "I'm doing this for you" BS that you and I can see through. In a word, they're honest, within the bounds of reason.
The technique they employ is simple: they listen first. They ask you questions about you, what you're really looking for, and why. Prior to that, they've found some other neutral common ground with you---family, weather, sports, recreational activities, etc. They visibly respect your humanity. They achieve this the same way: by asking questions. Then really listening.
People fall in love with people who listen to them. Most of the time we feel processed, talked at, by folks going through the motions. This goes for family, friends, as well as business situations. We don't feel respected, and return the ambivalence in kind.
Professionals in sales as well as in other professions, prove their interest by asking open-ended questions. Questions that require more than a yes or no answer. Typically they'll start with "Why" or "How" for example. But it doesn't stop there. When they HEAR the answer, they ask more "Why/How" type questions. In the beginning, this is not easy to do. There can be a learning curve that, like all learning processes in the beginning, can be quite uncomfortable, even discouraging. If you already employ this technique in your life, you know the original discomfort pays huge dividends long-term.
The chemistry of pro-active listening provides you the information you need to focus on your commonality of interests and the benefits that your idea, good or service will represent to your listener. More importantly, your subject owes you a hearing and is happy to listen to someone who has shown a demonstrable interest in them, as well as respect for who they are.
If all this sounds a tad premeditated, it is. How can you help other people if they're shut off from you because you don't know how to communicate the authenticity of your caring (by showing an active interest in who they are)? If you have successful family interraction, friendships, business relationships, you are already using these fundamental techniques, knowingly or otherwise. And, if you're encountering obstacles in these areas, or with communicating your political insights to others, this may be your lucky day.
Examine how you approach potential 'sales'. Maybe you haven't shown the respect and interest you want yourself, by LISTENING to the other person!!
As always, anything you can add, suggestions, other viewpoints, is always welcom on The Front Porch! Hope to see you here this evening!!
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
When Normality Is a Problem...
Battin' around a thing that we all deal with, whether it's our children, neighbors, trade partners, business associates, even 'fellow Americans.'
Let's start with the one on which we can all probably agree. There are periods in our lives when our parents become, well, not so smart. We know better. They can preach to us until the cows come home, but it's "only" our parents, mucked in the past whereas we have been exposed to the latest of everything. Just ask Al Gore. If we're old enough, we've grown to be embarrassed by our adolescent folly, and have re-embraced our parents' wisdom, perhaps even marveling at it. The flip side is...
As a parent, our grown up kid is still the squalling child whose diapers we changed, nose we wiped, and helped out of various scrapes in their early years. Playing the role of omnicompetent, omniscient mentor, benefactor, caretaker, we resist (subconsciously) this shift and behave as if they're the same little rug rat they used to be. But he/she's not. They're grown up (if you're my age) and have lots to offer if only we don't minimize the messenger.
As many of us have experienced, this whip-saw effect of images outlasting their usefuleness is unproductive at best, and can drive a wedge beteen us and our most precious relationships at worst. Fact is, this is NORMAL, for lots of reasons. It's merely our job to be aware that it may be happening, so we can allow for it, adjust, and preserve the best of our relationships.
Let's go to our business relationships. How many of us have had the the experience of being hard-pursued, wine and dined, by a potential employer salivating to make us an employee, rather than, say a consultant, or another person's employee? And what happens when we throw in with our suitor? It doesn't take long, does it?
The wisdom for which we were courted becomes fast disrespected in favor of the next consultant or hire. We're no longer the coming of the second saviour, even if we did the job. Again, this is NORMAL. Looking elsewhere for talent to magically solve problems of a business is NORMAL. It's easier than knowing how to manage the talent you've already coralled and less stressful to the ego than laissez-faire: letting the folks hired to get the job done take their full shot at it. The consequences of management looking for the 'greener grass' are astronomical, but not visible to the perpetrator. (Hope someone reading this this finds comfort in knowing this happens to many, many dedicated, talented folks---because, again, it's NORMAL!)
How does this apply to us advocates of freedom? Let's bet on NORMAL. The people closest to you are most likely to dismiss your message because...well...for many reasons. For their own purposes, they need to get the message 'independently', from elsewhere. You could write a book on this. Don't take it personally when this happens because it's...NORMAL. Remember, for every person in your own circle of non-influence, there are many open-minded folks in quest for truth and maybe even the rewards of liberty and independence, but they've blocked off their own circle of influence. Get it? The good news is there are more people out there who don't know you than do. Therein lies the success of those who rise to the top in terms of getting the message out.
There are always a few 'easy sales' within your circle, but be prepared to work outside of it if you are serious about your mission!!
As I said, you, we, could write a book on the why's of this subject, as well as the 'how do we work with it instead of against it." Would love to hear from you 'On the Front Porch.'
Copyright Jack Geene, 2010
Let's start with the one on which we can all probably agree. There are periods in our lives when our parents become, well, not so smart. We know better. They can preach to us until the cows come home, but it's "only" our parents, mucked in the past whereas we have been exposed to the latest of everything. Just ask Al Gore. If we're old enough, we've grown to be embarrassed by our adolescent folly, and have re-embraced our parents' wisdom, perhaps even marveling at it. The flip side is...
As a parent, our grown up kid is still the squalling child whose diapers we changed, nose we wiped, and helped out of various scrapes in their early years. Playing the role of omnicompetent, omniscient mentor, benefactor, caretaker, we resist (subconsciously) this shift and behave as if they're the same little rug rat they used to be. But he/she's not. They're grown up (if you're my age) and have lots to offer if only we don't minimize the messenger.
As many of us have experienced, this whip-saw effect of images outlasting their usefuleness is unproductive at best, and can drive a wedge beteen us and our most precious relationships at worst. Fact is, this is NORMAL, for lots of reasons. It's merely our job to be aware that it may be happening, so we can allow for it, adjust, and preserve the best of our relationships.
Let's go to our business relationships. How many of us have had the the experience of being hard-pursued, wine and dined, by a potential employer salivating to make us an employee, rather than, say a consultant, or another person's employee? And what happens when we throw in with our suitor? It doesn't take long, does it?
The wisdom for which we were courted becomes fast disrespected in favor of the next consultant or hire. We're no longer the coming of the second saviour, even if we did the job. Again, this is NORMAL. Looking elsewhere for talent to magically solve problems of a business is NORMAL. It's easier than knowing how to manage the talent you've already coralled and less stressful to the ego than laissez-faire: letting the folks hired to get the job done take their full shot at it. The consequences of management looking for the 'greener grass' are astronomical, but not visible to the perpetrator. (Hope someone reading this this finds comfort in knowing this happens to many, many dedicated, talented folks---because, again, it's NORMAL!)
How does this apply to us advocates of freedom? Let's bet on NORMAL. The people closest to you are most likely to dismiss your message because...well...for many reasons. For their own purposes, they need to get the message 'independently', from elsewhere. You could write a book on this. Don't take it personally when this happens because it's...NORMAL. Remember, for every person in your own circle of non-influence, there are many open-minded folks in quest for truth and maybe even the rewards of liberty and independence, but they've blocked off their own circle of influence. Get it? The good news is there are more people out there who don't know you than do. Therein lies the success of those who rise to the top in terms of getting the message out.
There are always a few 'easy sales' within your circle, but be prepared to work outside of it if you are serious about your mission!!
As I said, you, we, could write a book on the why's of this subject, as well as the 'how do we work with it instead of against it." Would love to hear from you 'On the Front Porch.'
Copyright Jack Geene, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
9 of 1009 reasons you should be annoying...
Someone whom I had obviously annoyed considerably, asked me today, "Just curious, what is it that you have accomplished in your life that gives you the thought that you can dish out advice and your grand ideas like candy?"
For the purposes of that conversation, I said, "And what gives you the thought that I can't?"
But, for those of us who believe we're at a critical time point in the civilized world, it's a question to which we need a good handle. Otherwise we may falter which helps no one. A few thoughts:
1. The truth is annoying.
2. No one enjoys learning they've been duped. By one's self, or others.
3. Our allegiance can be either to the truth, or to trying to please everyone around us. In less roily times, even Rick Nelson knew you can't really do the latter ("Garden Party")
4. I like myself much more when I'm on the side of truth as I see it. That's just me---maybe you.
5. How "qualified" does a person have to be to tell you your house is on fire? That's each individual homeowner's call. If the messenger is more important than the message, well, "some will, some won't, so what, next!"
6. This same person, who merely spoke what many others were thinking, also once said to me, something to the effect that "There are no heroes." A convenient way to diminish the fact that some of us do better at being heroic than others. If the viewpoint is an honest one, it is also toxic to the soul.
7. Speaking of souls, Tom Paine said it best,"These are the times that try men's souls." That's all inclusive. Regardless of how we choose to confront these moments in history. This time: No Way Out.
8. Having said all this, spend your energy on the right people, to the extent you can identify them. People who have a stake, particularly a psychological one, in maintaining a status quo that doesn't exist will drain your energy, time, and spirit. There are millions out there who would really like to know what the heck is happening to them. Glenn Beck's success is proof of that (and don't get me started on the folks who find Beck so abrasive that they won't benefit from what he is putting before us---specifically the history I daresay 99% of us, including me, didn't know about...)
9. And don't fear repeating yourself. It's how you break through the clutter. As the Wisk ad guy would have said, we're not doing this to be liked.
9B. And back to the original remark, you don't have to prove yourSELF to anyone, your deeds will suffice. And your facts will speak for themselves.
The challenges we're taking on require courage, at least of a sort, to speak out 'risking' the disapproval of sheeples, fellow travelers, useful idiots everywhere. What's to lose?
Would love to hear back on this. Dealing with it successfully is essential to our cause, and the other side will do everything to shame us into quiet separation.
For the purposes of that conversation, I said, "And what gives you the thought that I can't?"
But, for those of us who believe we're at a critical time point in the civilized world, it's a question to which we need a good handle. Otherwise we may falter which helps no one. A few thoughts:
1. The truth is annoying.
2. No one enjoys learning they've been duped. By one's self, or others.
3. Our allegiance can be either to the truth, or to trying to please everyone around us. In less roily times, even Rick Nelson knew you can't really do the latter ("Garden Party")
4. I like myself much more when I'm on the side of truth as I see it. That's just me---maybe you.
5. How "qualified" does a person have to be to tell you your house is on fire? That's each individual homeowner's call. If the messenger is more important than the message, well, "some will, some won't, so what, next!"
6. This same person, who merely spoke what many others were thinking, also once said to me, something to the effect that "There are no heroes." A convenient way to diminish the fact that some of us do better at being heroic than others. If the viewpoint is an honest one, it is also toxic to the soul.
7. Speaking of souls, Tom Paine said it best,"These are the times that try men's souls." That's all inclusive. Regardless of how we choose to confront these moments in history. This time: No Way Out.
8. Having said all this, spend your energy on the right people, to the extent you can identify them. People who have a stake, particularly a psychological one, in maintaining a status quo that doesn't exist will drain your energy, time, and spirit. There are millions out there who would really like to know what the heck is happening to them. Glenn Beck's success is proof of that (and don't get me started on the folks who find Beck so abrasive that they won't benefit from what he is putting before us---specifically the history I daresay 99% of us, including me, didn't know about...)
9. And don't fear repeating yourself. It's how you break through the clutter. As the Wisk ad guy would have said, we're not doing this to be liked.
9B. And back to the original remark, you don't have to prove yourSELF to anyone, your deeds will suffice. And your facts will speak for themselves.
The challenges we're taking on require courage, at least of a sort, to speak out 'risking' the disapproval of sheeples, fellow travelers, useful idiots everywhere. What's to lose?
Would love to hear back on this. Dealing with it successfully is essential to our cause, and the other side will do everything to shame us into quiet separation.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Part 4 of Devilish Daffynitions from Mr. Bierce---Enjoy!!
from THE DEVIL'S DICTIONARY by Ambrose Bierce. pub circa 1909
TELEPHONE, n. An invention of the Devil, which abrogates some of the advantages of making a disagreeable person keep his distance.
TELESCOPE, n. A device having a relation to the eye similar to that of the telephone to the ear, enabling distant objects to plague us with a multitude of needless details. Luckily it is unprovided with a bell to summon us to the sacrifice.
TARIFF, n. A scale of taxes on imports, designed to protect the domestic producer against the greed of his customer.
SUCCESS, n. The one unpardonable sin against one's fellows...
SELF-EVIDENT,n. Evident to one's self and nobody else.
SELFISH, adj. Devoid of consideration for the selfishness of others.
SATAN, n. One of the Creator's lamentable mistakes, repented in sash cloth and ashes. Being instated as an archangel, Satan made himself multifariously objectionable and was finally expelled from Heaven. Halfway in his descent he paused, bent his head in thought a moment and at last went back. "There is one favor I should like to ask," said he. "Name it." "Man, I understand, is about to be created. He will need laws." "What, wretch! you his appointed adversary, charged from the dawn of eternity with hatred of his soul---you ask for the right to make his laws?" "Pardon, what I have to ask is that he be permitted to make them himself." It was so ordered.
ROBBER, n. A candid man of affairs. It is related of Voltaire that one night he and some traveling companions lodged at a wayside inn. The surroundings were suggestive, and after supper they agreed to tell robber stories in turn. When Voltaire's turn came he said: "Once there was a Farmer-General of the Revenues." Saying nothing more, he was encouraged to continue. "That," he said, "is the story."
Are we having fun yet?
TELEPHONE, n. An invention of the Devil, which abrogates some of the advantages of making a disagreeable person keep his distance.
TELESCOPE, n. A device having a relation to the eye similar to that of the telephone to the ear, enabling distant objects to plague us with a multitude of needless details. Luckily it is unprovided with a bell to summon us to the sacrifice.
TARIFF, n. A scale of taxes on imports, designed to protect the domestic producer against the greed of his customer.
SUCCESS, n. The one unpardonable sin against one's fellows...
SELF-EVIDENT,n. Evident to one's self and nobody else.
SELFISH, adj. Devoid of consideration for the selfishness of others.
SATAN, n. One of the Creator's lamentable mistakes, repented in sash cloth and ashes. Being instated as an archangel, Satan made himself multifariously objectionable and was finally expelled from Heaven. Halfway in his descent he paused, bent his head in thought a moment and at last went back. "There is one favor I should like to ask," said he. "Name it." "Man, I understand, is about to be created. He will need laws." "What, wretch! you his appointed adversary, charged from the dawn of eternity with hatred of his soul---you ask for the right to make his laws?" "Pardon, what I have to ask is that he be permitted to make them himself." It was so ordered.
ROBBER, n. A candid man of affairs. It is related of Voltaire that one night he and some traveling companions lodged at a wayside inn. The surroundings were suggestive, and after supper they agreed to tell robber stories in turn. When Voltaire's turn came he said: "Once there was a Farmer-General of the Revenues." Saying nothing more, he was encouraged to continue. "That," he said, "is the story."
Are we having fun yet?
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Of course you don't...
Remember back in the fifties and sixties (if you're old enough) when you'd read the obituaries and they were full of reports of infants dying from unsafe cribs, people starving to death, millions of kids dying from lack of child-proof packaging, the youngsters dying like flies from unsafe and exposed playground equipment...
"...Little Johnnie was the 37,212th child this year to die, trapped by the slide down panels on his crib..."
"...Mr. Hanson was found on Willow Street, dead, in a pile of roughly 2,700 other corpses dead from the starvation sweeping America..."
"...Young Betty was found dead after strangling on aspirin that had been left unguarded on the TV tray. She is the 450th casualty from TV tray exposed aspirin in our state this year..."
"...James passed away hours after being struck in the head by an unsupervised see-saw. He was the 58th see-saw victim this year in our fair town..."
Remember? Of course you don't. You're purposefully blocking it out....
"...Little Johnnie was the 37,212th child this year to die, trapped by the slide down panels on his crib..."
"...Mr. Hanson was found on Willow Street, dead, in a pile of roughly 2,700 other corpses dead from the starvation sweeping America..."
"...Young Betty was found dead after strangling on aspirin that had been left unguarded on the TV tray. She is the 450th casualty from TV tray exposed aspirin in our state this year..."
"...James passed away hours after being struck in the head by an unsupervised see-saw. He was the 58th see-saw victim this year in our fair town..."
Remember? Of course you don't. You're purposefully blocking it out....
Thinking We Can Change Evil into Good with Alchemy is a Big Mistake
Response to this comment on Facebook:
"Ah, Francisco destroying the d'Anconia empire so the looters could not get it...showing them the consequences of looting. If we could just get enough Congressmen or Obama, to read that book!"
My response, with apolgies for length
"...if Che' or Mao read the book, which neither would do, would they become'good guys'overnight? Have been on your journey myself, and found that not everyone is wired the same way we are. Misspent a lot of time, energy, and money.
"In sales it's called 'qualifying.' Making sure, through open-ended questioning and listening to the answers,that the person with whom you're speaking is capable of acting if they understand the benefits. For folks who want power and to whom your happiness and independence is anathema, the message is threatening, not appealing.
"So if I can can share the fruit of some hard-won experience, and help you get the most out of your passion, it could be summed up in 'Some will, some won't, so what, next.' Or...'know when to hold 'em. Know when to fold 'em.' Or 'A leopard can't change his spots.'
"Armed with this, you'll limit your regrets considerably, though not entirely!! (We still take a shot occasionally. My own batting average getting folks to read ATLAS SHRUGGED is that even after qualifying, and probably some wishful thinking, only 10-20% get it.)
Trauma from upcoming circumstances may move that percentage up---as will people's willingness to accept commie/fascist style dicatators presenting themselves as easy solutions to the the chaos and fear of the day. The news is: our time has come to stand with those who crossed the frozen Delaware that night, or to cower and hope someone else will save us. Apathy is fast becoming unavailable as a practical alternative!!
"Ah, Francisco destroying the d'Anconia empire so the looters could not get it...showing them the consequences of looting. If we could just get enough Congressmen or Obama, to read that book!"
My response, with apolgies for length
"...if Che' or Mao read the book, which neither would do, would they become'good guys'overnight? Have been on your journey myself, and found that not everyone is wired the same way we are. Misspent a lot of time, energy, and money.
"In sales it's called 'qualifying.' Making sure, through open-ended questioning and listening to the answers,that the person with whom you're speaking is capable of acting if they understand the benefits. For folks who want power and to whom your happiness and independence is anathema, the message is threatening, not appealing.
"So if I can can share the fruit of some hard-won experience, and help you get the most out of your passion, it could be summed up in 'Some will, some won't, so what, next.' Or...'know when to hold 'em. Know when to fold 'em.' Or 'A leopard can't change his spots.'
"Armed with this, you'll limit your regrets considerably, though not entirely!! (We still take a shot occasionally. My own batting average getting folks to read ATLAS SHRUGGED is that even after qualifying, and probably some wishful thinking, only 10-20% get it.)
Trauma from upcoming circumstances may move that percentage up---as will people's willingness to accept commie/fascist style dicatators presenting themselves as easy solutions to the the chaos and fear of the day. The news is: our time has come to stand with those who crossed the frozen Delaware that night, or to cower and hope someone else will save us. Apathy is fast becoming unavailable as a practical alternative!!
Monday, June 21, 2010
Devilish Definitions from Ambrose Bierce, Part 3
More fun and frolic from THE DEVIL'S DICTIONARY, pub circa 1919 (see earlier blogs for cycnical dessert!!)
FRIENDLESS, n. Having no favors to bestow. Destitute of fortune. Addicted to utterance of truth and common sense.
GALLOWS, n. A stage for the performance of miracle plays, in which the leading character is translated to heaven. In this country the gallows is chiefly remarkable for the number of persons who escape it.
GOOD, adj. Sensible, madam, to the worth of this present writer. Alive sir, to the advantages of leaving him alone.
GRAPESHOT, n. An argument which the future is preparing in answer to the demands of American Socialism.
HAND, n. A singular instrument worn at the end of a human arm and commonly thrust into somebody's pocket.
HAPPINESS, n. An agreeable sensation arising from contemplating the misery of another.
HARANGUE, n. A speech by an opponent, who is known as a harangue-outang.
HASH, x. There is no definition for this word---nobody knows what hash is.
HATRED, n. A sentiment appropriate to the occasion of another's superiority.
HEAVEN, n. A place where the wicked cease from troubling you with talk of their personal affairs, and the good listen with attention while you expound your own.
HYPOCRITE, n. One who, professing virtues he does not respect, secures the advantage of seeming to be what he despises.
Tell us you like these...!!!
FRIENDLESS, n. Having no favors to bestow. Destitute of fortune. Addicted to utterance of truth and common sense.
GALLOWS, n. A stage for the performance of miracle plays, in which the leading character is translated to heaven. In this country the gallows is chiefly remarkable for the number of persons who escape it.
GOOD, adj. Sensible, madam, to the worth of this present writer. Alive sir, to the advantages of leaving him alone.
GRAPESHOT, n. An argument which the future is preparing in answer to the demands of American Socialism.
HAND, n. A singular instrument worn at the end of a human arm and commonly thrust into somebody's pocket.
HAPPINESS, n. An agreeable sensation arising from contemplating the misery of another.
HARANGUE, n. A speech by an opponent, who is known as a harangue-outang.
HASH, x. There is no definition for this word---nobody knows what hash is.
HATRED, n. A sentiment appropriate to the occasion of another's superiority.
HEAVEN, n. A place where the wicked cease from troubling you with talk of their personal affairs, and the good listen with attention while you expound your own.
HYPOCRITE, n. One who, professing virtues he does not respect, secures the advantage of seeming to be what he despises.
Tell us you like these...!!!
Sunday, June 20, 2010
THE OVERTON WINDOW
Thoughts after reading it the second time...
First, an apology for the introspective nature of this 'review.' It may seem egocentric, and perhaps is, but I try to leave the readers 'room' to relate to the information without suggesting we're all going to have the same experience, reaction and derive the same or any value from the experience as I may have.
With books and movies I like, I find reading and seeing them more than once is like peeling a delicious onion, if there is such a thing. Each layer provides a depth of richness and understanding that just gets better. Add to that, over time we're banking more personal experience, and things that we looked at first time can take on a broader and often more poignant meaning.
I didn't want to share thoughts on Glenn Beck's latest from just the first reading. Lots of folks will, particularly those who are 'going through the motions' simply to justify foregone conclusions, or their jobs or both. The non-informative "Yeah, I read that and it's tripe" is usually a good indicator that at best he saw the book on the neighbor's coffee table, or the movie while stoned. (Please pardon this digression but I'm not making this up!! Recently I was chatting with an avowed, and 'well-schooled', communist on Facebook. I mentioned Ludwig von Mises. "Oh yeah, I read all his stuff and he's wrong." I couldn't help but call him on it. It was obvious puffery, i.e. a bloviating lie. No one reads "All" von Mises stuff while seriously disagreeing with it. Dollars to donuts. I busted him and he admitted it.)
After 2 readings, I'm not through with the OVERTON WINDOW.
The first time through, it is definitely a page turner, which in my case means I'm not trying to figure subtle nuances, I'm anxious to see what happens next. For my purposes, the book gets an A for 'page turning.'
After satisfying my curiosity at the 'thriller' level, the second time through was a more careful one. Here I was interested in character development, intricacies regarding how the events unfold, and the messaging.
The problem with prescience these days is it becomes factual history so fast. Beck even noted he had to keep updating THE OVERTON WINDOW because, in my words, the 'creeping socialism' we worried about decades ago has been accellerated to warp speed in the past 2 years.
When I refer to prescience in this book, I'm not talking about five years from now. Many of us would be shocked, but not a bit surprised, if the last chapter in the book unfolded before our eyes next week (let's hope not).
If you're familiar with Beck, which does not mean randomly or via the third party method of message gathering, you'll find THE OVERTON WINDOW consistent with what attracts you to Beck.
For my part, and I'm not fond of saying this, I have learned more about American history including its founding in the past year from Beck than I have from all my years of so-called 'formal education.' Much of that you'll find in THE OVERTON WINDOW.
Now if you're not familiar with Beck, his instructive technique relies largely on citing the direct words of good guys and bad guys in history. Both sides speak more eloquently and closer to the truth about themselves than the Geraldo Riveras of today. I like that, although it brings to mind one of Beck's favorite quotations from I don't recall whom, "The truth shall set you free, but first it'll make you damned mad." And, if we're honest, the person at whom we should be mad is ourselves. We've been suckered bigtime.
There is a character in THE OVERTON WINDOW that I gotta "love". He's the consummate bad guy. The closest I can come to an approximate fictional comparison is Ellsworth Toohey to the fifth power. And let me tell you, when he explains why he is the way he is, you may, hopefully, hate him for it, but you may also be wondering if he's right. Alone, he makes THE OVERTON WINDOW a must read.
Of course, any "must read" is also a "must not read". The media have taken up the usual tactics to pigeon-hole Beck, his message and to dishonor his fans. If that weren't happening, there'd really would be cause for worry. And the folks so assigned have had a rocky start. In a promotional piece for THE OVERTON WINDOW a poem that's in the book is quoted. (I find it haunting, and it plays an instrumental role in the climax of the book) For a day or two, the culture weasels had a field day attributing all kinds of demeaning, diminishing and dismissive remarks regarding WHAT THEY THOUGHT
was some terrible slush Beck had written. It goes like this:
"Then the Gods of the Market tumbled
and thier smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled
and began to believe it was true
That all is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up
to explain it once more.
"As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since social progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger, goes wabbling back
to the Fire.
"And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and
no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror
and slaughter return!"
---Rudyard Kipling 1919 (!!!)
Now if you're curious as to whom this anthem belonged in THE OVERTON WINDOW, and to what "Gods of the Copybook Heading" refers, well this is a good time to say, "it's in the book." And in the process, if you haven't already, you'll find out what the "Overton Window" is--- Good deal!!
First, an apology for the introspective nature of this 'review.' It may seem egocentric, and perhaps is, but I try to leave the readers 'room' to relate to the information without suggesting we're all going to have the same experience, reaction and derive the same or any value from the experience as I may have.
With books and movies I like, I find reading and seeing them more than once is like peeling a delicious onion, if there is such a thing. Each layer provides a depth of richness and understanding that just gets better. Add to that, over time we're banking more personal experience, and things that we looked at first time can take on a broader and often more poignant meaning.
I didn't want to share thoughts on Glenn Beck's latest from just the first reading. Lots of folks will, particularly those who are 'going through the motions' simply to justify foregone conclusions, or their jobs or both. The non-informative "Yeah, I read that and it's tripe" is usually a good indicator that at best he saw the book on the neighbor's coffee table, or the movie while stoned. (Please pardon this digression but I'm not making this up!! Recently I was chatting with an avowed, and 'well-schooled', communist on Facebook. I mentioned Ludwig von Mises. "Oh yeah, I read all his stuff and he's wrong." I couldn't help but call him on it. It was obvious puffery, i.e. a bloviating lie. No one reads "All" von Mises stuff while seriously disagreeing with it. Dollars to donuts. I busted him and he admitted it.)
After 2 readings, I'm not through with the OVERTON WINDOW.
The first time through, it is definitely a page turner, which in my case means I'm not trying to figure subtle nuances, I'm anxious to see what happens next. For my purposes, the book gets an A for 'page turning.'
After satisfying my curiosity at the 'thriller' level, the second time through was a more careful one. Here I was interested in character development, intricacies regarding how the events unfold, and the messaging.
The problem with prescience these days is it becomes factual history so fast. Beck even noted he had to keep updating THE OVERTON WINDOW because, in my words, the 'creeping socialism' we worried about decades ago has been accellerated to warp speed in the past 2 years.
When I refer to prescience in this book, I'm not talking about five years from now. Many of us would be shocked, but not a bit surprised, if the last chapter in the book unfolded before our eyes next week (let's hope not).
If you're familiar with Beck, which does not mean randomly or via the third party method of message gathering, you'll find THE OVERTON WINDOW consistent with what attracts you to Beck.
For my part, and I'm not fond of saying this, I have learned more about American history including its founding in the past year from Beck than I have from all my years of so-called 'formal education.' Much of that you'll find in THE OVERTON WINDOW.
Now if you're not familiar with Beck, his instructive technique relies largely on citing the direct words of good guys and bad guys in history. Both sides speak more eloquently and closer to the truth about themselves than the Geraldo Riveras of today. I like that, although it brings to mind one of Beck's favorite quotations from I don't recall whom, "The truth shall set you free, but first it'll make you damned mad." And, if we're honest, the person at whom we should be mad is ourselves. We've been suckered bigtime.
There is a character in THE OVERTON WINDOW that I gotta "love". He's the consummate bad guy. The closest I can come to an approximate fictional comparison is Ellsworth Toohey to the fifth power. And let me tell you, when he explains why he is the way he is, you may, hopefully, hate him for it, but you may also be wondering if he's right. Alone, he makes THE OVERTON WINDOW a must read.
Of course, any "must read" is also a "must not read". The media have taken up the usual tactics to pigeon-hole Beck, his message and to dishonor his fans. If that weren't happening, there'd really would be cause for worry. And the folks so assigned have had a rocky start. In a promotional piece for THE OVERTON WINDOW a poem that's in the book is quoted. (I find it haunting, and it plays an instrumental role in the climax of the book) For a day or two, the culture weasels had a field day attributing all kinds of demeaning, diminishing and dismissive remarks regarding WHAT THEY THOUGHT
was some terrible slush Beck had written. It goes like this:
"Then the Gods of the Market tumbled
and thier smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled
and began to believe it was true
That all is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up
to explain it once more.
"As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since social progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger, goes wabbling back
to the Fire.
"And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and
no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror
and slaughter return!"
---Rudyard Kipling 1919 (!!!)
Now if you're curious as to whom this anthem belonged in THE OVERTON WINDOW, and to what "Gods of the Copybook Heading" refers, well this is a good time to say, "it's in the book." And in the process, if you haven't already, you'll find out what the "Overton Window" is--- Good deal!!
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Liberty and Self-Empowerment
...by Jack Greene (that be me)
Condensed from the original version published in written format and video format circa 1999.
"Liberty, n. Freedom from political coercion. Freedom to choose. Freedom to manage one's own life and property."
For many people, the critical connection between personal and empowerment and liberty is obvious. We also understand that it may make some people uncomfortable when we point out this inextricable connection. For them, the connection may not be obvious at all...
From the following you will be able to see more clearly:
---That the "Mainspring of Human Progress" is liberty
---What liberty is and is not
---Why liberty is vital to your own personal empowerment
---How self-identified advocates of 'the little guy' are often his worst enemies
---How to cut living costs and take better care of 'natural resources'
---How to end the national debt(!)
---What you can do to help make good things happen for everyone
First we need to distinguish between liberty and license. Liberty and license are two very different concepts! Each may grant us the freedom to choose our actions, associations and thoughts. The critical distinction is that liberty requires us to take responsibility for our actions by honoring our neighbors choices. With this balance, peace is the default so our property and person are secure. License, on the other hand, allows us to run roughshod over the choices of others, with no thought to the consequences. When those others eventually retaliate, feuding begins and our property and person are in jeopardy. (See Dr. Mary Ruwart's HEALING OUR WORLD)
To enjoy liberty ourselves, we must grant that same liberty to others. This code of mutual respect means we won't defraud, assault or steal from our peaceful neighbors, regardless of how much we may disagree with their choices. We never raise our hand against a neighbor except in self-defense. When members of society have liberty, peace and harmony naturally follow.
Contrary to the popular theme, liberty is NOT about politics!
As a matter of fact, liberty is the absence of politics. Politics is about who will have license to impose their will on others, limiting their choices. Without choice, we are trapped in someone else's idea of who we ought to be.
At its core, politics embodies the various justifications used by certain institutions and people to exercise power over other institutions and people. Poltics is about tribes, kingdoms, bureaucracies, dictatorships and group-rule of one form or another. It is the systematic disempowerment of a subset of our neighbors so that they are unable to pursue thier own dreams. Politics often feels "dirty" because it is!
Liberty is the opposite of politics. The slaves fleeing the pre-Civil War southern states, the Jews fleeing the ovens of Auschwitz, or Cubans fleeing Castro's domination were not engaging in politics, they were escaping its consequences.
There are stark examples of the recognition that to grow, even to live, we must be free to make our own choices. Self-empowerment starts with liberty.
Did you know there is, and always has been, a countermovement to the personal empowerment movement? In fact, our opposition arrived on the scene first! There are always, and always have been, individuals and groups ready to be our masters. For whatever ill-intentioned or well-intentioned reasons, they want to make our choices for us. Theirs has always been a message of dependence, subservience, disempowerment.
In many cultures and geographical locations, freedom and liberty do not exist. From primitive tribal barbarism to sophisticated mega-states, whole groups of people live this very day in slavery. In primitive cultures, superstition and mysticism support the tyranny. In the modern mega-states there is a whole body of philosophy, political science and culture-speak forming the foundational justification for suppression. The tyranny is, of course, usually portrayed to be for the good of the suppressed.
For those of us born mostly free of tyranny, it is hard to imagine what life would be like in those conditions. This helps explain why people born into an environment with a great deal of freedom (such as the US) often take it for granted. They don't understand or appreciate their heritage of liberty, even as they see others risking their very lives to reach our shores.
Wise men throughout the centuries have warned that we must be eternally vigilant to protect our freedom. They were not referring wholly to rifles and bullets, but more fundamentally to awareness, understanding and appreciation of the nature of liberty.
Liberty, like love, cannot be forced. It fluorishes only in the absence of force. Accepting self-responsibility is the first step to self-empowerment. Self-empowerment presupposes freedom to exercise choice. If we are unable to make choices relevant to our own property and welfare, we are dependent upon, and subservient to, others. We are not free.
Part of the confusion coming from rampant non-integrated thinking today is that liberty means democracy. It does not. Democracy entails the imposition of the will of the majority over the minority. Although democracy is a palpable improvement over tribalism, monarchy or oligarchy, it has also brought about everything from segregation laws, to Adolph Hitler, to confiscatory taxation, licensing and regulation.
There is no criminal action made moral by voting. Legal perhaps, moral no. Frederic Bastiat, in his 1850 masterpiece "The Law," identified the "legal" taking from some persons to give to others to whom the property does not belong as LEGAL PLUNDER. Author Ayn Rand referred to forced redistribution of other people's property as MORAL CANNIBALISM.
We cannot force, by ballot or bullet, human progress. Whatever your passion---your career, your family's education and health, even curing world hunger and disease---betterment in any area of human endeavor is rooted in freedom. Wherever men are free to creat and reap the rewards of thier risked time, energy, money and blood, humanity fluorishes. That is the story of mankind (See Rose Wilder Lane's THE DISCOVERY OF FREEDOM).
Significantly, being a proponent of liberty is rooted in optimism. We believe in our individual capabilities, the overall benevolent nature of our fellow human, and the widespread abundance of expanding wealth and opportunity for us all.
Dislike of liberty, on the other hand, is rooted in fear. Fear of responsibility, fear of incompetence, fear of relative loss of power and prestige, fear that someone else will have more (money, property, luck, love, sex, etc.) than we do. These fears manifest a poverty consciousness and are profoundly disempowering (see Ludwig von Mises THE ANTI-CAPITALISTIC MENTALITY and Helmut Shoeck's ENVY). And these fears play right into the hands of those whose passion is control over others.
Often we see proponents of self-empowerment who have a complete disconnect when self-empowerment runs into its primary adversary: the State. They may express shock and dismay and say we are bringing up the subject of "politics." How can we promote personal power, self-confidence and independent thinking while turning our heads from the platform required for their development?
Such disconnects reminds us of another time when the forces of apathy were confronted by the facts of reality, to the discomfort of most. See Patrick Henry's 'Liberty or Death' speech. http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/henry.htm
Those words were shocking for many then, as they are to many now! "Liberty" has been a 'shush-word' of our culture---"Don't say it"---reminiscent of when words like "cancer" were only whispered. This reality blockage results in non-integrated thinking, crippling our decision-making processes by failing to take into account the unspeakable. We can't solve problems or take advantage of opportunities whose existence we deny. How much does this non-integrated thinking cost us?
HERE IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE:
In our real world the federal and state government own over half the US land mass. It doesn't take an economist to figure holding that much of
ANYTHING that is useful off the market drives the price of what is left THROUGH THE ROOF!
Can you imagine how inexpensive land, and the resources it offers, would be if it weren't corralled by the State? And what would happen to the national debt if this idle abomination were sold on the open market with the proceeds going to ending the prospects of slavery for future generations?
There's a favorite saying that hasn't been applied here, for the same reasons we have this absurdity in the first place:
"FOLLOW THE MONEY."
Let's do that! Let's ask WHO would be the biggest beneficiaries from the horrific kind of land and resource policies currently being enforced? Before answering, also consider that this practice is one of the cruelest taxes on the the most vulnerable---the so-called 'little guys' whose interests their self-decribed protectors would have us believe they have foremost in their mind! We are talking about one of the most insidious and regressive forms of taxation ever devised...
Conversely, who would be the 'losers' if the obscenely artificially high prices were to settle at half their current levels? It's easy:
The 'losers' would be those currently holding title, to the articially high-priced PRIVATE land and it's contents. Who are they, largely? Moneylenders, particularly large banks and financial institutions (See Lysander Spooner's NO TREASON: THE CONSTITUTION of NO AUTHORITY) and the businesses who are already harvesting or mining the resources from the land they control. They do not want new competition resulting in lower prices (see Gabriel Kolko's THE TRIUMPH OF CONSERVATISM which documents the late 19th and early 20th century behind-the-scenes partnership of government and big businesses, which kept those established businesses relatively immune from new competition, all under the guise of "anti big business" legislation and regulation.)
Then there are the crocodile tears of concern about the 'national debt'. If a big chunk of public lands was sold, there could be a breath-taking reduction of this debt. Myths to the contrary of how "we owe it to ourselves" who does collect the interest on this gargantuan debt? Primarily big banks and other financial institutions. And who pays for this debt? TAXPAYERS!
Remember in the classic Old West movies when the local cattle baron (and bad guy) would dam up the water supply so farmers competing for the open land where he feeds his cattle would starve or have to move elsewhere? This meanie didn't want to pay the going price for the land he wanted. And he was ready to use his hired guns to make sure he won. We hated this guy and couldn't wait for the Duke and Gabby to ride into town and make things right. Well bad guys like that still exist, only they've gotten a lot smarter!
Pretend, for a moment, YOU are part of the group of old-line established lenders, foresters and oil companies. How would you keep prices up on the lands that are security for your loans and your products safe from cheaper competition? You could work harder to improve your efficiency, products and services. Maybe...or...
Wouldn't it be easier if you could simply get laws passed that would stop your future competitors in their tracks? What if you could, through the political process, keep new land and resources off the market and therefore unavailable to your would-be competitors?
Now you wouldn't dare try overtly doing this by nationalizing half the country in the name of FatCat Preservation. Although they're getting close, the voters aren't that naive. You'd wind up like the bad guys in the old Westerns. But(stroke chin menacingly)...
What if much of the country was legally off limits to private ownership and development? That could work. But how would you pull off such a grab as that?
HERE'S HOW:
Conceive, support and fund any "worthy" cause you could invent and promote (surreptitiously through third parties) which would deny access to land and resources. Convince a majority of gullible voters that somehow "We all own" these properties together and "we must keep them pristine and pure for everyone," especially animals and children. You fund slick front organizations to employ political and environmental rhetoric to posture as friends of the 'common man. nature, etc.'
All the while, publicly your company seems to be the unwilling subject of this well-intentioned legislation that will save the earth from the likes of you. You'll have the state educators, news media and politicians clamoring to be on your bandwagon. After all, they're on your payroll directly or indirectly too.
Meanwhile your potential competitors and the public are forced to fund all the chaos you generate with THEIR tax monies. Sweet!! The Duke and Gabby won't stand a chance against you because no one knows they're being robbed!
So massive amounts of money go into permanently institutionalized promotions to "save" rain forests, natural habitats, rare and endangered species, ecological 'balance', nature's beauty, etc. Think of how the employees in this new "industry" will vote. Yowzah!!
The "enemies" of environment are labelled "selfish polluters," greedy capitalists, strip miners rich industrialists and callous developers, Bambi killers. Well intentioned (for the most part) environmentalists, conservationists, animal preservasionists, Sierra Clubbers, and all the children they can influence are the unwitting pawns of the very people they believe they oppose. You've cheaply and safely locked the door on your pesky competitors forever and you're ready to go on to the next delightful scam, currently called "climate change."
All the propoganda about saving the land from developers, sprawl, polluters, greedy corporations, ecological disasters, the NRA, has eventuated in a set-up that keeps the rich rich, and...you know the rest.
There is no "We own it" in government. If this still troubles you, think about this: In any meaningful sense, you do not "own" an iota of anything operated or held off the market by government. Not the national parks, not government housing, not the educational system, the money supply, not the IRS. Ownership in reality means the ability to improve, exchange or dispose of at your discretion. Can you sell your imaginary piece of the government largesse? Can you borrow money against it? Or ask yourself this, if it's mine, how can I be arrested for trespassing on it?
Why not release the land and resources to the open market (people who will have a direct stake in making it useful)? It would be a monumental bonanza, notably benefitting those with the least the most! There would be less poverty (not good for control freaks and shysters), far less dependence (anathema to control freaks and shysters), and WAY much more disposable income for whater we choose to spend it on (heresy!!).
We are already doing an end run around stifling statism. "Hooked on Phonics," home schooling, FedEx, are just some examples of how problems get solved, not institutionalized, when people are free to innovate, free to choose. Remember, the folks who want your kids in public schools send theirs to private schools. Same for retirement programs, modes of transportation, etc. (See Nancy Pelosi's Air Fleet, the President's $100 a lb Kobi beef parties, ad nauseam).
Closing on notes of encouragement and optimism for your own liberty and self-empowerment:
"Laissez-faire does not mean: let soulless mechanical forces operate. It means: let each individual choose how he wants to cooperate in the social division of labor; let the consumers determine what the entrepreneurs should produce...Laissez-faire means: Let the common man choose and act; do not force him to yield to a dictator." ---Ludwig von Mises, HUMAN ACTION
"The two ideas of human freedom and economic freedom working together came to their greatest fruition in the United States...We have been forgetting the basic truth that the greatest threat to human freedom is the concentration of power, whether in the hands of government or anyone else...Fortunately we are waking up...again recognizing that good objectives can be perverted by bad means, that reliance on the freedom of people to control their own lives lives in accordance with their own values is the surest way to achieve the full potential of a great society." ---Milton Friedman, FREE TO CHOOSE
Copyright 1999. Jack Greene
-----
Condensed from the original version published in written format and video format circa 1999.
"Liberty, n. Freedom from political coercion. Freedom to choose. Freedom to manage one's own life and property."
For many people, the critical connection between personal and empowerment and liberty is obvious. We also understand that it may make some people uncomfortable when we point out this inextricable connection. For them, the connection may not be obvious at all...
From the following you will be able to see more clearly:
---That the "Mainspring of Human Progress" is liberty
---What liberty is and is not
---Why liberty is vital to your own personal empowerment
---How self-identified advocates of 'the little guy' are often his worst enemies
---How to cut living costs and take better care of 'natural resources'
---How to end the national debt(!)
---What you can do to help make good things happen for everyone
First we need to distinguish between liberty and license. Liberty and license are two very different concepts! Each may grant us the freedom to choose our actions, associations and thoughts. The critical distinction is that liberty requires us to take responsibility for our actions by honoring our neighbors choices. With this balance, peace is the default so our property and person are secure. License, on the other hand, allows us to run roughshod over the choices of others, with no thought to the consequences. When those others eventually retaliate, feuding begins and our property and person are in jeopardy. (See Dr. Mary Ruwart's HEALING OUR WORLD)
To enjoy liberty ourselves, we must grant that same liberty to others. This code of mutual respect means we won't defraud, assault or steal from our peaceful neighbors, regardless of how much we may disagree with their choices. We never raise our hand against a neighbor except in self-defense. When members of society have liberty, peace and harmony naturally follow.
Contrary to the popular theme, liberty is NOT about politics!
As a matter of fact, liberty is the absence of politics. Politics is about who will have license to impose their will on others, limiting their choices. Without choice, we are trapped in someone else's idea of who we ought to be.
At its core, politics embodies the various justifications used by certain institutions and people to exercise power over other institutions and people. Poltics is about tribes, kingdoms, bureaucracies, dictatorships and group-rule of one form or another. It is the systematic disempowerment of a subset of our neighbors so that they are unable to pursue thier own dreams. Politics often feels "dirty" because it is!
Liberty is the opposite of politics. The slaves fleeing the pre-Civil War southern states, the Jews fleeing the ovens of Auschwitz, or Cubans fleeing Castro's domination were not engaging in politics, they were escaping its consequences.
There are stark examples of the recognition that to grow, even to live, we must be free to make our own choices. Self-empowerment starts with liberty.
Did you know there is, and always has been, a countermovement to the personal empowerment movement? In fact, our opposition arrived on the scene first! There are always, and always have been, individuals and groups ready to be our masters. For whatever ill-intentioned or well-intentioned reasons, they want to make our choices for us. Theirs has always been a message of dependence, subservience, disempowerment.
In many cultures and geographical locations, freedom and liberty do not exist. From primitive tribal barbarism to sophisticated mega-states, whole groups of people live this very day in slavery. In primitive cultures, superstition and mysticism support the tyranny. In the modern mega-states there is a whole body of philosophy, political science and culture-speak forming the foundational justification for suppression. The tyranny is, of course, usually portrayed to be for the good of the suppressed.
For those of us born mostly free of tyranny, it is hard to imagine what life would be like in those conditions. This helps explain why people born into an environment with a great deal of freedom (such as the US) often take it for granted. They don't understand or appreciate their heritage of liberty, even as they see others risking their very lives to reach our shores.
Wise men throughout the centuries have warned that we must be eternally vigilant to protect our freedom. They were not referring wholly to rifles and bullets, but more fundamentally to awareness, understanding and appreciation of the nature of liberty.
Liberty, like love, cannot be forced. It fluorishes only in the absence of force. Accepting self-responsibility is the first step to self-empowerment. Self-empowerment presupposes freedom to exercise choice. If we are unable to make choices relevant to our own property and welfare, we are dependent upon, and subservient to, others. We are not free.
Part of the confusion coming from rampant non-integrated thinking today is that liberty means democracy. It does not. Democracy entails the imposition of the will of the majority over the minority. Although democracy is a palpable improvement over tribalism, monarchy or oligarchy, it has also brought about everything from segregation laws, to Adolph Hitler, to confiscatory taxation, licensing and regulation.
There is no criminal action made moral by voting. Legal perhaps, moral no. Frederic Bastiat, in his 1850 masterpiece "The Law," identified the "legal" taking from some persons to give to others to whom the property does not belong as LEGAL PLUNDER. Author Ayn Rand referred to forced redistribution of other people's property as MORAL CANNIBALISM.
We cannot force, by ballot or bullet, human progress. Whatever your passion---your career, your family's education and health, even curing world hunger and disease---betterment in any area of human endeavor is rooted in freedom. Wherever men are free to creat and reap the rewards of thier risked time, energy, money and blood, humanity fluorishes. That is the story of mankind (See Rose Wilder Lane's THE DISCOVERY OF FREEDOM).
Significantly, being a proponent of liberty is rooted in optimism. We believe in our individual capabilities, the overall benevolent nature of our fellow human, and the widespread abundance of expanding wealth and opportunity for us all.
Dislike of liberty, on the other hand, is rooted in fear. Fear of responsibility, fear of incompetence, fear of relative loss of power and prestige, fear that someone else will have more (money, property, luck, love, sex, etc.) than we do. These fears manifest a poverty consciousness and are profoundly disempowering (see Ludwig von Mises THE ANTI-CAPITALISTIC MENTALITY and Helmut Shoeck's ENVY). And these fears play right into the hands of those whose passion is control over others.
Often we see proponents of self-empowerment who have a complete disconnect when self-empowerment runs into its primary adversary: the State. They may express shock and dismay and say we are bringing up the subject of "politics." How can we promote personal power, self-confidence and independent thinking while turning our heads from the platform required for their development?
Such disconnects reminds us of another time when the forces of apathy were confronted by the facts of reality, to the discomfort of most. See Patrick Henry's 'Liberty or Death' speech. http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/henry.htm
Those words were shocking for many then, as they are to many now! "Liberty" has been a 'shush-word' of our culture---"Don't say it"---reminiscent of when words like "cancer" were only whispered. This reality blockage results in non-integrated thinking, crippling our decision-making processes by failing to take into account the unspeakable. We can't solve problems or take advantage of opportunities whose existence we deny. How much does this non-integrated thinking cost us?
HERE IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE:
In our real world the federal and state government own over half the US land mass. It doesn't take an economist to figure holding that much of
ANYTHING that is useful off the market drives the price of what is left THROUGH THE ROOF!
Can you imagine how inexpensive land, and the resources it offers, would be if it weren't corralled by the State? And what would happen to the national debt if this idle abomination were sold on the open market with the proceeds going to ending the prospects of slavery for future generations?
There's a favorite saying that hasn't been applied here, for the same reasons we have this absurdity in the first place:
"FOLLOW THE MONEY."
Let's do that! Let's ask WHO would be the biggest beneficiaries from the horrific kind of land and resource policies currently being enforced? Before answering, also consider that this practice is one of the cruelest taxes on the the most vulnerable---the so-called 'little guys' whose interests their self-decribed protectors would have us believe they have foremost in their mind! We are talking about one of the most insidious and regressive forms of taxation ever devised...
Conversely, who would be the 'losers' if the obscenely artificially high prices were to settle at half their current levels? It's easy:
The 'losers' would be those currently holding title, to the articially high-priced PRIVATE land and it's contents. Who are they, largely? Moneylenders, particularly large banks and financial institutions (See Lysander Spooner's NO TREASON: THE CONSTITUTION of NO AUTHORITY) and the businesses who are already harvesting or mining the resources from the land they control. They do not want new competition resulting in lower prices (see Gabriel Kolko's THE TRIUMPH OF CONSERVATISM which documents the late 19th and early 20th century behind-the-scenes partnership of government and big businesses, which kept those established businesses relatively immune from new competition, all under the guise of "anti big business" legislation and regulation.)
Then there are the crocodile tears of concern about the 'national debt'. If a big chunk of public lands was sold, there could be a breath-taking reduction of this debt. Myths to the contrary of how "we owe it to ourselves" who does collect the interest on this gargantuan debt? Primarily big banks and other financial institutions. And who pays for this debt? TAXPAYERS!
Remember in the classic Old West movies when the local cattle baron (and bad guy) would dam up the water supply so farmers competing for the open land where he feeds his cattle would starve or have to move elsewhere? This meanie didn't want to pay the going price for the land he wanted. And he was ready to use his hired guns to make sure he won. We hated this guy and couldn't wait for the Duke and Gabby to ride into town and make things right. Well bad guys like that still exist, only they've gotten a lot smarter!
Pretend, for a moment, YOU are part of the group of old-line established lenders, foresters and oil companies. How would you keep prices up on the lands that are security for your loans and your products safe from cheaper competition? You could work harder to improve your efficiency, products and services. Maybe...or...
Wouldn't it be easier if you could simply get laws passed that would stop your future competitors in their tracks? What if you could, through the political process, keep new land and resources off the market and therefore unavailable to your would-be competitors?
Now you wouldn't dare try overtly doing this by nationalizing half the country in the name of FatCat Preservation. Although they're getting close, the voters aren't that naive. You'd wind up like the bad guys in the old Westerns. But(stroke chin menacingly)...
What if much of the country was legally off limits to private ownership and development? That could work. But how would you pull off such a grab as that?
HERE'S HOW:
Conceive, support and fund any "worthy" cause you could invent and promote (surreptitiously through third parties) which would deny access to land and resources. Convince a majority of gullible voters that somehow "We all own" these properties together and "we must keep them pristine and pure for everyone," especially animals and children. You fund slick front organizations to employ political and environmental rhetoric to posture as friends of the 'common man. nature, etc.'
All the while, publicly your company seems to be the unwilling subject of this well-intentioned legislation that will save the earth from the likes of you. You'll have the state educators, news media and politicians clamoring to be on your bandwagon. After all, they're on your payroll directly or indirectly too.
Meanwhile your potential competitors and the public are forced to fund all the chaos you generate with THEIR tax monies. Sweet!! The Duke and Gabby won't stand a chance against you because no one knows they're being robbed!
So massive amounts of money go into permanently institutionalized promotions to "save" rain forests, natural habitats, rare and endangered species, ecological 'balance', nature's beauty, etc. Think of how the employees in this new "industry" will vote. Yowzah!!
The "enemies" of environment are labelled "selfish polluters," greedy capitalists, strip miners rich industrialists and callous developers, Bambi killers. Well intentioned (for the most part) environmentalists, conservationists, animal preservasionists, Sierra Clubbers, and all the children they can influence are the unwitting pawns of the very people they believe they oppose. You've cheaply and safely locked the door on your pesky competitors forever and you're ready to go on to the next delightful scam, currently called "climate change."
All the propoganda about saving the land from developers, sprawl, polluters, greedy corporations, ecological disasters, the NRA, has eventuated in a set-up that keeps the rich rich, and...you know the rest.
There is no "We own it" in government. If this still troubles you, think about this: In any meaningful sense, you do not "own" an iota of anything operated or held off the market by government. Not the national parks, not government housing, not the educational system, the money supply, not the IRS. Ownership in reality means the ability to improve, exchange or dispose of at your discretion. Can you sell your imaginary piece of the government largesse? Can you borrow money against it? Or ask yourself this, if it's mine, how can I be arrested for trespassing on it?
Why not release the land and resources to the open market (people who will have a direct stake in making it useful)? It would be a monumental bonanza, notably benefitting those with the least the most! There would be less poverty (not good for control freaks and shysters), far less dependence (anathema to control freaks and shysters), and WAY much more disposable income for whater we choose to spend it on (heresy!!).
We are already doing an end run around stifling statism. "Hooked on Phonics," home schooling, FedEx, are just some examples of how problems get solved, not institutionalized, when people are free to innovate, free to choose. Remember, the folks who want your kids in public schools send theirs to private schools. Same for retirement programs, modes of transportation, etc. (See Nancy Pelosi's Air Fleet, the President's $100 a lb Kobi beef parties, ad nauseam).
Closing on notes of encouragement and optimism for your own liberty and self-empowerment:
"Laissez-faire does not mean: let soulless mechanical forces operate. It means: let each individual choose how he wants to cooperate in the social division of labor; let the consumers determine what the entrepreneurs should produce...Laissez-faire means: Let the common man choose and act; do not force him to yield to a dictator." ---Ludwig von Mises, HUMAN ACTION
"The two ideas of human freedom and economic freedom working together came to their greatest fruition in the United States...We have been forgetting the basic truth that the greatest threat to human freedom is the concentration of power, whether in the hands of government or anyone else...Fortunately we are waking up...again recognizing that good objectives can be perverted by bad means, that reliance on the freedom of people to control their own lives lives in accordance with their own values is the surest way to achieve the full potential of a great society." ---Milton Friedman, FREE TO CHOOSE
Copyright 1999. Jack Greene
-----
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Communism 101 for Idiots, and a few Idiot Questions
This nice communist feller sat a spell with us on the porch last evening. We did our best to follow his wisdom, but still had a few lingering questions...
The Wisdom(Sarcasm font here):
Workers create all the wealth in capitalist society. That's people like me and you who have to work for a living to make a profit for someone else.
For all the talk about "wealth creation", capitalists do not actually create anything. Take a factory with raw materials coming in one end and consumer products coming out the other. Something magical ... See Morehappens to those raw materials: human work. Workers add value to the raw materials, and receive less in wages than the value they add. The surplus value is taken by the capitalist as profit, despite the fact he has not done anything to the products he is selling to increase their exchange value.
The constant need to seek out greater and greater profits and open up new markets creates wars. The capitalist class within a country lobbies its government and the government uses state power - the state has a monopoly of violence under capitalism - to open up these markets by force if necessary.
The ideas of the capitalist class are the ideas of the capitalist state. In the same way, the ideas of aristocrats and monarchies were the dominant ideas of the feudal state and the ideas of the slaveowning Roman elite were the dominant ideas of Roman society: in any given historical epoch, the ideas of the ruling class are the ruling ideas. One thing the Romans knew well was "divide and rule" and it is a maxim that has served ruling classes well in the millennia since. Look at our mass media, owned and controlled by wealthy capitalists such as Rupert Murdoch - every day our mass media sows fear and division. Strikers are "holding the country to ransom" (what about bankers?), workers are encouraged to look down on lower paid immigrant workers because of their immigration status, to encourage homophobia, to divide along racial lines, or along religious lines ("tuppence ha'penny looking down on tuppence" was how the attitude of Protestant workers to Catholic workers in the north of Ireland was described, for example).
Only by fighting back together can we hope to overcome these divisions which after 300 years of the capitalist system are pretty deep-seeded now, but through the experience of struggling side by side with one another these divisions do disappear. We socialists are for extreme democracy - maximum democracy, with rank and file committees in the workplace, in the armed forces, in our communities, our schools, right up to a national level. We are for the right of recall of any delegate of they are not doing what they were elected to do. We are for democratic planning of production to meet human need, not private greed. From each according to his or her ability, to each according to his or her need.
IDIOTS" Response...(Sarcasm font here)
Thanks for your patient effort and putting big thoughts into little words most of us can understand. Not that we've achieved your total clarity, but we're trying! A few questions with which perhaps you can help:
Why don't the workers in non-capitalist societies create the same wealth as do their comrades in capitalist societies?
Is the presence of factories in capitalist countries and the absence of same in non-capitalist countries a voodoo thing? Beyond our ability to comprehend and certainly no concern of us the common folk? Are there 'factory fairies' that favor the capitalist dark-side?
Why don't workers add value to raw materials in non-capitalist societies?
Why are we common folks under the incorrect impression that Rupert Murdoch is so unlike the rest of media owners?
Are the rest really like him? I'll be dang....
Some of us have trouble absorbing the obvious truth that certain political methods employ the 'divide and rule' technique, while the correct one, yours, sees clearly and benevolently that separating "workers" and "non-workers" as we understand you would define them is not the same technique designed for the same end...
And, finally, just wundrin' who will interpret the 'ability' of each person so their efforts can be 'guided and judged,' as well as who will determine the ultimate need of "each" of us---and what if the person who produces, or the "needer", disagrees? How will you, er...we, enforce this evaluation?
In the past, trying to make these wonderful things happen with real people seems to have resulted in massive extermination of millions. Is this a necessary part of the process? Seems a bit harsh. Is there a newly developed method of getting folks to accept the 'collective wisdom' (of folks like yourself) in lieu of acting on their own 'selfish' judgment?
Drop by again soon, I'm sure the rest of the front porchers have some questions too...
The Wisdom(Sarcasm font here):
Workers create all the wealth in capitalist society. That's people like me and you who have to work for a living to make a profit for someone else.
For all the talk about "wealth creation", capitalists do not actually create anything. Take a factory with raw materials coming in one end and consumer products coming out the other. Something magical ... See Morehappens to those raw materials: human work. Workers add value to the raw materials, and receive less in wages than the value they add. The surplus value is taken by the capitalist as profit, despite the fact he has not done anything to the products he is selling to increase their exchange value.
The constant need to seek out greater and greater profits and open up new markets creates wars. The capitalist class within a country lobbies its government and the government uses state power - the state has a monopoly of violence under capitalism - to open up these markets by force if necessary.
The ideas of the capitalist class are the ideas of the capitalist state. In the same way, the ideas of aristocrats and monarchies were the dominant ideas of the feudal state and the ideas of the slaveowning Roman elite were the dominant ideas of Roman society: in any given historical epoch, the ideas of the ruling class are the ruling ideas. One thing the Romans knew well was "divide and rule" and it is a maxim that has served ruling classes well in the millennia since. Look at our mass media, owned and controlled by wealthy capitalists such as Rupert Murdoch - every day our mass media sows fear and division. Strikers are "holding the country to ransom" (what about bankers?), workers are encouraged to look down on lower paid immigrant workers because of their immigration status, to encourage homophobia, to divide along racial lines, or along religious lines ("tuppence ha'penny looking down on tuppence" was how the attitude of Protestant workers to Catholic workers in the north of Ireland was described, for example).
Only by fighting back together can we hope to overcome these divisions which after 300 years of the capitalist system are pretty deep-seeded now, but through the experience of struggling side by side with one another these divisions do disappear. We socialists are for extreme democracy - maximum democracy, with rank and file committees in the workplace, in the armed forces, in our communities, our schools, right up to a national level. We are for the right of recall of any delegate of they are not doing what they were elected to do. We are for democratic planning of production to meet human need, not private greed. From each according to his or her ability, to each according to his or her need.
IDIOTS" Response...(Sarcasm font here)
Thanks for your patient effort and putting big thoughts into little words most of us can understand. Not that we've achieved your total clarity, but we're trying! A few questions with which perhaps you can help:
Why don't the workers in non-capitalist societies create the same wealth as do their comrades in capitalist societies?
Is the presence of factories in capitalist countries and the absence of same in non-capitalist countries a voodoo thing? Beyond our ability to comprehend and certainly no concern of us the common folk? Are there 'factory fairies' that favor the capitalist dark-side?
Why don't workers add value to raw materials in non-capitalist societies?
Why are we common folks under the incorrect impression that Rupert Murdoch is so unlike the rest of media owners?
Are the rest really like him? I'll be dang....
Some of us have trouble absorbing the obvious truth that certain political methods employ the 'divide and rule' technique, while the correct one, yours, sees clearly and benevolently that separating "workers" and "non-workers" as we understand you would define them is not the same technique designed for the same end...
And, finally, just wundrin' who will interpret the 'ability' of each person so their efforts can be 'guided and judged,' as well as who will determine the ultimate need of "each" of us---and what if the person who produces, or the "needer", disagrees? How will you, er...we, enforce this evaluation?
In the past, trying to make these wonderful things happen with real people seems to have resulted in massive extermination of millions. Is this a necessary part of the process? Seems a bit harsh. Is there a newly developed method of getting folks to accept the 'collective wisdom' (of folks like yourself) in lieu of acting on their own 'selfish' judgment?
Drop by again soon, I'm sure the rest of the front porchers have some questions too...
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
The Oil Spill 'Puzzle'---
"Think for yourself. Everybody tells you to do this from the moment you start school but nobody ever really means it. If you doubt me, try doing it at a university." ---from A THOUSAND PATHS TO PERSONAL POWER by Robert Allen
Re: the Oil Spill 'Crisis'---a few factoids (puzzle pieces)
1. BP and Goldman Sachs dumped piles of BP stock just before the Gulf Oil "Leak"
2. Obama's cadre of administrators, czars and advisors is infested with Goldman Sachs connected folks, labor union bosses, green industry wonks ... See More
3. Goldman Sachs, BP, GE, American labor unions and George "Auric" Soros have been major contributors to Obama's campaign
4. As long as the crisis continues, and drilling is 'temporarily' shut down in the Gulf, the more valuable Soros' Brazilian offshore drilling operation becomes
5. Obama continues to sit on allowing international help with cleaning up the oil spill, which preserves US unions' power in the region and exacerbates the 'crisis'
6. The resulting 'energy and ecological crisis' strenghens cases for alternative energy subsidies, cap and trade. Who will benefit from rerouting resources to expensive alternative energy? GE
7. Prestidigitators and tyrants need distractions and boogey-men, and usually the 'bad guys' are covertly on the payroll, one way or another
All begging the question, do we need all 500 pieces of the puzzle to see the picture?
Re: the Oil Spill 'Crisis'---a few factoids (puzzle pieces)
1. BP and Goldman Sachs dumped piles of BP stock just before the Gulf Oil "Leak"
2. Obama's cadre of administrators, czars and advisors is infested with Goldman Sachs connected folks, labor union bosses, green industry wonks ... See More
3. Goldman Sachs, BP, GE, American labor unions and George "Auric" Soros have been major contributors to Obama's campaign
4. As long as the crisis continues, and drilling is 'temporarily' shut down in the Gulf, the more valuable Soros' Brazilian offshore drilling operation becomes
5. Obama continues to sit on allowing international help with cleaning up the oil spill, which preserves US unions' power in the region and exacerbates the 'crisis'
6. The resulting 'energy and ecological crisis' strenghens cases for alternative energy subsidies, cap and trade. Who will benefit from rerouting resources to expensive alternative energy? GE
7. Prestidigitators and tyrants need distractions and boogey-men, and usually the 'bad guys' are covertly on the payroll, one way or another
All begging the question, do we need all 500 pieces of the puzzle to see the picture?
Monday, June 14, 2010
More Paths to Personal Power from Robert Allen
See prior blog for intro....
"Skill to do comes of doing." ---Ralph Waldo Emerson
"I always start a creative writing class by putting 'WRITERS WRITE' on the board. You'd be amazed how many would-be writers entiely overlook this basic fact."
"Walk in the middle of the road and you'll get hit on both sides."
"The way to do is to be." ---Tao Te Ching
"Stick to your own definition of success and succeed by your own rights."
"Be the first to take your own good advice."
"A man without a cause has no effect."
"Before you decide that you have no reason for living, make sure you haven't been living for the wrong reason."
"To do the right thing and be praised is good, but to do the right thing and get criticized takes guts."
"A strong purpose is a very sharp sword."
"People will claim the highest motives when performing the basest actions. Keeep your eye on the actions."
"I want to do it because I want to do it." ---Amelia Earhart
"Don't let anyone else tell you what it is in life that you want."
"You can bet that when the end justifies the means, it'll be a bad end."
Hope you found something pertinent, useful humorous. Comments?
"Skill to do comes of doing." ---Ralph Waldo Emerson
"I always start a creative writing class by putting 'WRITERS WRITE' on the board. You'd be amazed how many would-be writers entiely overlook this basic fact."
"Walk in the middle of the road and you'll get hit on both sides."
"The way to do is to be." ---Tao Te Ching
"Stick to your own definition of success and succeed by your own rights."
"Be the first to take your own good advice."
"A man without a cause has no effect."
"Before you decide that you have no reason for living, make sure you haven't been living for the wrong reason."
"To do the right thing and be praised is good, but to do the right thing and get criticized takes guts."
"A strong purpose is a very sharp sword."
"People will claim the highest motives when performing the basest actions. Keeep your eye on the actions."
"I want to do it because I want to do it." ---Amelia Earhart
"Don't let anyone else tell you what it is in life that you want."
"You can bet that when the end justifies the means, it'll be a bad end."
Hope you found something pertinent, useful humorous. Comments?
Sunday, June 13, 2010
A Thousand Paths to Personal Power
Welcome to the front porch this evening, folks. Let's mellow out tonight and chat a little about this nice book I'm reading, A Thousand Paths to Personal Power, by Robert Allen.
It consists of small, bite-sized quotes, which makes it ideal for bathroom reading and the attention-impaired. It covers a wide spectrum of topics loosely related to personal power, with quotes and aphorisms from a wide variety of well-known and anonymous people.
I believe you'll find in it some validation, cheer, instructive thought if you want it. Some quotes you'll find disagreeable, others irrelevant, but occasionally you'll catch one pertinent to you and your present mood and situation. Not unlike a box of chocolates!
Here are a few I found that touched me in some way...
"My friend Paul used to see an old lady each day on his way to the shops. He'd say hello, how are you, nice day---just routine stuff. After she died she left behind a letter thanking him for their little chats. They were, appparently, the only ones she'd had."
"Whenever someone says, 'You have no alternative,' they are anxious that you will spot the alternative."
"Friendship will not stand the strain of very much good advice for very long." ---Robert Lynd
"Make sure you say all the things that need to be said so that, one day, you don't have to think 'I never told X that.'"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." ---Leonardo da Vinci
"In my town there was a notorious junction presided over by traffic lights. One day the lights failed and people had to decide between them whose turn it was. It worked so well they got rid of the lights."
"A horse can pull a cart that a man could not move one inch. The man tells the horse to go, stop, turn left, turn right. So why do they call it horsepower?"
"It is no wonder that someone founded a financial empire on the simple idea of helping people find their old school friends. What an irresistible bargain!"
"Do not remove the mosquito from a friendd's brow with a hatchet." ---Chinese Proverb
"Your belief in people brings them to full bloom."
Hope you found some of those useful in some way to you---let us all know!!
It consists of small, bite-sized quotes, which makes it ideal for bathroom reading and the attention-impaired. It covers a wide spectrum of topics loosely related to personal power, with quotes and aphorisms from a wide variety of well-known and anonymous people.
I believe you'll find in it some validation, cheer, instructive thought if you want it. Some quotes you'll find disagreeable, others irrelevant, but occasionally you'll catch one pertinent to you and your present mood and situation. Not unlike a box of chocolates!
Here are a few I found that touched me in some way...
"My friend Paul used to see an old lady each day on his way to the shops. He'd say hello, how are you, nice day---just routine stuff. After she died she left behind a letter thanking him for their little chats. They were, appparently, the only ones she'd had."
"Whenever someone says, 'You have no alternative,' they are anxious that you will spot the alternative."
"Friendship will not stand the strain of very much good advice for very long." ---Robert Lynd
"Make sure you say all the things that need to be said so that, one day, you don't have to think 'I never told X that.'"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." ---Leonardo da Vinci
"In my town there was a notorious junction presided over by traffic lights. One day the lights failed and people had to decide between them whose turn it was. It worked so well they got rid of the lights."
"A horse can pull a cart that a man could not move one inch. The man tells the horse to go, stop, turn left, turn right. So why do they call it horsepower?"
"It is no wonder that someone founded a financial empire on the simple idea of helping people find their old school friends. What an irresistible bargain!"
"Do not remove the mosquito from a friendd's brow with a hatchet." ---Chinese Proverb
"Your belief in people brings them to full bloom."
Hope you found some of those useful in some way to you---let us all know!!
Urls of Interest---perhaps the Dukes of URL
http://www.drudgereport.com/
http://biggovernment.com/
http://mises.org/
http://www.the912project.com/
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html
http://bigjournalism.com/
http://michellemalkin.com/
http://www.isil.org/
http://www.foodinsurance.com/
http://allamon-theallamoncartoonblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.bobart.org/noforce/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,77538,00.html
http://www.indepthwalkingtours.com/
http://www.watchglennbeck.com/archive/
http://biggovernment.com/
http://mises.org/
http://www.the912project.com/
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html
http://bigjournalism.com/
http://michellemalkin.com/
http://www.isil.org/
http://www.foodinsurance.com/
http://allamon-theallamoncartoonblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.bobart.org/noforce/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,77538,00.html
http://www.indepthwalkingtours.com/
http://www.watchglennbeck.com/archive/
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Politicians, Professional Wrestling and Prestidigitators Big and Small
Disregarding the fringes of sanity, like folks thinking the moon landing was simulated, George Bush blew up the Twin Towers and the dykes in New Orleans,or those who think the Civil War was fought to free Blacks, the larger percentage of us still have a grain of common sense.
We've known traditional Professional Wrestling is choreographed. We know that David Copperfield doesn't really turn the damsel into 1,000 doves. We know TV heroes are imaginary. Lassie hasn't really saved Timmy from the well 132 times. We're not 'fooled' as such. We pays our money and we's entertained. End of story. No one's hurt...
This does beg the question, however: All evidence to the contrary, we cling to the unreasonable belief that politicians are in it for us. Why? When's the last time you ran an ad in the paper offering to mow the lawn of elderly couples three states away? Sometimes we're utterly naive.
The first "clue" is that politicians don't do "good" with their own money. They use yours and take the credit for being benefactors. The second "clue" is they have no true principles and that their sole focus is getting re-elected. Do we have to trot out 10 examples? 100 examples? 10,000 examples? The third clue is they get rich doing it. They become obscenely wealthier and distant from those they "serve" in the process. A hundredfold. Come on gang, it's right in front of us. And the fourth "clue" should be that their "programs" don't work and then they say they need more of your money to fix them. And more power.
I'll ask the same question : how many examples of this do we need before we see we're being gamed? This is where it gets really embarrassing, if you're one of us. The power they assemble for themselves is just as apparent as the money with which they line the pockets of their friends and associates. And that power comes from us. Year after year after year, since the Republic was founded, like termites they've been eating away at the structures that make us free and the most successful civilization on earth. It has made us ugly (if you care what the world thinks), bankrupt in spirit, morality and bounty.
Unlike the other folks who fool their audience temporarily, to the voluntary delight of us all, these folks are in permamant game mode as long we we willfully let them shear us of wealth, opportunity and dignity like the sheep many of us have become.
There's a term for this that needs way more publicity if we're going to get the lives and freedoms of future generations back. It's called "Sanction of the Victim." The good news is we can withdraw that sanction, and the game will be up for the parasitical class. Or we can continue to believe the pols are elves, tooth fairies, the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.
To coin a popular phrase, "How's that been working for us?"
How do we withdraw our sanction? The good news is it's simple as identifying that the Emperor is a fraud and that we don't need his peculiar form of "protection." And say it loudly and often, dammit!! The bad news is it takes clarity, courage, and a steadfast belief in our own abilities and perceptions. The latter have been eroded, intentionally, by State institutions and their media and academic minions.
Let's show a fraction of the guts and character that took the barefoot revolutionaries across the Delaware that frigid night. After all, we at least have our Nikes and HDTV's. Or we can be history's biggest fools. And our grandchildren will look in wonderment at what we willingly gave away.
We've known traditional Professional Wrestling is choreographed. We know that David Copperfield doesn't really turn the damsel into 1,000 doves. We know TV heroes are imaginary. Lassie hasn't really saved Timmy from the well 132 times. We're not 'fooled' as such. We pays our money and we's entertained. End of story. No one's hurt...
This does beg the question, however: All evidence to the contrary, we cling to the unreasonable belief that politicians are in it for us. Why? When's the last time you ran an ad in the paper offering to mow the lawn of elderly couples three states away? Sometimes we're utterly naive.
The first "clue" is that politicians don't do "good" with their own money. They use yours and take the credit for being benefactors. The second "clue" is they have no true principles and that their sole focus is getting re-elected. Do we have to trot out 10 examples? 100 examples? 10,000 examples? The third clue is they get rich doing it. They become obscenely wealthier and distant from those they "serve" in the process. A hundredfold. Come on gang, it's right in front of us. And the fourth "clue" should be that their "programs" don't work and then they say they need more of your money to fix them. And more power.
I'll ask the same question : how many examples of this do we need before we see we're being gamed? This is where it gets really embarrassing, if you're one of us. The power they assemble for themselves is just as apparent as the money with which they line the pockets of their friends and associates. And that power comes from us. Year after year after year, since the Republic was founded, like termites they've been eating away at the structures that make us free and the most successful civilization on earth. It has made us ugly (if you care what the world thinks), bankrupt in spirit, morality and bounty.
Unlike the other folks who fool their audience temporarily, to the voluntary delight of us all, these folks are in permamant game mode as long we we willfully let them shear us of wealth, opportunity and dignity like the sheep many of us have become.
There's a term for this that needs way more publicity if we're going to get the lives and freedoms of future generations back. It's called "Sanction of the Victim." The good news is we can withdraw that sanction, and the game will be up for the parasitical class. Or we can continue to believe the pols are elves, tooth fairies, the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.
To coin a popular phrase, "How's that been working for us?"
How do we withdraw our sanction? The good news is it's simple as identifying that the Emperor is a fraud and that we don't need his peculiar form of "protection." And say it loudly and often, dammit!! The bad news is it takes clarity, courage, and a steadfast belief in our own abilities and perceptions. The latter have been eroded, intentionally, by State institutions and their media and academic minions.
Let's show a fraction of the guts and character that took the barefoot revolutionaries across the Delaware that frigid night. After all, we at least have our Nikes and HDTV's. Or we can be history's biggest fools. And our grandchildren will look in wonderment at what we willingly gave away.
Friday, June 11, 2010
US Unions and Prez Preventing help from Other Nations on Oil Spill
Just saw on the news that multiple foreign nations have ships, people and equipment poised to help clean up the oil mess.
Because of a 70+ year old law, called the Jones Act, only American (unionized)vesssels are permitted to operate in coastal waters without special Presidential permission. Which our President has been "thinking about" for over a month.
Parenthetically, after Katrina, President Bush waved this ridiculous law immediately so foreign help could arrive.
When BHO asserted that his administration has been ON TOP of this situation since Day 1, he was being literal, not just figurative.
Because of a 70+ year old law, called the Jones Act, only American (unionized)vesssels are permitted to operate in coastal waters without special Presidential permission. Which our President has been "thinking about" for over a month.
Parenthetically, after Katrina, President Bush waved this ridiculous law immediately so foreign help could arrive.
When BHO asserted that his administration has been ON TOP of this situation since Day 1, he was being literal, not just figurative.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
It's that time of year!! Cook-outs!!
We're having tarantula stuffed peppers this weekend for a small gathering. Cooking hints? Should we boil or grill the critters first? Suggestions for side dishes?.
Monday, June 7, 2010
More Devil's Daffynitions (because you begged me)
from THE DEVIL'S Dictionary, pub circa 1906, by our favorite skeptic, Ambrose Bierce...
Critic, n. A person who boasts himself hard to please because nobody tries to please him.
Cynic, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Debt, n. An ingenius substitute for the chain and whip of the slave driver.
Deliberation,n. The act of examining one's bread to see which side it's buttered on.
Dependent, adj. Reliant upon another's generosity for the support which you are not in a position to exact from his fears.
Destiny, n. A tyrant's excuse for crime and a fool's excuse for failure.
Diplomacy, n. The patriotic art of lying for one's country.
Discussion, n. A method of confirming others in their errors.
Distress, n. A disease incurred by the exposure to the prosperity of a friend.
Edible, adj. Good to eat and wholesome to digest, as a worm to a toad, a toad to a snake, a snake to a pig, a pig to a man, and a man to a worm.
Education, n. That which discloses to the wise and disguises from the foolish their lack of understanding.
Effect, n. The second of two phenomena which always occur together in the same order. The first, called a Cause, is said to generate the other---which is no more sensible than it would be for one who has never seen a dog except in pursuit of a rabbit to declare the rabbit the cause of the dog.
Egotist, n. A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me.
Eloquence, n. The art of orally persuading fools that white is the color it appears to be. It includes the gift of making any color appear white.
Erudition, n. Dust shaken out of a book into an empty skull.
Exile, n. One who serves his country by residing abroad, yet is not an ambassador.
If you liked these, keep beggin' for more!!
Critic, n. A person who boasts himself hard to please because nobody tries to please him.
Cynic, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Debt, n. An ingenius substitute for the chain and whip of the slave driver.
Deliberation,n. The act of examining one's bread to see which side it's buttered on.
Dependent, adj. Reliant upon another's generosity for the support which you are not in a position to exact from his fears.
Destiny, n. A tyrant's excuse for crime and a fool's excuse for failure.
Diplomacy, n. The patriotic art of lying for one's country.
Discussion, n. A method of confirming others in their errors.
Distress, n. A disease incurred by the exposure to the prosperity of a friend.
Edible, adj. Good to eat and wholesome to digest, as a worm to a toad, a toad to a snake, a snake to a pig, a pig to a man, and a man to a worm.
Education, n. That which discloses to the wise and disguises from the foolish their lack of understanding.
Effect, n. The second of two phenomena which always occur together in the same order. The first, called a Cause, is said to generate the other---which is no more sensible than it would be for one who has never seen a dog except in pursuit of a rabbit to declare the rabbit the cause of the dog.
Egotist, n. A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me.
Eloquence, n. The art of orally persuading fools that white is the color it appears to be. It includes the gift of making any color appear white.
Erudition, n. Dust shaken out of a book into an empty skull.
Exile, n. One who serves his country by residing abroad, yet is not an ambassador.
If you liked these, keep beggin' for more!!
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Let's Have a Few Daffynitions from our Favorite Skeptic
from Ambrose Bierce's "Devil's Dictionary"----pub circa 1906 (!)
Abnormal, adj. Not conforming to standard. In matters of thought and conduct, to be independent is to be abnormal, to be abnormal is to be detested.
Abstainer, n. A weak person who yields to the temptation of denying himself a pleasure. A total abstainer is one who abstains from everything but abstention, and especially from inactivity in the affairs of others.
Acknowledge, v.t. To confess. Acknowledge of one another's faults is the highest duty imposed by our love of truth.
Admiration, n. Our polite recognition of another's resemblance to ourselves.
African, n. A nigger that votes our way.
Alliance, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third.
Apologize, v.t. To lay the foundation for a future offense.
Barometer, n. An ingenius instrument that tells us what kind of weather we're having.
Bigot, n. One who is obstinately and zealously attached to an opinion that you do not entertain.
Bore, n. A person who talks when you wish him to listen.
Callous, adj. Gifted with great fortitude to bear the evils afflicting another.
Cannon, n. An insrument employed in the rectification of national boundaries.
Close-fisted, adj. Unduly desirous of keeping that which many meritorious persons wish to obtain.
Comfort, n. A state of mind produced by contemplation of a neighbor's uneasiness.
Consolation, n. The knowledge that a better man is more unfortunate than yourself.
Corporation, n. An ingenius device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility.
More to come daily, if you beg me!
Abnormal, adj. Not conforming to standard. In matters of thought and conduct, to be independent is to be abnormal, to be abnormal is to be detested.
Abstainer, n. A weak person who yields to the temptation of denying himself a pleasure. A total abstainer is one who abstains from everything but abstention, and especially from inactivity in the affairs of others.
Acknowledge, v.t. To confess. Acknowledge of one another's faults is the highest duty imposed by our love of truth.
Admiration, n. Our polite recognition of another's resemblance to ourselves.
African, n. A nigger that votes our way.
Alliance, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third.
Apologize, v.t. To lay the foundation for a future offense.
Barometer, n. An ingenius instrument that tells us what kind of weather we're having.
Bigot, n. One who is obstinately and zealously attached to an opinion that you do not entertain.
Bore, n. A person who talks when you wish him to listen.
Callous, adj. Gifted with great fortitude to bear the evils afflicting another.
Cannon, n. An insrument employed in the rectification of national boundaries.
Close-fisted, adj. Unduly desirous of keeping that which many meritorious persons wish to obtain.
Comfort, n. A state of mind produced by contemplation of a neighbor's uneasiness.
Consolation, n. The knowledge that a better man is more unfortunate than yourself.
Corporation, n. An ingenius device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility.
More to come daily, if you beg me!
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Have You Been Had? Yes...
How many times have we said to ourselves, this world makes no sense? People are nuts. How can they be so crazy as to think, say and do the things they're up to? Well as Ayn Rand said, if things don't make sense, it's way past time to check our premises. And as Garfield (the Prez not the pussy) or someone in his era said, "The truth will set you free. But first it will make you damned mad."
Folks, if you're like me, you're realizing you've been had.
After being an expert on all things political for most of my 61 years, I've recently had the humbling pleasure of learning that I know next to nothing about history. Including Anti-semitism, racism...
Those of us who've had the pleasure getting our 'history' from public schools, the media, and 4th generation history hacks, are having a fast awakening.
We learned that Anti-semitism was a "right wing" thing espoused by Hitler and his caricature intellectual progeny, the KKK. So it's been only recently that a handful of brave persons has pointed out the connections of Anti-Semtism, racism and socialism, going back to the latter's coinage by Karl Marx.
Then, to heap on the humbling facts, it turns out that the gently portrayed Woodrow Wilson was a pro-active racist, propagandist and that the cartoon bad guys of History, Hitler and Goebbels, modeled much of their indoctrination from studying the Wilson administration.
Turns out "Progressives" such as George Bernard Shaw were flaming racists who entertained ideas about how to "humanely" exterminate blacks.
And then there was Stalin, and his ethnic genocides exterminating millions of his own countrymen.
The crumb that was left for us to "remember" was the German halocaust...And we learn that Eisenhauer made photographers take pictures of the massacres in Germany, because he openly said that otherwise one day these things will not be in the history books.
Ike was right.
The above information, if you're seeing it for the first time and therefore rightfully taking it with a grain of salt, is simple to prove to yourself by reading these folks in their own words.
If you need incentive, because it seems TMLW, consider this:
If you're paying attention, you've noticed that the entire world is assembling against Israel now. The socialists and communists are no longer bothering to conceal their hatred of Jews. They're out of the closet for the first time in decades. Including right here in the enlightened good ol' US of A.
And obviously proud of it...
Apparently they think they've won. No need to hide. Have they?
Feedback, suggestions, corrections, even "I told ya' so's" all welcome."
Folks, if you're like me, you're realizing you've been had.
After being an expert on all things political for most of my 61 years, I've recently had the humbling pleasure of learning that I know next to nothing about history. Including Anti-semitism, racism...
Those of us who've had the pleasure getting our 'history' from public schools, the media, and 4th generation history hacks, are having a fast awakening.
We learned that Anti-semitism was a "right wing" thing espoused by Hitler and his caricature intellectual progeny, the KKK. So it's been only recently that a handful of brave persons has pointed out the connections of Anti-Semtism, racism and socialism, going back to the latter's coinage by Karl Marx.
Then, to heap on the humbling facts, it turns out that the gently portrayed Woodrow Wilson was a pro-active racist, propagandist and that the cartoon bad guys of History, Hitler and Goebbels, modeled much of their indoctrination from studying the Wilson administration.
Turns out "Progressives" such as George Bernard Shaw were flaming racists who entertained ideas about how to "humanely" exterminate blacks.
And then there was Stalin, and his ethnic genocides exterminating millions of his own countrymen.
The crumb that was left for us to "remember" was the German halocaust...And we learn that Eisenhauer made photographers take pictures of the massacres in Germany, because he openly said that otherwise one day these things will not be in the history books.
Ike was right.
The above information, if you're seeing it for the first time and therefore rightfully taking it with a grain of salt, is simple to prove to yourself by reading these folks in their own words.
If you need incentive, because it seems TMLW, consider this:
If you're paying attention, you've noticed that the entire world is assembling against Israel now. The socialists and communists are no longer bothering to conceal their hatred of Jews. They're out of the closet for the first time in decades. Including right here in the enlightened good ol' US of A.
And obviously proud of it...
Apparently they think they've won. No need to hide. Have they?
Feedback, suggestions, corrections, even "I told ya' so's" all welcome."
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Why Marx is in Schools and Spooner is Not
Recently we heard, on the Beck TV program, an historian mention the name Lysander Spooner, as if the viewers all knew who he was. If you do know, he was a 19th century libertarian, active abolitionist and the author of one of the most potent defenses of freedom ever written: NO TREASON.
If you, like me, are enjoying and not a little disturbed by the eradication of true American history in books and media over the past 100 years, you may enjoy Spooner's perspective on the causes of the Civil War (this coming from the prominent abolitionist). If you never bought into the propaganda about 'ending slavery,' you'll eat this with a Spoon(er)!!
Last paragraphs from NO TREASON:
"...Notwithstanding all this, that we had learned, and known, and professed, for nearly a century, these lenders of blood money had, for a long series of years previous to the war, been the willing accomplices of the slave-holders in perverting the government from the purposes of liberty and justice, to the greatest of crimes. They had been such accomplices FOR A PURELY PECUNIARY CONSIDERATION, to wit, a control of the markets in the South; in other words, the privilege of holding the slave-holders themselves in industrial and commercial subjection to the manufacturers and merchants of the North (who afterwards furnished the money for the war). And these Northern merchants and manufacturers, these lenders of blood-money, were willing to continue to be the accomplices of the slave-holders in the future, for the same pecuniary considerations. But the slave-holders, either doubting the fidelity of their Northern allies, or feeling themselves strong enough to keep their slaves in subjection without Northern assistance, would no longer pay the price which these Northern men demanded. And it was to enforce this price in the future — that is, to monopolize the Southern markets, to maintain their industrial and commercial control over the South — that these Northern manufacturers and merchants lent some of the profits of their former monopolies for the war, in order to secure to themselves the same, or greater, monopolies in the future. These — and not any love of liberty or justice — were the motives on which the money for the war was lent by the North. In short, the North said to the slave-holders: If you will not pay us our price (give us control of your markets) for our assistance against your slaves, we will secure the same price (keep control of your markets) by helping your slaves against you, and using them as our tools for maintaining dominion over you; for the control of your markets we will have, whether the tools we use for that purpose be black or white, and be the cost, in blood and money, what it may.
On this principle, and from this motive, and not from any love of liberty, or justice, the money was lent in enormous amounts, and at enormous rates of interest. And it was only by means of these loans that the objects of the war were accomplished.
And now these lenders of blood-money demand their pay; and the government, so called, becomes their tool, their servile, slavish, villanous tool, to extort it from the labor of the enslaved people both of the North and South. It is to be extorted by every form of direct, and indirect, and unequal taxation. Not only the nominal debt and interest — enormous as the latter was — are to be paid in full; but these holders of the debt are to be paid still further — and perhaps doubly, triply, or quadruply paid — by such tariffs on imports as will enable our home manufacturers to realize enormous prices for their commodities; also by such monopolies in banking as will enable them to keep control of, and thus enslave and plunder, the industry and trade of the great body of the Northern people themselves. In short, the industrial and commercial slavery of the great body of the people, North and South, black and white, is the price which these lenders of blood money demand, and insist upon, and are determined to secure, in return for the money lent for the war.
This programme having been fully arranged and systematized, they put their sword into the hands of the chief murderer of the war, [undoubtedly a reference to General Grant, who had just become president] and charge him to carry their scheme into effect. And now he, speaking as their organ, says, "LET US HAVE PEACE."
The meaning of this is: Submit quietly to all the robbery and slavery we have arranged for you, and you can have "peace." But in case you resist, the same lenders of blood-money, who furnished the means to subdue the South, will furnish the means again to subdue you.
These are the terms on which alone this government, or, with few exceptions, any other, ever gives "peace" to its people.
The whole affair, on the part of those who furnished the money, has been, and now is, a deliberate scheme of robbery and murder; not merely to monopolize the markets of the South, but also to monopolize the currency, and thus control the industry and trade, and thus plunder and enslave the laborers, of both North and South. And Congress and the president are today the merest tools for these purposes. They are obliged to be, for they know that their own power, as rulers, so-called, is at an end, the moment their credit with the blood-money loan-mongers fails. They are like a bankrupt in the hands of an extortioner. They dare not say nay to any demand made upon them. And to hide at once, if possible, both their servility and crimes, they attempt to divert public attention, by crying out that they have "Abolished Slavery!" That they have "Saved the Country!" That they have "Preserved our Glorious Union!" and that, in now paying the "National Debt," as they call it (as if the people themselves, ALL OF THEM WHO ARE TO BE TAXED FOR ITS PAYMENT, had really and voluntarily joined in contracting it), they are simply "Maintaining the National Honor!"
By "maintaining the national honor," they mean simply that they themselves, open robbers and murderers, assume to be the nation, and will keep faith with those who lend them the money necessary to enable them to crush the great body of the people under their feet; and will faithfully appropriate, from the proceeds of their future robberies and murders, enough to pay all their loans, principal and interest.
The pretense that the "abolition of slavery" was either a motive or justification for the war, is a fraud of the same character with that of "maintaining the national honor." Who, but such usurpers, robbers, and murderers as they, ever established slavery? Or what government, except one resting upon the sword, like the one we now have, was ever capable of maintaining slavery? And why did these men abolish slavery? Not from any love of liberty in general — not as an act of justice to the black man himself, but only "as a war measure," and because they wanted his assistance, and that of his friends, in carrying on the war they had undertaken for maintaining and intensifying that political, commercial, and industrial slavery, to which they have subjected the great body of the people, both black and white. And yet these imposters now cry out that they have abolished the chattel slavery of the black man — although that was not the motive of the war — as if they thought they could thereby conceal, atone for, or justify that other slavery which they were fighting to perpetuate, and to render more rigorous and inexorable than it ever was before. There was no difference of principle — but only of degree — between the slavery they boast they have abolished, and the slavery they were fighting to preserve; for all restraints upon men's natural liberty, not necessary for the simple maintenance of justice, are of the nature of slavery, and differ >from each other only in degree.
If their object had really been to abolish slavery, or maintain liberty or justice generally, they had only to say: All, whether white or black, who want the protection of this government, shall have it; and all who do not want it, will be left in peace, so long as they leave us in peace. Had they said this, slavery would necessarily have been abolished at once; the war would have been saved; and a thousand times nobler union than we have ever had would have been the result. It would have been a voluntary union of free men; such a union as will one day exist among all men, the world over, if the several nations, so called, shall ever get rid of the usurpers, robbers, and murderers, called governments, that now plunder, enslave, and destroy them.
Still another of the frauds of these men is, that they are now establishing, and that the war was designed to establish, "a government of consent." The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a government of consent, is this — that it is one to which everybody must consent, or be shot. This idea was the dominant one on which the war was carried on; and it is the dominant one, now that we have got what is called "peace."
Their pretenses that they have "Saved the Country," and "Preserved our Glorious Union," are frauds like all the rest of their pretenses. By them they mean simply that they have subjugated, and maintained their power over, an unwilling people. This they call "Saving the Country"; as if an enslaved and subjugated people — or as if any people kept in subjection by the sword (as it is intended that all of us shall be hereafter) — could be said to have any country. This, too, they call "Preserving our Glorious Union"; as if there could be said to be any Union, glorious or inglorious, that was not voluntary. Or as if there could be said to be any union between masters and slaves; between those who conquer, and those who are subjugated.
All these cries of having "abolished slavery," of having "saved the country," of having "preserved the union," of establishing "a government of consent," and of "maintaining the national honor," are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats — so transparent that they ought to deceive no one — when uttered as justifications for the war, or for the government that has suceeded the war, or for now compelling the people to pay the cost of the war, or for compelling anybody to support a government that he does not want.
The lesson taught by all these facts is this: As long as mankind continues to pay "national debts," so-called — that is, so long as they are such dupes and cowards as to pay for being cheated, plundered, enslaved, and murdered — so long there will be enough to lend the money for those purposes; and with that money a plenty of tools, called soldiers, can be hired to keep them in subjection. But when they refuse any longer to pay for being thus cheated, plundered, enslaved, and murdered, they will cease to have cheats, and usurpers, and robbers, and murderers and blood-money loan-mongers for masters.
If you, like me, are enjoying and not a little disturbed by the eradication of true American history in books and media over the past 100 years, you may enjoy Spooner's perspective on the causes of the Civil War (this coming from the prominent abolitionist). If you never bought into the propaganda about 'ending slavery,' you'll eat this with a Spoon(er)!!
Last paragraphs from NO TREASON:
"...Notwithstanding all this, that we had learned, and known, and professed, for nearly a century, these lenders of blood money had, for a long series of years previous to the war, been the willing accomplices of the slave-holders in perverting the government from the purposes of liberty and justice, to the greatest of crimes. They had been such accomplices FOR A PURELY PECUNIARY CONSIDERATION, to wit, a control of the markets in the South; in other words, the privilege of holding the slave-holders themselves in industrial and commercial subjection to the manufacturers and merchants of the North (who afterwards furnished the money for the war). And these Northern merchants and manufacturers, these lenders of blood-money, were willing to continue to be the accomplices of the slave-holders in the future, for the same pecuniary considerations. But the slave-holders, either doubting the fidelity of their Northern allies, or feeling themselves strong enough to keep their slaves in subjection without Northern assistance, would no longer pay the price which these Northern men demanded. And it was to enforce this price in the future — that is, to monopolize the Southern markets, to maintain their industrial and commercial control over the South — that these Northern manufacturers and merchants lent some of the profits of their former monopolies for the war, in order to secure to themselves the same, or greater, monopolies in the future. These — and not any love of liberty or justice — were the motives on which the money for the war was lent by the North. In short, the North said to the slave-holders: If you will not pay us our price (give us control of your markets) for our assistance against your slaves, we will secure the same price (keep control of your markets) by helping your slaves against you, and using them as our tools for maintaining dominion over you; for the control of your markets we will have, whether the tools we use for that purpose be black or white, and be the cost, in blood and money, what it may.
On this principle, and from this motive, and not from any love of liberty, or justice, the money was lent in enormous amounts, and at enormous rates of interest. And it was only by means of these loans that the objects of the war were accomplished.
And now these lenders of blood-money demand their pay; and the government, so called, becomes their tool, their servile, slavish, villanous tool, to extort it from the labor of the enslaved people both of the North and South. It is to be extorted by every form of direct, and indirect, and unequal taxation. Not only the nominal debt and interest — enormous as the latter was — are to be paid in full; but these holders of the debt are to be paid still further — and perhaps doubly, triply, or quadruply paid — by such tariffs on imports as will enable our home manufacturers to realize enormous prices for their commodities; also by such monopolies in banking as will enable them to keep control of, and thus enslave and plunder, the industry and trade of the great body of the Northern people themselves. In short, the industrial and commercial slavery of the great body of the people, North and South, black and white, is the price which these lenders of blood money demand, and insist upon, and are determined to secure, in return for the money lent for the war.
This programme having been fully arranged and systematized, they put their sword into the hands of the chief murderer of the war, [undoubtedly a reference to General Grant, who had just become president] and charge him to carry their scheme into effect. And now he, speaking as their organ, says, "LET US HAVE PEACE."
The meaning of this is: Submit quietly to all the robbery and slavery we have arranged for you, and you can have "peace." But in case you resist, the same lenders of blood-money, who furnished the means to subdue the South, will furnish the means again to subdue you.
These are the terms on which alone this government, or, with few exceptions, any other, ever gives "peace" to its people.
The whole affair, on the part of those who furnished the money, has been, and now is, a deliberate scheme of robbery and murder; not merely to monopolize the markets of the South, but also to monopolize the currency, and thus control the industry and trade, and thus plunder and enslave the laborers, of both North and South. And Congress and the president are today the merest tools for these purposes. They are obliged to be, for they know that their own power, as rulers, so-called, is at an end, the moment their credit with the blood-money loan-mongers fails. They are like a bankrupt in the hands of an extortioner. They dare not say nay to any demand made upon them. And to hide at once, if possible, both their servility and crimes, they attempt to divert public attention, by crying out that they have "Abolished Slavery!" That they have "Saved the Country!" That they have "Preserved our Glorious Union!" and that, in now paying the "National Debt," as they call it (as if the people themselves, ALL OF THEM WHO ARE TO BE TAXED FOR ITS PAYMENT, had really and voluntarily joined in contracting it), they are simply "Maintaining the National Honor!"
By "maintaining the national honor," they mean simply that they themselves, open robbers and murderers, assume to be the nation, and will keep faith with those who lend them the money necessary to enable them to crush the great body of the people under their feet; and will faithfully appropriate, from the proceeds of their future robberies and murders, enough to pay all their loans, principal and interest.
The pretense that the "abolition of slavery" was either a motive or justification for the war, is a fraud of the same character with that of "maintaining the national honor." Who, but such usurpers, robbers, and murderers as they, ever established slavery? Or what government, except one resting upon the sword, like the one we now have, was ever capable of maintaining slavery? And why did these men abolish slavery? Not from any love of liberty in general — not as an act of justice to the black man himself, but only "as a war measure," and because they wanted his assistance, and that of his friends, in carrying on the war they had undertaken for maintaining and intensifying that political, commercial, and industrial slavery, to which they have subjected the great body of the people, both black and white. And yet these imposters now cry out that they have abolished the chattel slavery of the black man — although that was not the motive of the war — as if they thought they could thereby conceal, atone for, or justify that other slavery which they were fighting to perpetuate, and to render more rigorous and inexorable than it ever was before. There was no difference of principle — but only of degree — between the slavery they boast they have abolished, and the slavery they were fighting to preserve; for all restraints upon men's natural liberty, not necessary for the simple maintenance of justice, are of the nature of slavery, and differ >from each other only in degree.
If their object had really been to abolish slavery, or maintain liberty or justice generally, they had only to say: All, whether white or black, who want the protection of this government, shall have it; and all who do not want it, will be left in peace, so long as they leave us in peace. Had they said this, slavery would necessarily have been abolished at once; the war would have been saved; and a thousand times nobler union than we have ever had would have been the result. It would have been a voluntary union of free men; such a union as will one day exist among all men, the world over, if the several nations, so called, shall ever get rid of the usurpers, robbers, and murderers, called governments, that now plunder, enslave, and destroy them.
Still another of the frauds of these men is, that they are now establishing, and that the war was designed to establish, "a government of consent." The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a government of consent, is this — that it is one to which everybody must consent, or be shot. This idea was the dominant one on which the war was carried on; and it is the dominant one, now that we have got what is called "peace."
Their pretenses that they have "Saved the Country," and "Preserved our Glorious Union," are frauds like all the rest of their pretenses. By them they mean simply that they have subjugated, and maintained their power over, an unwilling people. This they call "Saving the Country"; as if an enslaved and subjugated people — or as if any people kept in subjection by the sword (as it is intended that all of us shall be hereafter) — could be said to have any country. This, too, they call "Preserving our Glorious Union"; as if there could be said to be any Union, glorious or inglorious, that was not voluntary. Or as if there could be said to be any union between masters and slaves; between those who conquer, and those who are subjugated.
All these cries of having "abolished slavery," of having "saved the country," of having "preserved the union," of establishing "a government of consent," and of "maintaining the national honor," are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats — so transparent that they ought to deceive no one — when uttered as justifications for the war, or for the government that has suceeded the war, or for now compelling the people to pay the cost of the war, or for compelling anybody to support a government that he does not want.
The lesson taught by all these facts is this: As long as mankind continues to pay "national debts," so-called — that is, so long as they are such dupes and cowards as to pay for being cheated, plundered, enslaved, and murdered — so long there will be enough to lend the money for those purposes; and with that money a plenty of tools, called soldiers, can be hired to keep them in subjection. But when they refuse any longer to pay for being thus cheated, plundered, enslaved, and murdered, they will cease to have cheats, and usurpers, and robbers, and murderers and blood-money loan-mongers for masters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)