Callers: John In Tennessee, Ronni In Oregon
Click on the Republic Broadcasting Network banner above and show your support for the RBN pledge drive - now in progress!
Click on the Republic Broadcasting Network banner above and show your support for the RBN pledge drive - now in progress!
Pictured above is a NEW all-stainless steel, Bron Professional Model HD Mandoline. Removed from its original box only to snap this photo, it comes complete with all cutting attachments, along with its original S/S safety carriage. Read all about this classic French culinary machine at the link below...
... And then watch a brief French-language video demonstration of its remarkable capabilities here:
Three of these are available. USD $150, trade, OBO... of which half the proceeds... will go towards the current RBN pledge drive. Rare and unusual gift items... as well as hard-to-find collectibles... can be found here... at the link below:
Mom's Stuff
Thanks for looking! If you did not see something that suits your taste or budget... contact me directly by email... and I will help you find that certain something... personally! ~Lark
III---III---III
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy.’ They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
--John Lennon
---
Most of us spend one-third of our lives at work. But you can choose to do the work you love! Start by getting it out of your mind you’re somebody’s label – like two of my favorites, employee and employer – that upon reflection… you never in a million years would’ve used to describe or define yourself… had not your social engineering prepared you… to do just that.
--Lark In Texas
---
You can't better the world by simply talking to it. Philosophy to be effective must be mechanically applied.
The things to do are: the things that need doing: that you see need to be done, and that no one else seems to see need to be done. Then you will conceive your own way of doing that which needs to be done -- that no one else has told you to do or how to do it. This will bring out the real you that often gets buried inside a character that has acquired a superficial array of behaviors induced or imposed by others on the individual.
When individuals join in a cooperative venture, the power generated far exceeds what they could have accomplished acting individually.
You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.
Don't fight forces, use them.
There is no energy crisis, food crisis or environmental crisis. There is only a crisis of ignorance.
--R. Buckminster Fuller
Did you realize March 1st was the world’s first
Future Day?
March 1: Future Day
Kurzweil.net
Future Day: a new global holiday March 1
Why are nearly all our holidays focused on celebrating the past, or the cyclical processes of nature? Why not celebrate the amazing future we are collectively creating?
That’s the concept behind a new global holiday, Future Day (March 1), conceived by AI researcher Dr. Ben Goertzel.
Future Day 2012 gatherings are scheduled in more than a dozen cities, as well as in Second Life.
“Celebrating and honoring the past and the cyclical processes of nature is a valuable thing,” says Goertzel. “But in these days of rapid technological acceleration, it is our future that needs more attention, not our past.
“My hope is that Future Day can serve as a tool for helping humanity focus its attention on figuring out what kind of future it wants, and striving to bring these visions to reality.
“The past is over; the present is fleeting; we live in the future.”
— Ray Kurzweil re Future Day
“Ray Kurzweil predicts that technological paradigm shifts will become increasingly common, leading to ‘technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history,’” says Goertzel.
“Future Day is designed to center the impossible in the public mind once a year as a temptation too delicious to resist,” says Howard Bloom, author of Global Brain.
“If all matter in the universe is comprised of patterns, let’s redesign what doesn’t work and form new methods for approaching the future with fluidity,” says designer Natasha Vita-More, Chair, Humanity+.
REVOLVE: Man’s Scientific Rise to Godhood
By Aaron Franz
The Age of Transitions
Book reviews from readers of RESOLVE
A reader from Scotland sent this book review of Revolve by email:
Hi Aaron,
I've just finished reading 'Revolve' and you are right to feel proud of it. It is most certainly a book I will recommend to anyone seeking answers to the many questions raised by transhumanism. But not only transhumanism, 'Revolve' lifts the veils from the historical roots of this anti-human movement. In doing so it exposes it for what it is; the technological manifestation of an ancient plan and its hidden, fanatical ideology. I would go so far as to say that your heart and soul went into this book; a lot of thought has gone into its structure. I had the feeling I was being led along paths of knowledge intended create insight (the 'way out' sign in Plato's cave!). You expose the darker corners of the 'great work', its past cruelties and the cruelty to come, perhaps. And you ask for compassion for those who work within its many compartments, blinded by the lie, ignorant of the true agenda. However, the truth is available (though for how long?) and it is to be found in books like 'Revolve'. It will require two or three readings to go deep into the meanings of what you expose and this is mainly because the reader's own conditioning is eroded each time there is an insight. This is the true value of the book, it is not simply a logical rendering of the facts surrounding the subject, it is a journey into the self of the reader. Our consciousness is not hidden from us, it is just that they, with our consent, have built an image which we mistake for our consciousness and so it becomes an inflexible thing, incapable of understanding its own nature having been misdirected by an illusion. The alchemist's ability to shape the illusion at will, and therefore guide consciousness, is his greatest power. 'Revolve', and your work generally, is concerned with this fact, and with peeling away its exoteric form. Truly, this is the only way to freedom for future generations, the exposure of the illusion, its power, and for each individual to reflect upon what is actually there within themselves and then living socially with what is actual, rather than chasing (or being chased by) illusion. When a clique of intelligent, patient pragmatists can convert their plan into myth and then sell us that myth, in whatever form, and *we buy it (!),* then it is indeed time for reflection.
Best wishes,
Scott.
Revolve book reviews on Amazon link from the above site
http://www.amazon.com/The-Guru-Papers-Masks-Authoritarian/dp/1883319005/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330801754&sr=1-1
The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power
By Joel Kramer and Diana Alstad
(1993)
The Guru Papers demonstrates with uncompromising clarity that authoritarian control, which once held societies together, is now at the core of personal, social, and planetary problems, and thus a key factor in social disintegration. It illustrates how authoritarianism is embedded in the way people think, hiding in culture, values, daily life, and in the very morality people try to live by. The book unmasks authoritarianism in such areas as relationships, cults, 12-step groups, religion, and contemporary morality. Chapters on addiction and love show the insidious nature of authoritarian values and ideologies in the most intimate corners of life, offering new frameworks for understanding why people get addicted and why intimacy is laden with conflict. By exposing the inner authoritarian that people use to control themselves and others, the authors show why people give up their power, and how others get and maintain it.
Review
"Easily the most comprehensive, erudite, and timely book in print to explore authoritarianism in religion, institutions, power, the family, intimacy and sexual relations, and personal problems such as addiction....Argue[s] persuasively that any system of values that places tradition and the past above the imperative to question the present is destined to become increasingly lethal."
—Keith Thompson of The San Francisco Chronicle Book Review
"Spells out at length the dangers of becoming addicted to another's authority in any sphere of life."
—London Times Literary Supplement
"A thorough, wide-ranging analysis of the way power has historically been maintained...Purports to be no less than a diagnosis of what's wrong with the world and how, not merely to fix it, but to save it. Its thesis is elegant and nearly unlimited in its ramifications...[Shows that] authoritarianism is not merely a political phenomenon. It's part of the way we think."
—The New Mexican
"Discusses how authoritarian leaders manipulate followers and why people surrender to them."
—Publishers Weekly
"Provocative and thorough....Unmask[s] the countless manifestations of authoritarianism in our contemporary culture. Cover[s] vast territory...rais[es] all the vitally important questions...It should definitely be placed in the hands of anyone who has been, or is, or contemplates becoming involved with a guru or cult."
—Yoga Journal
"Don't be deceived by the title. The Guru Papers is about much more than cult groups. A profoundly important critique of the covert authoritarianism of most religions...and of such cultural values as unconditional love, addiction, and twelve-step programs...Thought-provoking and radically important...Extraordinarily rich and complex...[It]can make an important contribution to [changing the old paradigms] if enough people...take it to heart and mind."
—Liberty
—Keith Thompson of The San Francisco Chronicle Book Review
"Spells out at length the dangers of becoming addicted to another's authority in any sphere of life."
—London Times Literary Supplement
"A thorough, wide-ranging analysis of the way power has historically been maintained...Purports to be no less than a diagnosis of what's wrong with the world and how, not merely to fix it, but to save it. Its thesis is elegant and nearly unlimited in its ramifications...[Shows that] authoritarianism is not merely a political phenomenon. It's part of the way we think."
—The New Mexican
"Discusses how authoritarian leaders manipulate followers and why people surrender to them."
—Publishers Weekly
"Provocative and thorough....Unmask[s] the countless manifestations of authoritarianism in our contemporary culture. Cover[s] vast territory...rais[es] all the vitally important questions...It should definitely be placed in the hands of anyone who has been, or is, or contemplates becoming involved with a guru or cult."
—Yoga Journal
"Don't be deceived by the title. The Guru Papers is about much more than cult groups. A profoundly important critique of the covert authoritarianism of most religions...and of such cultural values as unconditional love, addiction, and twelve-step programs...Thought-provoking and radically important...Extraordinarily rich and complex...[It]can make an important contribution to [changing the old paradigms] if enough people...take it to heart and mind."
—Liberty
About the Author
Joel Kramer and Diana Alstad are co-authors of The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power. They have written and taught together since 1974 on evolution, spirituality, relationships, values, awareness, yoga, and social issues. Their Web site is www.joeldiana.com.
Joel Kramer, the author of The Passionate Mind, did post-graduate work in philosophy and psychology and was a resident teacher at Esalen Institute (1968-1970). He is a pioneer and legend of modern American yoga whose evolutionary vision of yoga freed it from its authoritarian roots, re-visioning it for the West.
Diana Alstad, a Woodrow Wilson Fellow, received a doctorate from Yale University in 1971. She taught in the humanities and initiated and taught the first Women's Studies courses at Yale and Duke. She envisioned the Yoga of Relationship and developed it with Kramer.
Joel Kramer, the author of The Passionate Mind, did post-graduate work in philosophy and psychology and was a resident teacher at Esalen Institute (1968-1970). He is a pioneer and legend of modern American yoga whose evolutionary vision of yoga freed it from its authoritarian roots, re-visioning it for the West.
Diana Alstad, a Woodrow Wilson Fellow, received a doctorate from Yale University in 1971. She taught in the humanities and initiated and taught the first Women's Studies courses at Yale and Duke. She envisioned the Yoga of Relationship and developed it with Kramer.
http://www.luxefaire.com/devilvision/tableofcontents.html
Devilvision: The World's New Wireless Grid
Including Pertinent History and First Ever Public Discussion of Active Auroral Behavior Modification and Surveillance Technologies
By William J. (Bill) Gallagher
(2006)
http://riddick2.blogspot.com/2012/03/communitarianism-its-plan-for-society.html
News Reload
http://www.traditioninaction.org/History/G_013_Communitarian_2.html
The theory being presented to advance Communitarianism is that Capitalism and Communism were two necessary, conflicting, temporary stages in human social development. From this clash, a fortunate synthesis is supposed to emerge when the whole world will descend into chaos and all the sides of every conflict will surrender to one single ideology. Communitarianism pretends to be that final synthesis in the Hegelian-Marxist dialectic.
Of course, there is no synthesis. This Communitarianism is really just a form of Communism, being offered with a different gravy in order to please modern tastes. It is also a way to present Communism, which is intrinsically evil as Pope Pius XI wrote in Divini Redemptoris (1937), as equal to Capitalism, which is not intrinsically evil. The last two Popes have been spreading this myth also, pretending the two systems are equally bad, causing confusion in the Catholic faithful. Even many conservative and traditionalist Catholics are falling for this ruse. The winner, of course, is Communitarianism, and all the socialist variants that lead to it or support it.
The controllers
This seems to be the old battle plan to achieve the world domination in a new form. For example in the European Union, which is a partial realization of this universal plan, the "generals" in this sham battle between Communism and Capitalism are recruited from Europe’s secret societies and brotherhoods, who can all be grouped together under the metaphorical tarpaulin of the Illuminati (Philip Jones).
Obama reading The Post American World by communitarian Fareed Zakaria
Much of the ideological base of the EU agenda can be found in the works of Count R.N. Coudenhove Kalergi, justifiably regarded by many as the "godfather" of the European Union. It began with the publishing of his manifesto Paneuropa (1923), which presented the idea of a unified European State. It was he who suggested Beethoven’s hymn as the EU’s national anthem, and played a large part in the design of the EU logo with its 12 stars symbolizing the 12 tribes of Israel. Count Kalergi mentioned in his autobiography that he had been financed by the Rothschild’s, and in the U.S., by Paul Warburg and Bernard Baruch.(1)
Count Kalergi’s vision was an Europe controlled by a small group comprised of the top plutocracy of Europe. In fact since the end of WWII, the major dynamic behind the movement has come not from the European side, but from the eastern seaboard “establishment” families, such as the Rockefeller’s, Harriman’s, Morgan’s, Dulles’ and Bush’s.
The goal was to promote unlimited “freedom” for their own special interests – the freedom to grab and loot any or all of the world’s resources. This is what is touted today as the full globalization of the world markets. The project is enforced by organizations like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations.
The role of usury
The chosen economists first needed to structure an illegitimate money power without any public mandate drawing its strength from usury and the distorted capitalism of the monopolies. They did this of course, with powerful centralized systems like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Among the important sources of the great power in the 20th and 21st century we find big money, and the root of it, an immoral and illicit usury, that is, the manipulation of economy to lend money at disproportionate interest rates.
Philip Jones gives us an example: “Since the 1980s, banks and lenders have seemingly been falling over themselves to lend money. Now, as we try to ride out our present woes, we are told that money is scarce. Why is it scarce? Because the same people who were lending it so willingly, are no longer doing so. … In this way, millions of people have been enticed to sign their freedoms away for the promise of a new home, car, kitchen or bathroom.
"Then when the times was right – which is now – they started calling in unpaid loans, manipulating prices, raising interest rates and destroying jobs and manufacturing production in the process. Then, with the people in fear for their existence and terrified of what the future might bring, demanding naively that something be done, they come up with the solution they had planned all along: More centralization of bank ownership, State and corporate mergers through ‘government buyout packages and the call of a uniform across the board single currency not only for Europe, but for the whole planet.” (2)
Kalergi's successor as head of the Paneuropean Union was his disciple Otto von Habsburg, who poses reading a Kalergi's book
What is the result? The middle classes emerge so badly damaged from this situation that their economical power base no longer exists. It is how the socialist leveling process enters the system.
The subversion of culture
This communitarian process also subverts national and regional culture, including literature and art, as well as undermines family and morality.
This has been achieved through a diabolical program of culture distortion, promoting subversive genres of popular music, ever more degrading and perverse forms of pornography, theater and cinema that distort reality and show an inverted and corrupted ideal of what is natural and moral.
Homosexuality is promoted to break the model of marriage according to the natural law, and every kind of decadence is encouraged.
This has been achieved through a diabolical program of culture distortion, promoting subversive genres of popular music, ever more degrading and perverse forms of pornography, theater and cinema that distort reality and show an inverted and corrupted ideal of what is natural and moral.
Homosexuality is promoted to break the model of marriage according to the natural law, and every kind of decadence is encouraged.
The media gives total support for cultural corruption
In short, a people’s healthy culture, based on the law of God and developed by Christian Civilization, is replaced with universal forms of entertainment contrived to instill revolution and perversion on a mass scale.
Satanic looking rock stars and immodest and openly immoral single mother movie stars are touted as role models for the youth. This undermining and subversion of the culture is openly promoted and encouraged by the media, also controlled by the Communitarian plutocracy bent on the centralization and uniformization of every aspect of society.
1. Read more about the Count, and the connection of the recently deceased Otto von Habsburg, who succeeded him as president of the Pan European Union, in “The Mount Pelerin Society,” The Synarchy
2.The EU Communitarian Agenda, 9-24-2009
Communitarianism: A Covert and Dangerous Enemy The Babel Tower Governing Europe A Façade for the Global Lodge Socialism and Gnosis Distributists Misleading their Audience about Capitalism Critique of Capitalism from an Organic Perspective The Harmful Mentality of Borrowing Money What to Do with the Surplus of Currency A Distributist Manifesto Strongly Spiced With Communismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/supervenient
supervenient
adjective
Coming as something additional or extraneous; coming afterwards.
That branch of belief was in him supervenient to Christian practice. --Hammond.
Divorces can be granted, a mensa et toro, only for supervenient causes. --Z. Swift.
Not part of the real or essential nature of a thing: adscititious, adventitious, incidental. See surface/depth.
transliteration
Transliteration is a subset of the science of hermeneutics. It is a form of translation, and is the practice of converting a text from one script into another. For instance, the Greek expression "Ελληνική Δημοκρατία" (meaning "Hellenic Republic") can be transliterated as "Hellēnikē Dēmokratia" by substituting Latin letters for Greek letters. Or "Ελληνική Δημοκρατία" should be transliterated as "Ellēnikē Dēmokratia" without the letter 'h', which is found only in the English rendition of the name, the common equivalent of Greece since: Ελλας >> Ellas >> Hellas (in English renderings).
Transliteration can form an essential part of transcription which converts text from one writing system into another. Transliteration is not concerned with representing the phonemics of the original: it only strives to represent the characters accurately.
Definitions
From an information-theoretical point of view, systematic transliteration is a mapping from one system of writing into another, word by word, or ideally letter by letter. Transliteration attempts to use a one-to-one correspondence and be exact, so that an informed reader should be able to reconstruct the original spelling of unknown transliterated words. Ideally, reverse transliteration is possible.
Transliteration is opposed to transcription, which specifically maps the sounds of one language to the best matching script of another language. Still, most systems of transliteration map the letters of the source script to letters pronounced similarly in the goal script, for some specific pair of source and goal language. If the relations between letters and sounds are similar in both languages, a transliteration may be (almost) the same as a transcription. In practice, there are also some mixed transliteration/transcription systems that transliterate a part of the original script and transcribe the rest.
The transliteration discussed above can be regarded as transliteration in the narrow sense. In a broader sense, the word transliteration may include both transliteration in the narrow sense and transcription.
Transliteration of single words is often an informal non-systematic process; many variants of the same word are often used. For example the Hebrew word מַצָּה is rendered in English, according to the second edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, as matzo, matzah, matso, motsa, motso, maẓẓo, matza, matzho, matzoh, mazzah, motza, and mozza.
transmutation
n.
The act or an instance of transmuting; transformation
The state of being transmuted
Physics. Transformation of one element into another by one or a series of nuclear reactions
The supposed conversion of base metals into gold or silver in alchemy
transmutational trans'mu·ta'tion·al or trans·mut'a·tive (-myū'tə-tĭv) adj.
The process or result of changing from one appearance, state, or phase to another: change, changeover, conversion, metamorphosis, mutation, shift, transfiguration, transformation, translation, transmogrification, transubstantiation. See change/persist
chirality
noun
Chirality (kaɪˈrælɪti) is a property of asymmetry important in several branches of science. The word chirality is derived from the Greek, χειρ (kheir), "hand", a familiar chiral object.
An object or a system is chiral if it is not identical to its mirror image, that is, it cannot be superposed onto it. A chiral object and its mirror image are called enantiomorphs (Greek opposite forms) or, when referring to molecules, enantiomers. A non-chiral object is called achiral (sometimes also amphichiral) and can be superposed on its mirror image.
The term was first used by Lord Kelvin in an address in 1904. In a lecture given in Baltimore on "Molecular Dynamics and the Wave Theory of Light" he stated:
I call any geometrical figure, or group of points, 'chiral', and say that it has chirality if its image in a plane mirror, ideally realized, cannot be brought to coincide with itself.
Human hands are perhaps the most universally recognized example of chirality: The left hand is a non-superimposable mirror image of the right hand; no matter how the two hands are oriented, it is impossible for all the major features of both hands to coincide. This difference in symmetry becomes obvious if someone attempts to shake the right hand of a person using his left hand, or if a left-handed glove is placed on a right hand. The word chirality is a mathematical term for the concept of "handedness".
Mathematics
Main article: Chirality (mathematics)
In mathematics, a figure is chiral (and said to have chirality) if it cannot be mapped to its mirror image by rotations and translations alone. For example, a right shoe is different from a left shoe, and clockwise is different from anti-clockwise.
A chiral object and its mirror image are said to be enantiomorphs. The word enantiomorph stems from the Greek ἐναντίος (enantios) 'opposite' + μορφή (morphe) 'form'. A non-chiral figure is called achiral or amphichiral.
The helix (and by extension a spun string, a screw, a propeller, etc.) and Möbius strip are chiral two-dimensional objects in three-dimensional ambient space. The J, L, S and Z-shaped tetrominoes of the popular video game Tetris also exhibit chirality, but only in a two-dimensional space.
Many other familiar objects exhibit the same chiral symmetry of the human body, such as gloves, glasses (where two lenses differ in prescription), and shoes. A similar notion of chirality is considered in knot theory, as explained below.
Some chiral three-dimensional objects, such as the helix, can be assigned a right or left handedness, according to the right-hand rule.
Geometry
In geometry a figure is achiral if and only if its symmetry group contains at least one orientation-reversing isometry. In two dimensions, every figure which possesses an axis of symmetry is achiral, and it can be shown that every bounded achiral figure must have an axis of symmetry. In three dimensions, every figure which possesses a plane of symmetry or a center of symmetry is achiral.
Knot theory
A knot is called achiral if it can be continuously deformed into its mirror image, otherwise it is called chiral. For example the unknot and the figure-eight knot are achiral, whereas the trefoil knot is chiral.
A table of all prime knots with seven crossings or fewer (not including mirror images)
Physics
Main article: Chirality (physics)
In physics, chirality may be found in the spin of a particle, which may be used to define a handedness (aka chirality) for that particle. A symmetry transformation between the two is called parity. Invariance under parity by a Dirac fermion is called chiral symmetry.
Electro-magnetism
Electromagnetic wave propagation as handedness is wave polarization and described in terms of helicity (occurs as a helix). Polarization of an electromagnetic wave, is the property that describes the orientation, i.e., the time-varying, direction (vector), and amplitude of the electric field vector. For a depiction, see the image below.
Chemistry
Main article: Chirality (chemistry)
A chiral molecule is a type of molecule that lacks an internal plane of symmetry and thus has a non-superposable mirror image. The feature that is most often the cause of chirality in molecules is the presence of an asymmetric carbon atom.
The term chiral in general is used to describe an object that is non-superposable on its mirror image.
In chemistry, chirality usually refers to molecules. Two mirror images of a chiral molecule are called enantiomers or optical isomers. Pairs of enantiomers are often designated as "right-" and "left-handed."
Molecular chirality is of interest because of its application to stereochemistry in inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry, physical chemistry, biochemistry, and supramolecular chemistry.
Biology
In anatomy, chirality is found in the imperfect mirror-image symmetry of many kinds of animal bodies.
In humans, chirality (also referred to as handedness or laterality) is an attribute of humans defined by their unequal distribution of fine motor skill between the left and right hands. An individual who is more dexterous with the right hand is called right-handed, and one who is more skilled with the left is said to be left-handed. It is also seen in the study of facial asymmetry.
Other creatures, such as gastropods, exhibit chirality in the "handedness" of their coiled shells, resulting in an asymmetrical appearance. The majority of gastropod species (over 90 %) have dextral (right-handed) shells in their coiling, but a small minority of species and genera are virtually always sinistral (left-handed). a very few species (for example Amphidromus perversus) show an even mixture of dextral and sinistral individuals.
Shells of two different species of sea snail: on the left is the normally sinistral (left-handed) shell of Neptunea angulata, on the right is the normally dextral (right-handed) shell of Neptunea despecta.
See also
Orientation (mathematics)
Stereochemistry
Right-hand rule
Handedness
Asymmetry
References
^ The Mathematical Theory of Chirality by Michel Petitjean.
^ Georges Henry Wagnière, On Chirality and the Universal Asymmetry: Reflections on Image and Mirror Image (2007).
^ Organic Chemistry (4th Edition) Paula Y. Bruice.
^ Organic Chemistry (3rd Edition) Marye Anne Fox ,James K. Whitesell.
^ IUPAC, Compendium of Chemical Terminology, 2nd ed. (the "Gold Book") (1997). Online corrected version: (2006–) "chirality"
^ Schilthuizen M. & Davison A. (2005). "The convoluted evolution of snail chirality". Naturwissenschaften 92(11): 504–515. doi:10.1007/s00114-005-0045-2.
^ Amphidromus perversus (Linnaeus, 1758)
code Napoléon
French civil code enacted by Napoleon in 1804. It clarified and made uniform the private law of France and followed Roman law in being divided into three books: the law of persons, things, and modes of acquiring ownership of things. In Louisiana, the only civil-law state in the U.S., the civil code of 1825 (revised in 1870 and still in force) is closely connected to the Napoleonic Code. See also law code.
law code
Systematic compilation of law or legal principles. The oldest extant fragments of a law code are tablets from the ancient city of Ebla dating to c. 2400 BC. The best-known ancient code is that of Hammurabi. Roman legal records began in the 5th century BC, though the first formal codification, ordered by Justinian I, was not undertaken until the 6th century AD. In the Middle Ages and into the modern era, only local or provincial compilations were attempted. The first major national code was the Napoleonic Code, followed by the German, Swiss, and Japanese codes. In common-law countries such as England and the U.S., law codes have traditionally been less important than the record of judicial decisions, though major codifications were completed in the U.S. in the 20th century (e.g., the U.S. Code, the Uniform Commercial Code). See also civil law; German Civil Code.
dirigisme
Term derived from French word diriger (to direct) referring to the control of economic activity by the state. Intervention may take the form of legal requirements, financial incentives and penalties, nationalization, or comprehensive economic planning, though with an underlying commitment to private ownership. Used predominantly in connection with the practices of French governments of both Imperial and Republican varieties.
Dirigisme is an economy in which the government exerts strong directive influence. While the term has occasionally been applied to centrally planned economies, where the state effectively controls both production and allocation of resources (in particular, to certain socialist economies where the means of production are assets of the state), it originally had neither of these meanings when applied to France, and generally designates a mainly capitalist economy with strong economic participation by government.
Most modern economies can be characterized as dirigiste to some degree – for instance, state economic action may be exercised through subsidizing research and developing new technologies, or through government procurement, especially military (i.e. a form of mixed economy). China is the clearest example to date.
Dirigisme is from the French. In English it is also "dirigism", although both spellings are used by the OED.
The development of French dirigisme coincided with the development of meritocratic technocracy: the École Nationale d'Administration supplied the state with high-level administrators, while leadership positions in industry were staffed with Corps of Mines state engineers and other personnel trained at the École Polytechnique.
During the 1945-1975 period, France experienced unprecedented economic growth (4.5% on average) and a demographic boom, leading to the coinage of the term Trente Glorieuses ("Thirty Glorious [years]").
Dirigisme flourished under the center-right governments of Charles de Gaulle and Georges Pompidou. In those times, the policy was viewed as a middle way between the American policy of little state involvement and the Soviet policy of total state control. In 1981, Socialist president François Mitterrand was elected, promising even more state enterprise in the economy; his government soon nationalised industries and banks. However, in 1983 the initial bad economic results forced the government to renounce dirigisme and start the era of rigueur ("rigour"). Dirigisme has remained out of favour with subsequent governments, though some of its traits remain.
Dirigisme in other economic systems
Economic dirigisme has been described as an inherent aspect of fascist economies by one author, Ivan T. Berend in his book An Economic History of Twentieth-Century Europe. However, the Fascist systems created by Benito Mussolini (Italy), Francisco Franco (Spain) and Adolf Hitler (Germany) are a varied mix of elements from numerous philosophies, including: nationalism, authoritarianism, militarism, corporatism, collectivism, totalitarianism, and anti-communism.
Dirigisme has been brought up as a politico-economic scheme at odds with laissez-faire capitalism in the context of French overseas holdings. Countries such as Lebanon and Syria have been influenced by this motif, in varying degrees throughout the post-colonial period.
See also
Philosophic roots:
Mercantilism
Mixed economy
Colbertism
Related systems:
American School
Japanese post-war economic miracle
German post-war economic model
National Policy of Canada (1876-1920)
Economic interventionism
State Capitalism
American school
The American School, also known as "National System", represents three different yet related constructs in politics, policy and philosophy. It was the American policy for the 1860s to the 1940s, waxing and waning in actual degrees and details of implementation. Historian Michael Lind describes it as a coherent applied economic philosophy with logical and conceptual relationships with other economic ideas.
It is the macroeconomic philosophy that dominated United States national policies from the time of the American Civil War until the mid-twentieth century (closely related to mercantilism and prior to Keynesian economics, it can be seen as contrary to classical economics). It consisted of these three core policies:
- protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and some include through subsidies (especially 1932–70)
- government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation)
- a national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation.
It is a capitalist economic school based on the Hamiltonian economic program. The American School of capitalism was intended to allow the United States to become economically independent and nationally self-sufficient.
The American School's key elements were promoted by John Q. Adams and his National Republican Party, Henry Clay and the Whig Party, and Abraham Lincoln through the early Republican Party which embraced, implemented, and maintained this economic system.
During its American System period the United States grew into the largest economy in the world with the highest standard of living, surpassing the British Empire by the 1880s.
History
Roots
The American School of economics represented the legacy of Alexander Hamilton, who in his Report on Manufactures, argued that the U.S. could not become fully independent until it was self-sufficient in all necessary economic products. Hamilton rooted this economic system, in part, in the successive regimes of Colbert's France and Elizabeth I's England, while rejecting the harsher aspects of mercantilism, such as seeking colonies for markets. As later defined by Senator Henry Clay who became known as the Father of the American System because of his impassioned support thereof, the American System was to unify the nation north to south, east to west, and city to farmer. [15]
Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders. [16] This had more to do with the perceived need to overcome the economic and financial chaos the nation suffered under the Articles of Confederation, and nothing to do with any desire to have a statist economy. The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton, was to ensure that dearly won political independence was not lost by being economically and financially dependent on the powers and princes of Europe. The creation of a strong central government able to promote science, invention, industry and commerce, was seen as an essential means of promoting the general welfare and making the economy of the United States strong enough for them to determine their own destiny.
A number of programs by the federal government undertaken in the period prior to the Civil War gave shape and substance to the American School. These programs included the establishment of the Patent Office in 1802; the creation of the Coast and Geodetic Survey in 1807 and other measures to improve river and harbor navigation created by the 1824 Rivers and Harbors Act; the various Army expeditions to the west, beginning with Lewis and Clark's Corps of Discovery in 1804 and continuing into the 1870s (see for example, the careers of Major Stephen Harriman Long and Major General John C. Frémont), almost always under the direction of an officer from the Army Corps of Topographical Engineers, and which provided crucial information for the overland pioneers that followed (see, for example, the career of Brigadier General Randolph B. Marcy); the assignment of Army Engineer officers to assist or direct the surveying and construction of the early railroads and canals; the establishment of the First Bank of the United States and Second Bank of the United States as well as various protectionist measures (e.g., the tariff of 1828).
Leading proponents were economists Friedrich List (1789–1846) and Henry Carey (1793–1879). List was a leading 19th Century German and American economist who called it the "National System" and developed it further in his book The National System of Political Economy. Carey called this a Harmony of Interests in his book by the same name, a harmony between labor and management, and as well a harmony between agriculture, manufacturing, and merchants.
The name, "American System," was coined by Clay to distinguish it, as a school of thought, from the competing theory of economics at the time, the "British System" represented by Adam Smith in his work Wealth of Nations. [17]
The American School included three cardinal policy points:
Support industry: The advocacy of protectionism, and opposition to free trade - particularly for the protection of "infant industries" and those facing import competition from abroad. Examples: Tariff of 1816 and Morrill Tariff
Create physical infrastructure: Government finance of internal improvements to speed commerce and develop industry. This involved the regulation of privately held infrastructure, to ensure that it meets the nation's needs. Examples: Cumberland Road and Union Pacific Railroad
Create financial infrastructure: A government sponsored National Bank to issue currency and encourage commerce. This involved the use of sovereign powers for the regulation of credit to encourage the development of the economy, and to deter speculation. Examples: First Bank of the United States, Second Bank of the United States, and National Banking Act. [12]
Henry C. Carey, a leading American economist and adviser to Abraham Lincoln, in his book Harmony of Interests, displays two additional points of this American School economic philosophy that distinguishes it from the systems of Adam Smith or Karl Marx:
Government support for the development of science and public education through a public 'common' school system and investments in creative research through grants and subsidies.
Rejection of class struggle, in favor of the "Harmony of Interests" between: owners and workers, farmer and manufacturers, the wealthy class and the working class. [18]
In a passage from his book, The Harmony of Interests, Carey wrote concerning the difference between the American System and British System of economics:
Two systems are before the world;... One looks to increasing the necessity of commerce; the other to increasing the power to maintain it. One looks to underworking the Hindoo, and sinking the rest of the world to his level; the other to raising the standard of man throughout the world to our level. One looks to pauperism, ignorance, depopulation, and barbarism; the other to increasing wealth, comfort, intelligence, combination of action, and civilization. One looks towards universal war; the other towards universal peace. One is the English system; the other we may be proud to call the American system, for it is the only one ever devised the tendency of which was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the world. [18]
The Government issue of fiat paper money has also been associated with the American School from the 1830s onwards. The policy has roots going back to the days of the American Colonies, when such a type of currency called Colonial Scrip was the medium of exchange. As early as 1837, John C. Calhoun called for a debt-free currency issued and controlled by the Government. Such a policy would reduce the profits of the banks, and in response to this, the banking institutions threw their support behind the British school, espousing the gold standard throughout the 1800s. In the Civil War, a shortage of specie led to the issue of such a fiat currency, called United States Notes, or "Greenbacks". Towards the end of the Civil War in March 1865, Henry C. Carey, Lincoln's economic advisor, published a series of letters to the Speaker of the House entitled "The Way to Outdo England Without Fighting Her." Carey called for the continuance of the Greenback policy even after the War, while also raising the reserve requirements of the banks to 50%.[19] This would have allowed the US to develop its economy independent of foreign capital (primarily British gold). Carey wrote:
The most serious move in the retrograde direction is that one we find in the determination to prohibit the further issue of [United States Notes]...To what have we been indebted for [the increased economic activity]? To protection and the " greenbacks"! What is it that we are now laboring to destroy? Protection and the Greenback! Let us continue on in the direction in which we now are moving, and we shall see...not a re-establishment of the Union, but a complete and final disruption of it.
Carey's plans did not come to fruition as Lincoln was assassinated the next month and new President Andrew Johnson supported the gold standard, and by 1879 the U.S. was fully on the gold standard.
Advocacy
The "American System" was the name given by Henry Clay in a speech before Congress advocating an economic program[20] based on the economic philosophy derived from Alexander Hamilton's economic theories (see Report on Manufactures, Report on Public Credit I and II). Clay's policies called for a high tariff to support internal improvements such as road-building, and a national bank to encourage productive enterprise and to form a national currency as Hamilton had advocated as Secretary of the Treasury.
According to U-S-History.com
Clay first used the term “American System” in 1824, although he had been working for its specifics for many years previously. Portions of the American System were enacted by Congress. The Second Bank of the United States was rechartered in 1816 for 20 years. High tariffs were maintained from the days of Hamilton until 1832. However, the national system of internal improvements was never adequately funded; the failure to do so was due in part to sectional jealousies and constitutional scruples about such expenditures. [21]
Clay's plan became the leading tenet of the National Republican Party of John Quincy Adams and the Whig Party of himself and Daniel Webster.
The "American System" was supported by New England and the Mid-Atlantic, which had a large manufacturing base. It protected their new factories from foreign competition.
The South opposed the "American System" because its plantation owners were heavily reliant on production of cotton for export, and the American System produced lower demand for their cotton and created higher costs for manufactured goods. After 1828 the United States kept tariffs low until the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1861.
The term became synomonous with other phrases such as "National System" and "Protective System" as it was used over the course of time.
Implementation
An extra session of congress was called in the summer of 1841 for a restoration of the American system. When the tariff question came up again in 1842, the compromise of 1833 was overthrown, and the protective system placed in the ascendant.
Due to the dominance of the then Democratic Party of Van Buren, Polk, and Buchanan the American School was not embraced as the economic philosophy of the United States until the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860, who with a series of laws during the American Civil War was able to fully implement what Hamilton, Clay, List, and Carey theorized, wrote about, and advocated.
According to an article at US-History.com
As soon as Lincoln took office, the old Whig coalition finally controlled the entire government. It immediately tripled the average tariff, began to subsidize the construction of a transcontinental railroad in California even though a desperate war was being waged, and on February 25, 1862, the Legal Tender Act empowered the secretary of the treasury to issue paper money ('greenbacks') that were not immediately redeemable in gold or silver.[2][10][11]
The United States continued these policies throughout the later half of the 19th century. President William McKinley (1897–1901) stated at the time:
[They say] if you had not had the Protective Tariff things would be a little cheaper. Well, whether a thing is cheap or dear depends upon what we can earn by our daily labor. Free trade cheapens the product by cheapening the producer. Protection cheapens the product by elevating the producer. Under free trade the trader is the master and the producer the slave. Protection is but the law of nature, the law of self-preservation, of self-development, of securing the highest and best destiny of the race of man.
[It is said] that protection is immoral.... Why, if protection builds up and elevates 63,000,000 [the U.S. population] of people, the influence of those 63,000,000 of people elevates the rest of the world. We cannot take a step in the pathway of progress without benefitting mankind everywhere. Well, they say, ‘Buy where you can buy the cheapest'.... Of course, that applies to labor as to everything else. Let me give you a maxim that is a thousand times better than that, and it is the protection maxim: ‘Buy where you can pay the easiest.' And that spot of earth is where labor wins its highest rewards. [22]
The American System was important in the election politics for and against Grover Cleveland,[7] the first Democrat elected after the Civil War, who, by reducing tariffs protecting American industries in 1893, began rolling back federal involvement in economic affairs, a process that continued until Herbert Hoover's "too little, too late" attempts to deal with the worsening Great Depression.
Evolution
As the United States entered the 20th century, the "American School" was the policy of the United States under such names as: "American Policy", "Economic nationalism", "National System",[23] "Protective System", "Protection Policy",[24] and "Protectionism", which alludes only to the 'tariff policy' of this system of economics.[25][26][27][15][28]
This continued until 1913 when the administration of Woodrow Wilson initiated his The New Freedom policy that replaced the National Bank System with the Federal Reserve System, and lowered tariffs to revenue-only levels with the Underwood Tariff.
The election of Warren G. Harding and the Republican Party in 1920 represented a partial return to the American School through restoration of high tariffs, although a shift away from productive investments into speculation by the Federal Reserve System continued. This speculation led to the Stock Market Crash on Black Friday in October 1929. President Herbert Hoover responded to this crash and the subsequent bank failures and unemployment by signing the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which some economists considered to have deepened the Great Depression, while others disagree. [29]
The New Deal continued infrastructure improvements through the numerous public works projects of the Works Progress Administration (WPA) as well as the creation of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA); brought massive reform to the banking system of the Federal Reserve while investing in various ways in industry to stimulate production and control speculation; but abandoned protective tariffs while embracing moderate tariff protection (revenue based 20–30% the normal tariff under this) through reciprocity, choosing to subsidized industry as a replacement. At the close of World War II, the United States now dominant in manufacturing with little competition, the era of free trade had begun. [30]
In 1973 when the "Kennedy" Round concluded under President Richard Nixon, who cut U.S. tariffs to all time lows, the New Deal orientation towards reciprocity and subsidy ended, which moved the United States further in the free market direction, and away from its American School economic system.[31][32]
List's influence among developing nations has been considerable. Japan has followed his model. [33] It has also been argued that Deng Xiaoping's post-Mao policies were inspired by List. [34]
See also
History of economic thought
Historical school of economics
Anders Chydenius
Daniel Raymond
David Ricardo
Johann Heinrich von Thünen
John Stuart Mill
Thomas Malthus
William Petty
Notes
^ "Free Trade Fallacy" New America.
^ a b "Second Bank of the United States" U-S-History.com.
^ "Republican Party Platform of 1860" presidency.ucsb.edu
^ "Republican Party Platform of 1856" presidency.ucsb.edu.
^ Pacific Railway Act (1862) ourdocuments.gov.
^ "History of U.S. Banking" SCU.edu.
^ a b ANDREWS, E. Benjamin, Page 180 of Scribner's Magazine Volume 18 #1 (January–June 1896); "A History of the Last Quarter-Century".
^ Lind, Michael: "Lincoln and his successors in the Republican party of 1865–1932, by presiding over the industrialization of the United State, foreclosed the option that the United States would remain a rural society with an agrarian economy, as so many Jeffersonians had hoped." and "...Hamiltonian side... the Federalists; the National Republicans; the Whigs, the Republicans; the Progressives." — "Hamilton's Republic" Introduction pp. xiv–xv. Free Press, Simon & Schuster, USA: 1997. ISBN 0-684-83160-0.
^ Lind, Michael: "During the nineteenth century the dominant school of American political economy was the "American School" of developmental economic nationalism... The patron saint of the American School was Alexander Hamilton, whose Report on Manufactures (1791) had called for federal government activism in sponsoring infrastructure development and industrialization behind tariff walls that would keep out British manufactured goods... The American School, elaborated in the nineteenth century by economists like Henry Carey (who advised President Lincoln), inspired the "American System" of Henry Clay and the protectionist import-substitution policies of Lincoln and his successors in the Republican party well into the twentieth century." — "Hamilton's Republic" Part III "The American School of National Economy" pp. 229–30. Free Press, Simon & Schuster, USA: 1997. ISBN 0-684-83160-0.
^ a b Richardson, Heather Cox: "By 1865, the Republicans had developed a series of high tariffs and taxes that reflected the economic theories of Carey and Wayland and were designed to strengthen and benefit all parts of the American economy, raising the standard of living for everyone. As a Republican concluded... "Congress must shape its legislation as to incidentally aid all branches of industry, render the people prosperous, and enable them to pay taxes... for ordinary expenses of Government." — "The Greatest Nation of the Earth" Chapter 4, "Directing the Legislation of the Country to the Improvement of the Country: Tariff and Tax Legislation" pp. 136–37. President and Fellows of Harvard College, USA: 1997. ISBN 0-674-36213-6.
^ a b Boritt, Gabor S: "Lincoln thus had the pleasure of signing into law much of the program he had worked for through the better part of his political life. And this, as Leornard P. Curry, the historian of the legislation has aptly written, amounted to a "blueprint for modern America." and "The man Lincoln selected for the sensitive position of Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase, was an ex-Democrat, but of the moderate variety on economics, one whom Joseph Dorfman could even describe as 'a good Hamiltonian, and a western progressive of the Lincoln stamp in everything from a tariff to a national bank.'" — "Lincoln and the Economics of the American Dream" Chapter 14, "The Whig in the White House" pp. 196–97. Memphis State University Press, USA: 1994. ISBN 0-87870-043-9.
^ a b hmco.org
^ J.L.M. Curry, "Confederate States and Their Constitution", The Galaxy, New York, 1874 cornell.edu
^ Gill, William J. "By 1880 the United States of America had overtaken and surpassed England as industrial leader of the world." — "Trade Wars Against America: A History of United States Trade and Monetary Policy", Chapter 6, "America becomes Number 1" pp. 39–49. Praeger Publishers, USA: 1990. ISBN 0-275-93316-4.
^ a b George D. Prentice, "Life of Henry Clay", The North American Review, Boston Massachusetts, 1831
^ Bourgin, Frank (1989). The Great Challenge: The Myth of Laissez-Faire in the Early Republic. New York, NY: George Braziller Inc. ISBN 0-06-097296-3
^ cornell.edu
^ a b Henry C. Carey, Harmony of Interests
^ Making of America Books
^ The Senate 1789-1989 Classic Speeches 1830-1993 Volume three, Bicentennial edition, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington
^ Ideas and Movements: American System U-S-History.com
^ William McKinley speech, October 4, 1892 in Boston, MA William McKinley Papers (Library of Congress)
^ Gill, William J. Trade Wars Against America: A History of United States Trade and Monetary Policy (1990)
^ Lind, Michael: "Free Trade Fallacy" by Michael Lind, New America Foundation.] "Like Britain, the U.S. protected and subsidised its industries while it was a developing country, switching to free trade only in 1945, when most of its industrial competitors had been wiped out by the Second World War and the U.S. enjoyed a virtual monopoly in many manufacturing sectors." New America Foundation, - "Free Trade Fallacy" January 2003
^ Dr. Ravi Batra, "The Myth of Free Trade": "Unlike most of its trading partners, real wages in the United States have been tumbling since 1973, the first year of the country's switch to laissez-faire." (pp. 126–27) "Before 1973, the U.S. economy was more or less closed and self-reliant, so that efficiency gains in industry generated only a modest price fall, and real earnings soared for all Americans." (pp. 66–67) "Moreover, it turns out that 1973 was the first year in its entire history when the United States became an open economy with free trade." (p. 39)
^ Lind, Michael: "The revival of Europe and Japan by the 1970s eliminated these monopoly profits, and the support for free trade of industrial-state voters in the American midwest and northeast declined. Today, support for free-trade globalism in the U.S. comes chiefly from the commodity-exporting south and west and from U.S. multinationals which have moved their factories to low-wage countries like Mexico and China." New America Foundation, "Free Trade Fallacy" January 2003
^ List's influences Japan: see "(3) A contrary view: How the World Works, by James Fallows"
^ berkeley.edu on List influences of Deng
References
Modern books
Batra, Ravi, Dr., The Myth of Free Trade: The pooring of America (1993)
Boritt, Gabor S. Lincoln and the Economics of the American Dream (1994)
Bourgin, Frank The Great Challenge: The Myth of Laissez-Faire in the Early Republic (George Braziller Inc., 1989; Harper & Row, 1990)
Buchanan, Patrick J., The Great Betrayal (1998)
Curry, Leonard P. Blueprint for Modern America: Nonmilitary Legislation of the First Civil War Congress (1968)
Croly, Herbert, The Promise of American Life (2005 reprint)
Dobbs, Lou Exporting America: Why Corporate Greed is Shipping American Jobs Overseas (2004)
Joseph Dorfman. The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606–1865 (1947) vol 2
Joseph Dorfman. The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1865–1918 (1949) vol 3
Foner, Eric. Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party before the Civil War (1970)
Faux, Jeff The Global Class War (2006)
Gardner, Stephen H. Comparative Economic Systems (1988)
Gill, William J. Trade Wars Against America: A History of United States Trade and Monetary Policy (1990)
Goetzmann, William H. Army Exploration in the American West 1803-1863 (Yale University Press, 1959; University of Nebraska Press, 1979)
Carter Goodrich, Government Promotion of American Canals and Railroads, 1800–1890 (Greenwood Press, 1960)
Goodrich, Carter. "American Development Policy: the Case of Internal Improvements," Journal of Economic History, 16 (1956), 449–60. in JSTOR
Goodrich, Carter. "National Planning of Internal Improvements”; Political Science Quarterly, 63 (1948), 16–44. in JSTOR
Richard Hofstadter, "The Tariff Issue on the Eve of the Civil War," American Historical Review, 64 (October 1938): 50–55, shows Northern business had little interest in tariff in 1860, except for Pennsylvania which demanded high tariff on iron products
Jenks, Leland Hamilton. "Railroads as a Force in American Development," Journal of Economic History, 4 (1944), 1–20. in JSTOR
John Lauritz Larson. Internal Improvement: National Public Works and the Promise of Popular Government in the Early United States (2001)
Johnson, E.A.J., The Foundations of American Economic Freedom: Government and Enterprise in the Age of Washington (University of Minnesota Press, 1973)
Lively, Robert A. "The American System, a Review Article," Business History Review, XXIX (March, 1955), 81–96. Recommended starting point.
Lauchtenburg, William E. Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal 1932–40 (1963)
Lind, Michael Hamilton's Republic: Readings in the American Democratic Nationalist Tradition (1997)
Lind, Michael What Lincoln Believed: The Values and Convictions of America's Greatest President (2004)
Paludan, Philip S. The Presidency of Abraham Lincoln (1994)
Richardson, Heather Cox. The Greatest Nation of the Earth: Republican Economic Policies during the Civil War (1997)
Remini, Robert V. Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union. New York: W. W. Norton Co., 1991
Roosevelt, Theodore. The New Nationalism (1961 reprint)
Richardson, Heather Cox. The Greatest Nation of the Earth: Republican Economic Policies during the Civil War (1997)
Edward Stanwood, American Tariff Controversies in the Nineteenth Century (1903; reprint 1974), 2 vols. favors protectionism
Older books
W. Cunningham, The Rise and Decline of the Free Trade Movement (London, 1904)
G. B. Curtiss, Protection and Prosperity; and W. H. Dawson, Protection in Germany (London, 1904)
Alexander Hamilton, Report on the Subject of Manufactures, communicated to the House of Representatives, 5 December 1791
F. Bowen, American Political Economy (New York, 1875)
J. B. Byles, Sophisms of Free Trade (London, 1903); G. Byng, Protection (London, 1901)
H. C. Carey, Principles of Social Science (3 vols. Philadelphia, 1858–59), Harmony of Interests Agricultural, Manufacturing and Commercial (Philadelphia, 1873)
H. M. Hoyt, Protection v. Free Trade, the scientific validity and economic operation of defensive duties in the United States (New York, 1886)
Friedrich List, Outlines of American Political Economy (1980 reprint)
Friedrich List, National System of Political Economy (1994 reprint)
A. M. Low, Protection in the United States (London, 1904); H. 0. Meredith, Protection in France (London, 1904)
S. N. Patten, Economic Basis of Protection (Philadelphia, 1890)
Ugo Rabbeno, American Commercial Policy (London, 1895)
Ellis H. Roberts, Government Revenue, especially the American System, an argument for industrial freedom against the fallacies of free trade (Boston, 1884)
R. E. Thompson, Protection to Home Industries (New York, 1886)
E. E. Williams, The Case for Protection (London, 1899)
J. P. Young, Protection and Progress: a Study of the Economic Bases of the American Protective System (Chicago, 1900)
Clay, Henry. The Papers of Henry Clay, 1797–1852. Edited by James Hopkins
External links
Excerpts of the Report on Manufactures by Alexander Hamilton
Report on Public Credit I by Alexander Hamilton
Argument in Favor of the National Bank by Alexander Hamilton
The Harmony of Interests by Henry C. Carey
The National System of Political Economy by Friedrich List
Federalist #7, The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton as Publius
The American System: Speeches on the Tariff Question and Internal Improvements by Congressman Andrew Stewart
John Bull the Compassionate
Party Platforms of Republican and Democratic Party's, including links to Third Party's in history
"Punchinello", Vol. 1, Issue 8 pg 125 Article from 1870 against the American System
"Henry Clay: National Socialist" Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Ludwig von Mises Institute
Vanguard of Expansion: Army Engineers in the Trans-Mississippi West, 1819-1879, by Frank N. Schubert, History Division, Office of the Chief of Engineers, August 1980.
mashup
(web application hybrid)
(web application hybrid)
In Web development, a mashup is a Web page or application that uses and combines data, presentation or functionality from two or more sources to create new services. The term implies easy, fast integration, frequently using open APIs and data sources to produce enriched results that were not necessarily the original reason for producing the raw source data.
The main characteristics of the mashup are combination, visualization, and aggregation. It is important to make existing data more useful, moreover for personal and professional use. To be able to permanently access the data of other services, mashups are generally client applications or hosted online.
In the past years, more and more Web applications have published APIs that enable software developers to easily integrate data and functions instead of building them by themselves. Mashups can be considered to have an active role in the evolution of social software and Web 2.0. Mashup composition tools are usually simple enough to be used by end-users. They generally do not require programming skills and rather support visual wiring of GUI widgets, services and components together. Therefore, these tools contribute to a new vision of the Web, where users are able to contribute.
The term mashup is also used to describe a remix of digital data.
Thesaurus.com
dustup
Main Entry: argument
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: verbal fight
Synonyms: altercation, beef, bickering, blowup, bone, bone of contention, bone to pick, brannigan, brawl, brush, clash, controversy, crusher, debate, difference of opinion, disagreement, dispute, donnybrook, dustup , exchange, face-off, falling, feud, finisher, flap, fuss, gin, go*, hassle, knock down and drag out, knockdown, out, quarrel, rhubarb, romp, row, ruckus, ruction, rumpus, run-in, scene, scrap, set-to, shindy, spat, squabble, static*, stew, talking heads, tiff, words, wrangle
Main Entry: polemic
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: argument
Synonyms: altercation, beef, bicker, bickering, blowup, bone, bone of contention, bone to pick, brannigan, brawl, brush, clash, contention, controversy, crusher, debate, difference of opinion, difficulty, disagreement, dispute, donnybrook, dustup , exchange, face-off, falling, feud, fight, finisher, flap, fuss*, gin, go*, hassle, knock down and drag out, knockdown, out*, quarrel, rhubarb, romp, row, ruckus, ruction, rumpus, run-in, scene, scrap, set-to, shindy, spat, squabble, static*, stew, talking heads, tiff, word, words, wrangle
Concept: Difference
Category: 1. ABSOLUTE RELATION; RELATIONS
Synonyms: -nouns
difference; variance, variation, variety; diversity, dissimilarity; disagreement; disparity (inequality); distinction, contradistinction; alteration., modification, permutation, moods and tenses., nice distinction, fine distinction, delicate distinction, subtle distinction; shade of difference, nuance; discrimination. [more]; differentia., different thing, something else, apple off another tree, another pair of shoes; horse of a different color; this that or the other.
Misery
By Phineas Parkhurst Quimby
Man's misery always arises from some error that is admitted as true. We confound our fears with the idea feared and place the evil in the thing seen or believed. Here is a great error, for we never see that which we are afraid of. Suppose, for instance, we see a wild animal lying down in the forest. Not knowing what it is, we are afraid, lest it be a bear or a catamount. This doubt is what makes our fear or torment. If we knew that the animal was securely chained, that knowledge would banish our fears.
Man is constantly tormented through fear of death. We may say we do not believe in the destruction of ourselves, but everything shows us that our lives are destroyed by this king of terrors. Now if it were possible to convince man that the life that can be destroyed is life only because his ignorance and fears make it so, he would then look about to see how he can save himself from the death he so much fears. At night he lies down and goes to sleep. In the morning he rises from the dead or the idea that he lived in eight hours before. Night and day are emblems of man's existence. When man is in doubt, he is in the darkness that he has been warned of.
All men must pass through this purgatory before they can awake to the light of wisdom. In passing through the night of error, shadows appear and the mind is disturbed and anxious for the light of day. In the daytime, we call ourselves awake, but we are just as much asleep to the light of wisdom as in the night. It, however, makes a difference in the ideas we fear. In the day or light of health, the ideas of disease are not near us; but in the night of trouble, we fear the darkness lest we should never again behold the light. These fears arise from our education and they are based on the fear of death, but let death be destroyed by destroying the belief in the evils that lead to it, then it is robbed of its terror. Men are in the dark about death and in this darkness Jesus appeared and brought the light of life.
It is the common opinion that Jesus came to convince man of another world, but this cannot be so for he never proved it. A scientific analysis of the scriptures will reveal the mission of Jesus. He came into the world as a saviour to save man from error and not from truth. Their religion had taught them to believe in another world. He saw the misery it wrought on the people and he made war against it. He saw that, like a serpent, it wound itself around the life of man, running its poisonous fangs through every act. Jesus was mortal like any other man, but Christ was wisdom manifested through Jesus, which could destroy the serpent by binding him with the cords of wisdom in man's own belief so that he could not deceive the people again. This was Jesus' mission: to save man from the devil and teach him to destroy all evil. Christ often comes in the form of some good Samaritan and saves man from the power of the devil. He is the creature of man's belief and he is found in priestcraft and its followers. The church has always fought Christ or science. Their offering of prayers can never take away pain or sin.
1864
Money
What is it?
Of all the incredible stupidities in the world, few can compare to that of man putting his trust in "money". Most people don't even know what "money" is!
I swear by the Father who said "you can't serve God and Mammon" that if you really knew what money was, you'd want no part of it.
I want no part of it.
The "smart Alec" at this point will surely be saying "Fine! If you don't want your money, please, give it to me!" Ha-ha, that's very funny, and very clever. But "Alec" doesn't know what he's talking about.
What is money? The simplest answer is: "an illusion".
When you've finished this document, you'll realize that:
Money, at least in its current form, has no value.
Our current "financial system" is a carbon-copy of previous financial systems which are proven failures. These systems generate large amounts of "money" for the short-run, but in the long-run they ruin a nation.
So where are we in this "long-run"? In the United States, in the early 21st century, we are in the final phase, i.e., we are essentially ruined. But the politicians won't stop until the ruin is total. Unless, that is, you stop them.
Three types of money
It is generally considered, by writers on the subject, that there are three basic types of money in the world:
Type 1: "Real" wealth, usually measured in gold and silver,
Type 2: Pieces of paper which claim to represent real wealth (i.e., bullion-backed paper money such as gold & silver certificates, etc.), and
Type 3: Pieces of paper which represent nothing at all, but which an oppressive government will force you to accept as "money" (called "fiat" money).
As a general rule, type 1 economies are healthy and prosperous. I didn't say "trouble-free"! No system of any sort in this world is "trouble-free".
As a general rule, type 2 economies are associated with fraud, since the obvious first purpose of pretending that pieces of paper are "money" is to have the possibility of creating the illusion that there's more "money" than there really is.
Type 3 economies are associated with theft, because the disappearance of all the bullion invariably means that it's been stolen or misappropriated.
Although the Constitution explicitly forbids it, the United States went recklessly from type 1 to type 2 money long ago, and we are now irreversibly entrenched in type 3; namely, pieces of paper which represent nothing at all. What does this mean? It means that our complete net worths can be erased any time. It means that there may be a day of reckoning coming, when you will wake up to find that your life savings have been devalued, and that you've become worthless.
If you're an American, you probably cannot imagine what it would be like to wake up to such a nightmare. To read a true life story of one woman -- a woman I knew personally -- who woke up to just such a nightmare during the Russian Revolution, click here.
If this day of reckoning comes, the only defense will be the widespread adoption -- in advance; not later -- of a way of life based upon the Golden Rule, as described elsewhere on this web site. If people do not prepare for a currency collapse, and if it really does come about, then there will be no other possibility of an effective defense against the consuming world financial tyranny which will follow.
"Legal tender"
Type 1 ... Gold and Silver Coins
The United States Constitution demands (to this day) that the only "legal tender" in this country be gold and silver coin (read: Article I, Section 10, Clause 1).
Few Americans are aware of this fact. To most, the thought of a currency consisting of only coins seems like a very strange idea, or perhaps a joke. But it's no joke. The Founding Fathers put this into the Constitution for a very good reason, which we shall examine shortly.
What is "legal tender"? This means the form of money which you are entitled to demand, under the law, as payment of debts. Thus, gold coins are legal tender--if you can find any!
But things like television sets, automobile tires and chickens, are not. If someone wants to pay you in chickens, and you agree, then all's well. But you can't be forced to accept chickens as payment of a debt. You can be forced to accept gold coins. If you can find any!
Bankers hate gold and silver coins, except the ones in their pockets. Why? Because gold and silver coins give you value, and they want all the value for themselves. Please, don't hate bankers! Deep down inside, we're just like them! Only they're better at it than we are.
"Legal tender"
Type 2 ... Paper Gold and Silver "Certificates"
What about systems employing "type 2" money, i.e., pieces of paper which claim to represent gold and silver? How do they work?
In a "type 2" system, some or all of the gold and silver is removed from circulation, and left in "reserve" in a safe location. In its place, paper appears.
Thus, if the United States has $1 trillion in gold and silver in Fort Knox (which it doesn't, believe it or not), then the government can leave all the gold and silver in the Fort, and issue instead $1 trillion in "gold certificates" and "silver certificates": pieces of paper (i.e., "legal tender" or "money") which represent--or claim to represent--the real gold and silver locked up in the Fort.
Those of you who are old enough to remember the Great Depression will, without a doubt, remember the gold certificates which the government forced you to accept in exchange for your real gold. In earlier times, those certificates (which have long since been removed from circulation) could be brought to the bank any time, and gold coins received in exchange for them.
Those of you who were of mature age in the 1970's will undoubtedly remember that back then, a dollar bill was called a "silver certificate". You could bring it to the bank and exchange it for silver coins, any time. Now both the silver certificates and the silver coins are gone. (What happened to all that gold and silver? Click here to find out what the response was, when this question was asked in Federal Court.)
The trouble with systems employing type 2 "money" is that people are greedy. Nations which use type 2 money almost always printed more paper bills than there were gold and silver coins behind them. Thus, if Fort Knox had $1 trillion in gold (which, again, it doesn't!), the government would sooner or later succumb to the temptation to print $2 trillion, or $3 trillion, or even more, in paper.
Everything's fine, as long as everyone doesn't run to the bank simultaneously for "their gold". But sooner or later, something will scare people, and they will indeed "run on the bank". Then the system collapses, because there's simply not enough gold and silver to pay on all those certificates.
That's exactly what happened in 1933. In the midst of the Great Depression, there was a nationwide "run on the bank". Why? Because there was a rumor abroad that all the gold was going to "disappear", which, in fact, is exactly what happened. Franklin D. Roosevelt, a loyal bank servant, dutifully removed all the gold from circulation at that point. (This was the culmination of a plan which was many, many years in the making; it didn't just "happen").
In that year, 1933, all citizens of the United States were ordered -- under threat of severe fine and imprisonment -- to hand in their gold, in exchange for a piece of paper called a "gold certificate". It looked just like a dollar bill looks today, except it said "Gold Certificate" at the top, and it said "IN GOLD COIN PAYABLE TO THE BEARER ON DEMAND" at the bottom.
What? What sort of nonsense is this? We just saw that people were ordered, at pain of $10,000 fine (a king's ransom during the Depression) and 10 years in prison, to hand over their gold! So what does it mean to tell the same people who had just been fleeced, that any old day of the week they could stroll over to the bank with their paper "money" and get their gold back? If a bank teller had accidentally given you gold, and you got caught by federal investigators on the way out the door, you and the teller would go straight to jail!
This was neither the beginning of fraud, nor the beginning of treason in our banking system, but it was the most overt, unabashed example of it in our history up to that time.
Later on, all the gold coins, and the gold "certificates", were replaced by other pieces of paper called "silver certificates". What a joke! If there wasn't enough gold to back the currency, how in the world could there have been enough silver? We were simply moving along the pathway of fraud, and we have only gotten worse as time has passed.
"Legal tender"
Type 3... Fiat Paper "Money"
What about "type 3" money, where the government declares that "money" is pieces of paper which have no value whatsoever? That, my friends, is where you are right now. Your money is intrinsically worthless.
In the early 1970's, the last scrap of silver was removed from the lawful treasuries of the United States, into the vaults of private bankers. Our "silver certificates" were replaced by "Federal Reserve Notes", which cannot be redeemed at all. They're nothing but plain paper, and there's nothing behind them.
If you're searching for a reason why you're getting poorer and poorer, and why your dollars buy less and less, look no farther. You've just read the reason.
As long as people trust in these Federal Reserve Notes, they will have "purchasing power". The minute people lose confidence in them; however, they become transformed back into plain paper, with no "purchasing power" at all; worthy of nothing but the trash can. Not a good situation!
"People think that the basis of money is gold. They are wrong. The basis of money is debt"
The above statement, generally attributed to the Rothschilds, expresses a simple but very important truth. It is the core reality of the current world banking system, and it invariably leads to fraud. If you learn nothing else about money, learn the meaning of the above quote! The following example will illustrate the concept.
Imagine, if you will, that you borrow $1000 from a friend. You agree to pay him back after exactly one year, and you agree further to pay him 10% interest. So he gives you $1000 now, and a year later you pay him back $1,100. Simple enough?
Now, he'll undoubtedly ask you to sign for the loan. The piece of paper you sign is called a promissory note. It is your promise to pay back the loan, plus the interest.
Now think about this: That promissory note has value. Do you doubt it? If your friend comes upon hard times, he can sell that note, can he not? As long as you are "good for the money", that note is worth its "face value" of $1000, plus the $100 additional you agreed to pay as interest. So it's potentially worth $1,100.
Whoever holds that note is in a position to collect that $1,100! It most assuredly has value.
Your friend would have a hard time selling it for the full $1,100, but if he plays his cards right, he can probably get more than $1000, because it's worth more than $1000. Suppose, for example, a buyer pays $1,050 for the note. At the end of the year, God willing, he'll collect the full $1,100. That's $50 more than he paid for it. So, without doing any work, he makes a fast $50.
The only risk is that you might fail to pay back the loan. So, in any sale of a promissory note, there's risk. The better you are as a credit risk, however, the more your promissory note will be worth.
In case you're not aware of it, know that the world is full of promissory notes, and that most of them do, in fact, get sold. Loan agreements are promissory notes, mortgage agreements are promissory notes, and even charge card slips are promissory notes. It is said, by those who pay attention to such things, that if you pay off a home mortgage, and demand to have your promissory note returned to you, the bank will do so. What you will see is that it is literally covered with endorsement stamps, each one attesting to the fact that it was bought and sold, repeatedly throughout its "life".
Speculators from many nations participate in this process. These promissory notes are most assuredly considered highly desirable, and by the time they are paid off in full, they have traveled literally "around the world"!
So I hope you can see that a promissory note has value. But is it "money"?
How to package a promissory note to make it look like "money"
If you're an American, you've undoubtedly seen a United States Savings Bond at some point in your life. U.S. Savings Bonds are among the commonest forms of gifts for "life cycle" events, namely weddings, Baptisms, Bar Mitzvahs, etc. (The way things are going in this godless country, they'll probably soon be given as "gifts" to celebrate your divorce).
What is a U.S. Savings Bond? It is a promissory note packaged to look a lot like "money". When you buy it, however, you pay less than the face value. That's why people like to give them as gifts. A $100 bond makes a nice-looking gift, but it only costs the giver $80 or so. (The price depends upon the prevailing interest rate).
That money, the $80, is a loan from you to the government. They will take your money and invest it. The government, being the most leveraged investor of all, will make a lot of money on your loan, and they will therefore be able to pay you back with interest, and still be "ahead of the game". When the bond "matures", you will be able to "cash it in" for the full $100. The government, of course, will have made more than $100 on your money, but what's that to you? Don't "look the gift horse in the mouth". They made money, you made money. Everyone ought to be happy.
Now, think of what a U.S. Savings Bond looks like. It looks a lot like money, does it not? Suppose you owed a man $100, and your business had just failed, and you had no cash to pay the man. If you had a mature $100 U.S. Savings Bond, the man just might accept the bond as payment for the loan. In fact, if he needed money fast, then even if the bond had not matured fully, he still might accept it, especially if he thought that he couldn't collect any money from you otherwise.
U.S. Savings Bonds look like money, and they act like money. But they're not "legal tender". Why? Because you can't force anyone to accept them as payment of debts. The acceptance in the example above was voluntary.
Hmmm... Any government, wanting to expand its currency, and knowing these facts about promissory notes, might well ask the following question: "How can we FORCE the citizens of our nation to accept our promissory notes as if they were real money"? Think about this: the government is continually borrowing money, re-paying old loans, and borrowing new money all over again. Each loan transaction generates a promissory note. If the government could somehow, by some subterfuge, find a way to package these promissory notes to make them look like money, and circulate them as such, then the government could be awash in new money, created without the need to mine gold, operate businesses, or raise taxes. What a deal! More money, no work!
So how do you do it? In the nineteenth century, the American government asked just that question. You'll be astonished, and dismayed, at the answer they came up with.
The Civil War: paper money is introduced to America
To get the people to accept promissory notes as "money", you first have to get them to accept paper. Remember, in the United States, the only lawful currency was (and is) "gold and silver coin".
The Civil War gave the government the excuse it needed to begin experimenting with paper.
Although the Civil War ended slavery, which is a good thing, it must be noted that no other western nation has slavery either. England freed her slaves before us, and they did it without a war. We were the only nation which needed a Civil War to end slavery. Was this war really necessary? In other portions of this web site we have made brief mention of some of the evils behind the facade of "good" which cloaks the true history of the Civil War.
Abraham Lincoln needed money to finance his war. The bankers offered him large quantities of money at interest rates so exorbitant that he said:
"I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe".
Wow! Now there's a new perspective on the Civil War!
Lincoln told the bankers to go to hell. He printed his own money! These bills, which had nothing behind them except Lincoln's solemn promise to redeem them in gold after the war (which he did do, in fact), were called "Greenbacks". They circulated, and the people accepted them. Amazing! Don't forget that the only "money" circulating in America at that time was gold and silver coin. The acceptance, by the people, of pieces of government paper masquerading as money, was an enormous vote of confidence in the integrity of the government. Of course, this sort of "trust" in the government is easier to elicit when there's a war going on.
So what's wrong with printing Greenbacks? Two things:
The Constitution forbids any legal tender except gold and silver coin. If any provision of the Constitution is flagrantly violated--for any reason--then an evil precedent is established.
Paper money is inflationary. The economists all agree that the dumping of unbacked paper money into the marketplaces causes all prices to rise. Click here for a plain-English explanation of this phenomenon.
The printing of Greenbacks caused the bankers to burn with rage! Their plan had been to gouge America with high-interest loans. Now their money was no longer needed!
It is alleged by many that John Wilkes Booth was a bank agent, and I wouldn't doubt it. We'll probably never know for sure.
During the Civil War, the bankers ranted and railed against Lincoln in the newspapers, emphasizing that the Greenbacks were unconstitutional and inflationary. What hypocrisy! Wait until you see what the bankers did when they finally got the power to print money (see below).
In any event, after the war, some, or perhaps all, of the Greenbacks, were "retired". This means that people brought them back to the banks, and -- true to Lincoln's word -- the banks exchanged them for real gold and silver coins.
But apparently the Greenbacks were not all destroyed. In 1878, a "law" was passed which brought them back out! In other words, the government, seeing an opportunity to "expand the currency", seized the moment and did so.
Think about what this means: These Greenbacks, pieces of intrinsically worthless paper, were sitting there in dark vaults, doing nothing. Then, by a highly questionable act of Congress, the Greenbacks were taken out of "retirement" and re-issued as "money"! Thus, without raising taxes, or doing any work at all, or mining any gold at all, the government gave itself millions of dollars’ worth of new "money". What a deal!
If you were a government employee, you could have suddenly found yourself being paid in Greenbacks. You did real work, but the government paid you in paper which it did not work for! There are many who would say that that wasn't fair, and that it wasn't right, other than according to the ancient maxim "might makes right".
The Greenback subterfuge was generally accepted by the people of America without protest. But not entirely without protest. Some people were furious. One of these was a man named Mr. Julliard, who sold a Mr. Greenman 100 bales of cotton for $5,122.90. When it came time to pay, Greenman coughed up $22.50 in gold, 40 cents in silver, and $5,100.00 in U.S. notes (i.e., Greenbacks)! Julliard refused to accept the paper. He sold real cotton, not a paper imitation, and he wanted real money in return, not paper play-money. Greenman refused to pay.
The case went to the Supreme Court (Julliard v. Greenman , 110 U.S. 421) (1884). The decision of that court was a major landmark in the history of destruction of your constitutional rights. Some dare call it "treason". I'm inclined to agree. You'll have to decide for yourself.
The issue in Julliard v. Greenman was whether the un-backed paper notes of the U.S. federal government, which were masquerading as "money", could be considered a "legal tender". Remember that the phrase "legal tender" refers to that which you can be FORCED to accept as payment of debts. Are unbacked government "notes", i.e., pieces of paper with nothing behind them except a promise to someday redeem them in gold or silver (a promise which can never again be kept), a form of "legal tender"? The Supreme Court was asked to decide.
As the text of the Court's decision makes clear, the law was hardly considered in this case. The real consideration at hand was that the United States, in 1884, was becoming a "world power", and needed money for imperialist expansion. This "world power" business was intoxicating stuff, causing those who believed in it to lose sight of what America was, and what the word "freedom" really meant.
As you have probably already guessed, the court decided in favor of Julliard. That is, the court declared that the government's paper was, indeed, "money", and that no American had the right to refuse to accept it as such!
Thus, in a land whose Constitution forbids---to this day--any form of "legal tender" other than gold and silver coins, worthless paper money suddenly was thrust upon us. On that day, the floodgates of tyranny were very quietly opened. It's over a hundred years later now, and those floodgates -- now hanging wide open like a gaping surgical wound -- can no longer be closed "quietly".
How did the court justify this wanton attack upon the Constitution? They justified it on the grounds of "sovereignty".
Who's in charge here?
"Sovereign" means "King". Up until the Julliard vs. Greenman case, the Supreme Court openly declared that in the United States, "the people" are collectively "sovereign". We have no King!
Don't forget that the single, all-encompassing philosophical basis of the American Revolution was the REJECTION of the belief that men had to live under a "King". Was it not?
Isn't that what you were taught in school? Isn't that what they still teach in school?
Well, guess what: that's not true anymore, and it hasn't been true since 1884, the year the Supreme Court ever-so-quietly announced that the federal government is your "sovereign". That means, in effect, your "King". So in the "land of the free, home of the brave", a King was made in 1884. You didn't know that, did you?
Real Currencies
Ken Adachi and Ron Paul
Like many in the Truth/Patriot Movement, Ken Adachi seems to have fallen for the Austrian Economics Mind Control operation.
Ken Adachi has defended Ron Paul against our analysis that he is a Money Power change agent. Since he evidently feels it is useful to discuss this in the public domain, I will answer him publicly too.
Before going into this, I want to express my admiration for Ken Adachi’s work in general. His site was one of the first I came across when I started digging almost ten years ago. It is a treasure trove and greatly enlightened me. So I seek no quarrel with Adachi, I just vehemently disagree with him about the Ron Paul phenomenon.
First, Adachi is upset that I (I’ll speak for myself in this article, although Makow and Memehunter are also involved) only attack Paul.
I don’t. When I first suggested Ron Paul was a change agent, I compared him to Obama. But it is true I waste very few words on all the jackals, whether it’s Obama, Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, the Clintons, the Bushes, or all the other childraping, cokesnorting and sodomizing children of Satan who rule in his name.
I don’t need to. People visiting Real Currencies don’t need that. Plenty people, including Makow and Adachi himself, have done an excellent job in exposing these fools and showing they all work for the same cabal.
The reason I attack Paul is not because I like defaming people. It is because hardly anybody else is doing it. I’ve seen to my chagrin that the Truth Movement has been completely taken over by the Gold diggers. So much so, that even a man like Adachi has fallen for their brainwashing.
Normally speaking I would have better things to do. Like creating Interest Free currencies that people can actually use to lessen their servitude to the Money Power.
Another point Adachi makes is a lot stranger. According to him we needn’t worry about the 1 Trillion austerity drive that Paul will use to destroy the American economy in the name of the Money Power. Because America is a democracy Paul will not be able to implement these policies anyway:
“You talk about a Ron Paul presidency as if it were a dictatorship. President Ron Paul could only vote in favor of or veto a bill sent to him by congress. He can’t propose bills or make law by presidential fiat. A president can have an influence on policy, and perhaps coerce legislators of his own party, but he can’t declare law (which your statement implies)…..
…..At best, a Ron Paul presidency would act as a brake to slow down the acceleration of the NWO takeover freight train that has sped up so precipitously in the past two decades.“
Does this mean Adachi is also worried about Paul’s insane proposals? If so, why support him?
We don’t need the Inflation vs. Deflation dialectic the Money Power is setting us up with. We can reflate the economy interest free overnight.
But the main point is this: Adachi: “He wants to audit the Federal Reserve and establish precious metal as backing behind the US dollar. Wow, what an Illuminated/Masonic/Satanic slime ball.”
He reinforces the point thus: “For us thinking Americans, it’s what Ron Paul has actually done and said and the political positions he has embraced for the past 3o years that count, and not what you or other Ron Paul character assassins wish to paint him as, in the 11th Hour of the besieged American Republic, while there is still a glimmer of hope that he may get the Republican party nod or run as an independent in November. “
Well, what can I say? As a thinking Dutchman it is exactly what Paul is saying that is what gets me so worried. He has been calling for Gold as Currency for thirty years. He has said Gold is actually World Currency. He has called for an insane austerity drive, which cannot create anything but a deflationary depression overnight.
Ron Paul is directly connected to PNAC. He wrote ‘the Case for Gold’ with PNAC board member Lehrman. Perhaps that explains why Paul says the Arabs did 9/11?
And yes. Wow, what an Illuminated/Masonic/Satanic slime ball Ron Paul the Freemason really is for calling for a Gold Standard. Indeed. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
What does it matter whether we pay all those billions of interest to the Money Power in Gold or in Paper Ken? Do you think Rothschild cares?
He doesn’t. He cares about continued control of the money supply. This is the issue:
Ron Paul is trying to make us believe the Government is the problem. It is not. The Money Power sits on top of the Pyramid, not the State. It rules by controlling the money supply, so they can rape us with interest. It uses that interest to buy all the politicians.
Rehash here, it’s amazing Adachi forgot about all this.
They own the printing press and they own the Gold. They don’t care which we use, as long as it is one these two.
What they are really worried about is Interest Free currency.
Concluding
A Freemason. A completely unnecessary and highly destructive Austerity drive. A Gold Standard. Austrian Economics financed from A to Z by (crypto) Jewish Businessmen. The sheer satanic ‘I’ll do as I please’ that is Libertarianism. Ignoring the Money Power while blaming the State for everything. Which perfectly explains why Paul himself is sponsored by a Globalist.
Ken, I can understand it’s painful to understand you’ve been had.
But like they say: to err is human, to persist is folly.
Real Currencies
Supporting People and the Commonwealth and resisting the Money Power by defeating Usury
Gary North’s Bluff: the Lie he’s been sitting on for 50 years
Gary North wants to make us believe salvation will come when we can pay our tribute to the Money Power in Gold instead of Fed Notes. Populists have forever maintained the Government should print its own money, so we can actually stop paying tribute. This is why the Volker Fund paid North and his buddies $500 dollars per month in the Sixties.
Having asked Gary North three times why we have to pay $150,000 interest over a $100,000 mortgage in 30 years, he comes up with a screed he wrote fifty years ago.
‘Gertrude Coogan’s Bluff’ is his attempt to discredit Gertrude Coogan, a forgotten hero of the Populist Movement. A typically boastfully arrogant Gary North hit piece. Even as a young lad North was an annoying bigmouth without much content.
According to Gary North, the problem is not that the money supply is monopolized by the Money Power, the problem is that the money is not fully backed by Gold. Here it is, on page 20:
“Counterfeiting is theft for one reason, and only one reason. Paper bills are issued that look exactly like bills that are backed by 100% of their face value in money metals, but these bills do not have such a backing. In other words, if all the individuals went to claim their money metals at the same time, some people could not collect. “
This is the classic Austrian case against Fractional Reserve Banking.
Let’s bury it forever.
Consider this: what do you think the Money Power cares whether it gets $150,000 interest over a $100k mortgage in Gold or in Paper?
My hunch is they would like to see us sweat for Gold even more than for Paper. They have been worshiping the Golden Calf ever since the days of Moses, after all. Yes, this is a very old story. So it is perhaps not so surprising that our favorite Libertarian has such an outright Old Testament world view.
Gary North is trying to make us believe that the choice at hand is to pay our Masters in Gold or in Paper.
But the real question is:
Would you prefer to pay $150,000 interest on your mortgage in Gold, or pay no interest at all?
For an Interest Slave, brainwashed to believe capital will always need to see a return on its investment, this can actually be a hard question to answer correctly. It can be hard to even accept this is the choice.
But it is.
Interest Slavery
The 80% poorest people pay more interest than they receive to the richest 10%. And within the richest 10% bracket, the ‘poorest’ 8% pay more interest than they receive to the richest 1%. And even within the richest 1% bracket, the ‘poorest’ 0. 8% pay more interest than they receive to the richest 0.1%.
So all the interest eventually ends up with the Plutocracy at the very top of the food chain.
This wealth transfer is going on both on a national and international level.
At this point the poorest 80% pay an estimated 5 to 10 Trillion dollars per year to the richest 10%. And all this money eventually ends up with the ultra-rich.
This is Usurious Usurpation.
Conclusion
One of the key reasons so much money was invested in making Austrian Economics important was to obscure this truth from us.
That’s why the Daily Bell’s Anthony Wile, who’s made a career in Banking, Gold Mining and Hedge Funds, goes around telling people Ellen Brown and the Greenbackers are a US Intel operation, without offering even a shadow of proof.
That’s why John Bircher Ed Griffin was commissioned to write his ‘Creature of Jekyll Island: to obscure that the REAL opposition, Mullins and Pound, were calling for interest free paper money in Mullins’s masterpiece ‘Secrets of the Federal Reserve’.
That’s why Gary North has to resort to the ‘nutty Greenbacker’ stuff. That’s why we have all the huffing and puffing.
To hide that he has built a well-funded career on a transparent lie.
To hide that he is a shameless lackey of power.
Recommended Reading:
The Inflation vs. Deflation Dialectic
On Interest
Budget of an Interest Slave
Related
What Gary North is not telling you about Interest
In Defense of Ellen Brown
Responding to Gary North
An Expose'
THE UNITED STATES IS STILL A BRITISH COLONY
EXTORTING TAXES FOR THE CROWN!
A DOCUMENTARY REVIEW
OF CHARTERS AND TREATIES
August 17, 1996
An introduction by the "Informer"
This is the latest from a man who visits me quite often. He and another man researched my theory that we have never been free from the British Crown. This disc shows the results. I have stated that we will never win in their courts. This shows conclusively why. We have the hard copy of the treaties that are the footnotes. This predates Schroder's material, my research of the 1861 stats by Lincoln that put us under the War Powers confiscation acts, and John Nelson's material.
All our material supports that the real Principal, the King of England, still rules this country through the bankers and why we own no property in allodium. This is why it is so important to start OUR courts of God's natural (common) Law and break away from all the crap they have handed us. This is one reason Virginia had a law to hang all lawyers but was somehow, by someone, (the King) set aside to let them operate again. Some good people put in the original 13th amendment so that without the lawyers the King could not continue his strangle hold on us.
James shows how that was quashed by the King. I am happy that James' research of six months bears out my theory, that most people would not listen to me, that we are still citizen/subjects under the kings of England. My article called "Reality" published in the American Bulletin and the article of mine on the "Atocha case," wherein Florida in 1981 used its sovereignty under the British crown to try to take away the gold from the wreck found in Florida waters supports this premise.
James makes mention of the Law dictionaries being England's Law Dictionary. You will note it lists the reign of all the Kings of England. It never mentions the reign of the Presidents of this country. Ever wonder Why?
Get this out to as many people as you can.
The Informer
28 USC § 1746 - Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury
Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form:
(1) If executed without the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)”.
(2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)”.
Norman Thomas
The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism.
But, in the name of ‘liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.’
He went on to say: ‘I will no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party.
The Democrat Party has adopted our policies.’
R. Buckminster Fuller
Moses Hess
Isaiah Berlin
(born June 6, 1909, Riga, Latvia — died Nov. 5, 1997, Oxford, Eng.) Latvian-born British political philosopher and historian of ideas. His family immigrated to Britain in 1920. Educated at the University of Oxford, Berlin taught there from 1950 to 1967, serving as president of Wolfson College from 1966 to 1975 and thereafter teaching at All Souls College. His writings on political philosophy are chiefly concerned with the problem of free will in increasingly totalitarian and mechanistic societies. His most important works include Karl Marx (1939), The Hedgehog and the Fox (1953), Historical Inevitability (1955), The Age of Enlightenment (1956), and Four Essays on Liberty (1969).
---
Sir Isaiah Berlin OM, FBA (6 June 1909 – 5 November 1997) was a British social and political theorist, philosopher and historian of ideas of Russian-Jewish origin, thought by many to be the dominant scholar of his generation. He excelled as an essayist, conversationalist and raconteur; and as a brilliant lecturer who improvised, rapidly and spontaneously, richly allusive and coherently structured material. He translated works by Ivan Turgenev from Russian into English and, during the war, worked for the British Diplomatic Service. The Independent stated that "Isaiah Berlin was often described, especially in his old age, by means of superlatives: the world's greatest talker, the century's most inspired reader, one of the finest minds of our time ... there is no doubt that he showed in more than one direction the unexpectedly large possibilities open to us at the top end of the range of human potential".
In 1932, at the age of 23, he was elected to a prize fellowship at All Souls College, Oxford. From 1957 to 1967, he was Chichele Professor of Social and Political Theory at the University of Oxford. He was president of the Aristotelian Society from 1963 to 1964. In 1966, he played a crucial role in founding Wolfson College, Oxford, and became its first President. He was knighted in 1957, and was awarded the Order of Merit in 1971. He was President of the British Academy from 1974 to 1978. He also received the 1979 Jerusalem Prize for his writings on individual freedom. The annual Isaiah Berlin Lectures are held at the Hampstead Synagogue and both Wolfson College and the British Academy each summer. Berlin's work on liberal theory and on value pluralism has had a lasting influence.
Life
Berlin was the only surviving child of a wealthy Jewish family, the son of Mendel Berlin, a timber industrialist and direct descendant of Shneur Zalman (founder of Chabad Hasidism), and his wife Marie, née Volshonok. He spent his childhood in Riga, and later lived in Andreapol´ (a small timber town near Pskov, effectively owned by the family business) and Petrograd, (formerly Saint Petersburg), witnessing both the February and October Revolutions of 1917.
Feeling increasingly oppressed by life under Bolshevik rule, the family left Petrograd, on 5 October 1920, for Riga, but encounters with anti-Semitism and difficulties with the Latvian authorities convinced them to leave, and they moved to Britain in early 1921 (Mendel in January, Isaiah and Marie at the beginning of February), when Berlin was eleven. In London, the family first stayed in Surbiton, then within the year they bought a house in Holland Park, and six years later in Hampstead. Berlin's English was virtually nonexistent at first, but he became fluent within a year.
Berlin was educated at St Paul's School (London), then at Corpus Christi College, Oxford, where he studied Greats (Classics). In his final examinations, he took a First, winning The John Locke Prize for his performance in the philosophy papers, in which he outscored A. J. Ayer. He subsequently took another degree at Oxford in PPE (Philosophy, Politics and Economics), winning another First after less than a year on the course. He was appointed a tutor in philosophy at New College, Oxford, and soon afterwards was elected to a prize fellowship at All Souls College, Oxford.
While still a student, he befriended A. J. Ayer (with whom he was to share a friendly rivalry for the rest of his life), Stuart Hampshire, Richard Wollheim, Maurice Bowra, Stephen Spender, J. L. Austin and Nicolas Nabokov. In 1940 he presented a philosophical paper on other minds to a meeting attended by Ludwig Wittgenstein at Cambridge University. Wittgenstein rejected his paper in discussion but praised Berlin for his intellectual honesty and integrity. Berlin was to remain at Oxford for the rest of his life, apart from a period working for British Information Services in New York from 1940 to 1942, and for the British embassies in Washington, DC, and Moscow from then until 1946. Berlin was fluent in Russian and English, spoke French, German and Italian, and knew Latin and Ancient Greek. Meetings with Anna Akhmatova in Leningrad in November 1945 and January 1946 had a powerful effect on both of them, and serious repercussions for Akhmatova (who immortalised the meetings in her poetry). He befriended Boris Pasternak, and was responsible for smuggling a typescript of Doctor Zhivago out of Russia to England. In 1956, he married Aline Halban, née de Gunzbourg, who was from an exiled half Russian-aristocratic and half ennobled-Jewish banking and petroleum family (her mother was Yvonne Deutsch de la Meurthe, grand-daughter of Henri Deutsch de la Meurthe) based in Paris. He was elected a Foreign Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1959. Berlin died in Oxford in 1997, aged 88. He is buried there in Wolvercote Cemetery. On his death, the obituarist of The Independent wrote: "he was a man of formidable intellectual power with a rare gift for understanding a wide range of human motives, hopes and fears, and a prodigiously energetic capacity for enjoyment – of life, of people in all their variety, of their ideas and idiosyncrasies, of literature, of music, of art." The front page of The New York Times concluded: "His was an exuberant life crowded with joys – the joy of thought, the joy of music, the joy of good friends ... The theme that runs throughout his work is his concern with liberty and the dignity of human beings ... Sir Isaiah radiated well-being."
Work
"Two Concepts of Liberty"
Main article: Two Concepts of Liberty
Berlin is popularly known for his essay "Two Concepts of Liberty", delivered in 1958 as his inaugural lecture as Chichele Professor of Social and Political Theory at Oxford. The essay, with its analytical approach to the definition of political concepts, re-introduced the study of political philosophy to the methods of analytic philosophy. Spurred by his background in the philosophy of language, Berlin argued for a nuanced and subtle understanding of our political terminology, where what was superficially understood as a single concept could mask a plurality of different uses and therefore meanings. Berlin argued that these multiple and differing concepts, otherwise masked by rhetorical conflations, showed the plurality and incompatibility of human values, and the need for us to distinguish and trade off analytically between, rather than conflate, them, if we are to avoid disguising underlying value-conflicts. The two concepts are freedom "from" which Berlin derived from the British tradition and freedom "to" which Berlin derived from Rousseau. Berlin points out that these two different conceptions of liberty can clash with each other.
Counter-Enlightenment
Main article: Counter-Enlightenment
Further information: Three Critics of the Enlightenment
Berlin's writings on the Enlightenment and its critics --- especially Giambattista Vico, Johann Gottfried Herder, Joseph de Maistre and Johann Georg Hamann), to whose views Berlin referred as the Counter-Enlightenment --- contributed to his advocacy of an irreducibly pluralist ethical ontology. In Three Critics of the Enlightenment, Berlin argued that Hamann was one of the first thinkers to conceive of human cognition as language – the articulation and use of symbols. Berlin saw Hamann as having recognised as the rationalist's Cartesian fallacy the notion that there are "clear and distinct" ideas "which can be contemplated by a kind of inner eye", without the use of language – a recognition greatly sharpened in the 20th century by Wittgenstein's private language argument.
Value pluralism
Main article: value pluralism
For Berlin, values are creations of mankind, rather than products of nature waiting to be discovered. He argued, on the basis of the epistemic and empathetic access we have to other cultures across history, that the nature of mankind is such that certain values – the importance of individual liberty, for instance – will hold true across cultures, and this is what he meant by objective pluralism. Berlin's argument was partly grounded in Wittgenstein's later theory of language, which argued that inter-translatability was supervenient on a similarity in forms of life, with the inverse implication that our epistemic access to other cultures entails an ontologically contiguous value-structure. With his account of value pluralism, he proposed the view that moral values may be equally, or rather incommensurably, valid and yet incompatible, and may therefore come into conflict with one another in a way that admits of no resolution without reference to particular contexts of decision. When values clash, it may not be that one is more important than the other. Keeping a promise may conflict with the pursuit of truth; liberty may clash with social justice. Moral conflicts are "an intrinsic, irremovable element in human life". "These collisions of values are of the essence of what they are and what we are." For Berlin, this clashing of incommensurate values within, no less than between individuals constitutes the tragedy of human life. Alan Brown suggests, however, that Berlin ignores the fact that values are commensurable in the extent to which they contribute to the human good.
"The Hedgehog and the Fox"
Main article: The Hedgehog and the Fox
"The Hedgehog and the Fox", a title referring to a fragment attributed to the ancient Greek poet Archilochus, was one of Berlin's most popular essays with the general public, reprinted in numerous editions. Of the essay, Berlin once said "I never meant it very seriously. I meant it as a kind of enjoyable intellectual game, but it was taken seriously."
Other work
The Berlin Quadrangle, Wolfson College.
Berlin's essay "Historical Inevitability" (1954) focused on a controversy in the philosophy of history. Given the choice, whether one believes that "the lives of entire peoples and societies have been decisively influenced by exceptional individuals" or, conversely, that whatever happens occurs as a result of impersonal forces oblivious to human intentions – Berlin rejected both options and the choice itself as nonsensical. Berlin is also well known for his writings on Russian intellectual history, most of which are collected in Russian Thinkers (1978; 2nd ed. 2008) and edited, as most of Berlin's work, by Henry Hardy (in the case of this volume, jointly with Aileen Kelly).
Wolfson College
Main article: Wolfson College, Oxford
Isaiah Berlin was instrumental in the founding, in 1966, of a new graduate college at Oxford University. Berlin founded Wolfson College to be a centre of academic excellence which, unlike many other colleges at Oxford, would also be based on a strong egalitarian and democratic ethos.
http://www.answers.com/topic/negative-and-positive-rights
negative and positive rights
Philosophers and political scientists make a distinction between negative and positive rights (not to be confused with the distinction between negative and positive liberties). According to this view, positive rights permit or oblige action, whereas negative rights permit or oblige inaction. These permissions or obligations may be of either a legal or moral character. Likewise, the notion of positive and negative rights may be applied to either liberty rights or claim rights, either permitting one to act or refrain from acting, or obliging others to act or refrain from acting. However, this article and most literature discusses them as applied to the latter sense.
To take an example involving two parties in a court of law: Adrian has a negative right to x against Clay if and only if Clay is prohibited from acting upon Adrian in some way regarding x. In contrast, Adrian has a positive right to x against Clay if and only if Clay is obliged to act upon Adrian in some way regarding x. A case in point, if Adrian has a negative right to life against Clay, then Clay is required to refrain from killing Adrian; while if Adrian has a positive right to life against Clay, then Clay is required to act as necessary to preserve the life of Adrian.
Rights considered negative rights may include civil and political rights such as freedom of speech, private property, freedom from violent crime, freedom of worship, habeas corpus, a fair trial, freedom from slavery. Rights considered positive rights, as initially proposed in 1979 by the Czech jurist Karel Vasak, may include other civil and political rights such as police protection of person and property and the right to counsel, as well as economic, social and cultural rights such as food, housing, public education, employment, national security, military, health care, social security, and a minimum standard of living. In the "three generations" account of human rights, negative rights are often associated with the first generation of rights, while positive rights are associated with the second and third generations.
Some philosophers (see criticisms) disagree that the negative-positive rights distinction is useful or valid.
Under the theory of positive and negative rights, a negative right is a right not to be subjected to an action of another person or group—a government, for example—usually in the form of abuse or coercion. A positive right is a right to be subjected to an action of another person or group. In theory, a negative right forbids others from acting against the right holder, while a positive right obligates others to act with respect to the right holder. In the framework of the Kantian categorical imperative, negative rights can be associated with perfect duties while positive rights can be connected to imperfect duties.
Belief in a distinction between positive and negative rights is usually maintained, or emphasized, by libertarians, who believe that positive rights do not exist until they are created by contract. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights lists both positive and negative rights (but does not identify them as such). The constitutions of most liberal democracies guarantee negative rights, but not all include positive rights. Nevertheless, positive rights are often guaranteed by other laws, and the majority of liberal democracies provide their citizens with publicly funded education, health care, social security and unemployment benefits.
Rights are often spoken of as inalienable and sometimes even absolute. However, in practice this is often taken as graded absolutism; rights are ranked by degree of importance, and violations of lesser ones are accepted in the course of preventing violations of greater ones. Thus, even if the right not to be killed is inalienable, the corresponding obligation on others to refrain from killing is generally understood to have at least one exception: self-defense. Certain widely accepted negative obligations (such as the obligations to refrain from theft, murder, etc.) are often considered prima facie, meaning that the legitimacy of the obligation is accepted "on its face"; but even if not questioned, such obligations may still be ranked for ethical analysis.
Thus a thief may have a negative obligation not to steal, and a police officer may have a negative obligation not to tackle people—but a police officer tackling the thief easily meets the burden of proof that he acted justifiably, since his was a breach of a lesser obligation and negated the breach of a greater obligation. Likewise a shopkeeper or other passerby may also meet this burden of proof when tackling the thief. But if any of those individuals pulled a gun and shot the thief for stealing, most modern societies would not accept that the burden of proof had been met. The obligation not to kill—being universally regarded as one of the highest, if not the highest obligation—is so much greater than the obligation not to steal that a breach of the latter does not justify a breach of the former. Most modern societies insist that other, very serious ethical questions need come into play before stealing could justify killing.
Positive obligations confer duty. But as we see with the police officer, exercising a duty may violate negative obligations (e.g. not to overreact and kill). For this reason, in ethics positive obligations are almost never considered prima facie. The greatest negative obligation may have just one exception—one higher obligation of self-defense—but even the greatest positive obligations generally require more complex ethical analysis. For example, one could easily justify failing to help, not just one, but a great many injured children quite ethically in the case of triage after a disaster. This consideration has led ethicists to agree in a general way that positive obligations are usually junior to negative obligations because they are not reliably prima facie. Critics of positive rights implicitly suggest that because positive obligations are not reliably prima facie they must always be agreed to through contract.
Nineteenth century philosopher Frederic Bastiat summarized the conflict between these negative and positive rights by saying:
According to Jan Narveson, the view of some that there is no distinction between negative and positive rights on the ground that negative rights require police and courts for their enforcement is "mistaken." He says that the question between what one has a right to do and who if anybody enforces it are separate issues. If rights are only negative then it simply means no one has a duty to enforce them, although individuals have a right to use any non-forcible means to gain the cooperation of others in protecting those rights. Therefore, he says "the distinction between negative and positive is quite robust." Libertarians hold that positive rights, which would include a right to be protected, do not exist until they are created by contract. However, those who hold this view do not mean that police, for example, are not obligated to protect the rights of citizens. Since they contract with their employers to defend citizens from violence, then they have created that obligation to their employer. A negative right to life allows an individual to defend his life from others trying to kill him, or obtain voluntary assistance from others to defend his life—but he may not force others to defend him, because he has no natural right to be provided with defense. To force a person to defend one's own negative rights, or the negative rights of a third party, would be to violate that person's negative rights.
Other advocates of the view that there is a distinction between negative and positive rights argue that the presence of a police force or army is not due to any positive right to these services that citizens claim, but rather because they are natural monopolies or public goods—features of any human society that arise naturally, even while adhering to the concept of negative rights only. Robert Nozick discusses this idea at length in his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia.
In the field of Medicine, positive rights of patients often conflict with negative rights of physicians. In controversial areas such as abortion and assisted suicide, medical professionals may not wish to offer certain services for moral or philosophical reasons. If enough practitioners opt out as a result of conscience, a right granted by conscience clause statutes in many jurisdictions, patients may not have any means of having their own positive rights fulfilled.[3] Such was the case of Janet Murdock, a Montana woman who could not find any physician to assist her suicide in 2009. This controversy over positive and negative rights in medicine has become a focal part on the ongoing public debate between conservative ethicist Wesley J. Smith and bioethicist Jacob M. Appel. In discussing the case of Baxter v. Montana, Appel has written:
Smith replies that this is "taking the duty to die and transforming it into a duty to kill," which he argues "reflects a profound misunderstanding of the government’s role."
negative and positive rights
Philosophers and political scientists make a distinction between negative and positive rights (not to be confused with the distinction between negative and positive liberties). According to this view, positive rights permit or oblige action, whereas negative rights permit or oblige inaction. These permissions or obligations may be of either a legal or moral character. Likewise, the notion of positive and negative rights may be applied to either liberty rights or claim rights, either permitting one to act or refrain from acting, or obliging others to act or refrain from acting. However, this article and most literature discusses them as applied to the latter sense.
To take an example involving two parties in a court of law: Adrian has a negative right to x against Clay if and only if Clay is prohibited from acting upon Adrian in some way regarding x. In contrast, Adrian has a positive right to x against Clay if and only if Clay is obliged to act upon Adrian in some way regarding x. A case in point, if Adrian has a negative right to life against Clay, then Clay is required to refrain from killing Adrian; while if Adrian has a positive right to life against Clay, then Clay is required to act as necessary to preserve the life of Adrian.
Rights considered negative rights may include civil and political rights such as freedom of speech, private property, freedom from violent crime, freedom of worship, habeas corpus, a fair trial, freedom from slavery. Rights considered positive rights, as initially proposed in 1979 by the Czech jurist Karel Vasak, may include other civil and political rights such as police protection of person and property and the right to counsel, as well as economic, social and cultural rights such as food, housing, public education, employment, national security, military, health care, social security, and a minimum standard of living. In the "three generations" account of human rights, negative rights are often associated with the first generation of rights, while positive rights are associated with the second and third generations.
Some philosophers (see criticisms) disagree that the negative-positive rights distinction is useful or valid.
Overview
Under the theory of positive and negative rights, a negative right is a right not to be subjected to an action of another person or group—a government, for example—usually in the form of abuse or coercion. A positive right is a right to be subjected to an action of another person or group. In theory, a negative right forbids others from acting against the right holder, while a positive right obligates others to act with respect to the right holder. In the framework of the Kantian categorical imperative, negative rights can be associated with perfect duties while positive rights can be connected to imperfect duties.
Belief in a distinction between positive and negative rights is usually maintained, or emphasized, by libertarians, who believe that positive rights do not exist until they are created by contract. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights lists both positive and negative rights (but does not identify them as such). The constitutions of most liberal democracies guarantee negative rights, but not all include positive rights. Nevertheless, positive rights are often guaranteed by other laws, and the majority of liberal democracies provide their citizens with publicly funded education, health care, social security and unemployment benefits.
When positive and negative rights conflict
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2008) |
Rights are often spoken of as inalienable and sometimes even absolute. However, in practice this is often taken as graded absolutism; rights are ranked by degree of importance, and violations of lesser ones are accepted in the course of preventing violations of greater ones. Thus, even if the right not to be killed is inalienable, the corresponding obligation on others to refrain from killing is generally understood to have at least one exception: self-defense. Certain widely accepted negative obligations (such as the obligations to refrain from theft, murder, etc.) are often considered prima facie, meaning that the legitimacy of the obligation is accepted "on its face"; but even if not questioned, such obligations may still be ranked for ethical analysis.
Thus a thief may have a negative obligation not to steal, and a police officer may have a negative obligation not to tackle people—but a police officer tackling the thief easily meets the burden of proof that he acted justifiably, since his was a breach of a lesser obligation and negated the breach of a greater obligation. Likewise a shopkeeper or other passerby may also meet this burden of proof when tackling the thief. But if any of those individuals pulled a gun and shot the thief for stealing, most modern societies would not accept that the burden of proof had been met. The obligation not to kill—being universally regarded as one of the highest, if not the highest obligation—is so much greater than the obligation not to steal that a breach of the latter does not justify a breach of the former. Most modern societies insist that other, very serious ethical questions need come into play before stealing could justify killing.
Positive obligations confer duty. But as we see with the police officer, exercising a duty may violate negative obligations (e.g. not to overreact and kill). For this reason, in ethics positive obligations are almost never considered prima facie. The greatest negative obligation may have just one exception—one higher obligation of self-defense—but even the greatest positive obligations generally require more complex ethical analysis. For example, one could easily justify failing to help, not just one, but a great many injured children quite ethically in the case of triage after a disaster. This consideration has led ethicists to agree in a general way that positive obligations are usually junior to negative obligations because they are not reliably prima facie. Critics of positive rights implicitly suggest that because positive obligations are not reliably prima facie they must always be agreed to through contract.
Nineteenth century philosopher Frederic Bastiat summarized the conflict between these negative and positive rights by saying:
| “ | M. de Lamartine wrote me one day: "Your doctrine is only the half of my program; you have stopped at liberty; I go on to fraternity." I answered him: "The second half of your program will destroy the first half." And, in fact, it is quite impossible for me to separate the word "fraternity" from the word "voluntary." It is quite impossible for me to conceive of fraternity as legally enforced, without liberty being legally destroyed, and justice being legally trampled underfoot. | ” |
According to Jan Narveson, the view of some that there is no distinction between negative and positive rights on the ground that negative rights require police and courts for their enforcement is "mistaken." He says that the question between what one has a right to do and who if anybody enforces it are separate issues. If rights are only negative then it simply means no one has a duty to enforce them, although individuals have a right to use any non-forcible means to gain the cooperation of others in protecting those rights. Therefore, he says "the distinction between negative and positive is quite robust." Libertarians hold that positive rights, which would include a right to be protected, do not exist until they are created by contract. However, those who hold this view do not mean that police, for example, are not obligated to protect the rights of citizens. Since they contract with their employers to defend citizens from violence, then they have created that obligation to their employer. A negative right to life allows an individual to defend his life from others trying to kill him, or obtain voluntary assistance from others to defend his life—but he may not force others to defend him, because he has no natural right to be provided with defense. To force a person to defend one's own negative rights, or the negative rights of a third party, would be to violate that person's negative rights.
Other advocates of the view that there is a distinction between negative and positive rights argue that the presence of a police force or army is not due to any positive right to these services that citizens claim, but rather because they are natural monopolies or public goods—features of any human society that arise naturally, even while adhering to the concept of negative rights only. Robert Nozick discusses this idea at length in his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia.
In medicine
In the field of Medicine, positive rights of patients often conflict with negative rights of physicians. In controversial areas such as abortion and assisted suicide, medical professionals may not wish to offer certain services for moral or philosophical reasons. If enough practitioners opt out as a result of conscience, a right granted by conscience clause statutes in many jurisdictions, patients may not have any means of having their own positive rights fulfilled.[3] Such was the case of Janet Murdock, a Montana woman who could not find any physician to assist her suicide in 2009. This controversy over positive and negative rights in medicine has become a focal part on the ongoing public debate between conservative ethicist Wesley J. Smith and bioethicist Jacob M. Appel. In discussing the case of Baxter v. Montana, Appel has written:
Medical licenses are a limited commodity, reflecting an artificial shortage created by a partnership between Congress and organizations representing physicians—with medical school seats and residency positions effectively allotted by the government, much like radio frequencies. Physicians benefit from this arrangement in that a smaller number of physicians inevitably leads to increased rates of reimbursement. There's nothing inherently wrong with this arrangement. However, it belies any claim that doctors should have the same right to choose their customers as barbers or babysitters. Much as the government has been willing to impose duties on radio stations (e.g., indecency codes, equal time rules) that would be impermissible if applied to newspapers, Montana might reasonably consider requiring physicians, in return for the privilege of a medical license, to prescribe medication to the dying without regard to the patient's intent.
Smith replies that this is "taking the duty to die and transforming it into a duty to kill," which he argues "reflects a profound misunderstanding of the government’s role."
Criticisms
Presumably, if a person has positive rights it implies that other people have positive duties (to take certain actions); whereas negative rights imply that others have negative duties (to avoid certain other actions). Philosopher Henry Shue is skeptical; he believes that all rights (regardless of whether they seem more "negative" or "positive") requires both kinds of duties at once. In other words, Shue says that honouring a right will requires avoidance (a "negative" duty) but also protective or reparative actions ("positive" duties). The negative positive distinction may be a matter of emphasis; it is therefore unhelpful to describe any right as though it requires only one of the two types of duties.
To Shue, rights can always be understood as confronting "standard threats" against humanity. Dealing with standard threats requires all kinds of duties, which may be divided across time (e.g. "if avoiding the harmful behaviour fails, begin to repair the damages"), but also divided across people. The point is that every right provokes all 3 types of behaviour (avoidance, protection, repair) to some degree. Dealing with a threat like murder, for instance, will require one individual to practice avoidance (e.g. the potential murderer must stay calm), others to protect (e.g. the police officer, who must stop the attack, or the bystander, who may be obligated to call the police), and others to repair (e.g. the doctor who must resuscitate a person who has been attacked). Thus, even the so-called "negative right not to be killed" can only be guaranteed with the help of some positive duties. Shue goes further, and maintains that the negative and positive rights distinction can be harmful, because it may result in the neglect of necessary duties.
James P. Sterba makes similar criticisms. He holds that any right can be made to appear either positive or negative depending on the language used to define it. He writes:
Sterba has rephrased the traditional "positive right" to provisions, and put it in the form of a sort of "negative right" not to be prevented from taking the resources on their own, albeit creating a conflict with the traditional negative right of private property. Thus, all rights may not only require both "positive" and "negative" duties, but it seems that rights that do not involve forced labor can be phrased positively or negatively at will. The distinction between positive and negative may not be very useful, or justified, as rights requiring the provision of labor can be rephrased from "right to education" or "right to health care" to "right to take surplus money to pay teachers" or "right to take surplus money to pay doctors".
http://www.answers.com/topic/negative-liberty
negative liberties and positive liberties
http://www.answers.com/topic/two-concepts-of-liberty
Two Concepts of Liberty
To Shue, rights can always be understood as confronting "standard threats" against humanity. Dealing with standard threats requires all kinds of duties, which may be divided across time (e.g. "if avoiding the harmful behaviour fails, begin to repair the damages"), but also divided across people. The point is that every right provokes all 3 types of behaviour (avoidance, protection, repair) to some degree. Dealing with a threat like murder, for instance, will require one individual to practice avoidance (e.g. the potential murderer must stay calm), others to protect (e.g. the police officer, who must stop the attack, or the bystander, who may be obligated to call the police), and others to repair (e.g. the doctor who must resuscitate a person who has been attacked). Thus, even the so-called "negative right not to be killed" can only be guaranteed with the help of some positive duties. Shue goes further, and maintains that the negative and positive rights distinction can be harmful, because it may result in the neglect of necessary duties.
James P. Sterba makes similar criticisms. He holds that any right can be made to appear either positive or negative depending on the language used to define it. He writes:
What is at stake is the liberty of the poor not to be interfered with in taking from the surplus possessions of the rich what is necessary to satisfy their basic needs. Needless to say, libertarians would want to deny that the poor have this liberty. But how could they justify such a denial? As this liberty of the poor has been specified, it is not a positive right to receive something, but a negative right of non-interference.(emphasis added)
Sterba has rephrased the traditional "positive right" to provisions, and put it in the form of a sort of "negative right" not to be prevented from taking the resources on their own, albeit creating a conflict with the traditional negative right of private property. Thus, all rights may not only require both "positive" and "negative" duties, but it seems that rights that do not involve forced labor can be phrased positively or negatively at will. The distinction between positive and negative may not be very useful, or justified, as rights requiring the provision of labor can be rephrased from "right to education" or "right to health care" to "right to take surplus money to pay teachers" or "right to take surplus money to pay doctors".
See also
- Claim rights and liberty rights—a different distinction, orthogonal to that between positive and negative rights
- Two Concepts of Liberty— a lecture by Isaiah Berlin, which distinguished between positive and negative liberty
http://www.answers.com/topic/negative-liberty
negative liberties and positive liberties
Negative liberty is defined as freedom from interference by other people, and is set in contrast to positive liberty, which is defined as an individual's freedom from inhibitions of the social structure within the society such as classism, sexism or racism and is primarily concerned with the possession of sociological agency. According to Thomas Hobbes, "a free man is he that in those things which by his strength and wit he is able to do is not hindered to do what he hath the will to do" (Leviathan, Ch. XXI, [2], thus alluding to liberty in its negative sense).
The distinction between negative and positive liberty was drawn originally by Hegel, but most famous in the anglophone tradition by Isaiah Berlin in his 1958 lecture "Two Concepts of Liberty." According to Berlin, the distinction is deeply embedded in the political tradition. In Berlin's words, "liberty in the negative sense involves an answer to the question: 'What is the area within which the subject — a person or group of persons — is or should be left to do or be what he is able to do or be, without interference by other persons'." Restrictions on negative liberty are imposed by a person, not by natural causes or incapacity. Helvetius expresses the point clearly: "The free man is the man who is not in irons, nor imprisoned in a gaol, nor terrorized like a slave by the fear of punishment ... it is not lack of freedom, not to fly like an eagle or swim like a whale."
Frankfurt School psychoanalyst and humanistic philosopher Erich Fromm drew a similar distinction between negative and positive freedom in his 1941 work, The Fear of Freedom, that predates Berlin's essay by more than a decade. Fromm sees the distinction between the two types of freedom emerging alongside humanity's evolution away from the instinctual activity that characterizes lower animal forms. This aspect of freedom, he argues, "is here used not in its positive sense of 'freedom to' but in its negative sense of 'freedom from', namely freedom from instinctual determination of his actions."
For Fromm, then, negative freedom marks the beginning of humanity as a species conscious of its own existence free from base instinct.
The distinction between positive and negative liberty is considered specious by socialist and Marxist political philosophers, who argue that positive and negative liberty are indistinguishable in practice, or that one cannot exist without the other. Although he is not a Socialist nor a Marxist, Berlin argues:
"It follows that a frontier must be drawn between the area of private life and that of public authority. Where it is to be drawn is a matter of argument, indeed of haggling. Men are largely interdependent, and no man's activity is so completely private as never to obstruct the lives of others in any way. 'Freedom for the pike is death for the minnows'; the liberty of some must depend on the restraint of others."
http://www.answers.com/topic/two-concepts-of-liberty
Two Concepts of Liberty
Two Concepts of Liberty was the inaugural lecture delivered by the liberal philosopher Isaiah Berlin before the University of Oxford on 31 October 1958. It was subsequently published as a 57-page pamphlet by Oxford at the Clarendon Press. It also appears in the collection of Berlin's papers entitled Four Essays on Liberty (1969) and was more recently reissued in a collection entitled simply Liberty (2002).
The essay, with its analytical approach to the definition of political concepts, re-introduced the study of political philosophy to the methods of analytic philosophy. It is also one of Berlin's first expressions of his ethical ontology of value-pluralism. Berlin defined negative liberty, as the term "liberty" was used by Thomas Hobbes, as the absence of coercion, or interference with, agents' possible private actions, by an exterior social-body, and as a comparatively recent political ideal, which, Berlin later writes, re-emerged in the late 17th century, after its slow and inarticulate birth in the Ancient doctrines of Antiphon the Sophist, the Cyrenaic discipleship, and of Otanes after the death of pseudo-Smerdis. In an introduction to the essay, Berlin writes:
"As for Otanes, he wished neither to rule nor to be ruled — the exact opposite of Aristotle's notion of true civic liberty... [This ideal] remains isolated and, until Epicurus, undeveloped... the notion had not explicitly emerged".
Summary
Positive liberty
Positive liberty may be understood as self mastery; and includes one's having a role in choosing who governs the society of which one is a part. Berlin traced positive liberty from Aristotle's definition of citizenship, which is historically derived from the social role of the freemen of classical Athens: it was, Berlin argued, the liberty in choosing their government granted to citizens, and extolled, most famously, by Pericles. Berlin granted that both concepts of liberty represent valid human ideals, and that both forms of liberty are necessary in any free and civilised society.
Negative liberty
- "liberty in the negative sense involves an answer to the question: 'What is the area within which the subject — a person or group of persons — is or should be left to do or be what he is able to do or be, without interference by other persons'."
For Berlin, negative liberty represents a different, and sometimes contradictory, understanding of the concept of liberty, which needs to be carefully distinguished. Its later proponents (such as Tocqueville, Constant, Montesquieu, John Locke, David Hume and John Stuart Mill, who accepted Chrysippus' understanding of self-determination) insisted that constraint and discipline were the antithesis of liberty and so were (and are) less prone to confusing liberty and constraint in the manner of rationalists and the philosophical harbingers of totalitarianism. This concept of negative liberty, Berlin argued, constitutes an alternative, and sometimes even opposed, concept to positive liberty, and one often closer to the intuitive modern usage of the word.
http://www.answers.com/topic/irving-berlin
Irving Berlin
A twentieth-century American writer of popular songs (words and music). His songs include “God Bless America,” “White Christmas,” and “There's No Business like Show Business.”
Amitai Etzioni
Arthur Koestler
The Thirteenth Tribe
Inverted Totalitarianism and the Corporate State
Totalitarian Collectivism
"The privatization of public services and functions manifests the steady evolution of corporate power into a political form, into an integral, even dominant partner with the state."
-- Sheldon S. Wolin
Inverted Totalitarianism and the Corporate State
Stricken with a terminal disease, the decline of traditional society is unavoidable. For decades, the political institutions that fostered a Republic based upon individual liberty and responsibility fade into fond memory. Defenders of all that made America a shining example of human freedom are attacked and ridiculed for holding onto a moral and ethical system that is based upon the dignity of every individual. Most will blame the failure of this decay on the politicians that willfully pander to the masses with the next generation of social welfare programs. While defining a politician as a scoundrel, deserving damnation, seems obvious; the underlying source of the decay that eats away the culture comes from various directions.
The trends toward despotism are visible for all to see. Most prefer their blinded vision because accepting the lethal condition might require some proactive response. The idea that a single dictator will seize power and rule as a tyranny seems foreign to many plebeians. Yet, the daily news that flows from the corporate mass media build upon the absence of real reporting and fundamental truth that ignores, denies and substitutes meaningless stories for earth shattering events.
Therefore, the significance of the concept, inverted totalitarianism, as defined by Sheldon S. Wolin deserves examination.
"It is all politics all of the time but a politics largely untempered by the political. Party squabbles are occasionally on public display, and there is a frantic and continuous politics among factions of the party, interest groups, competing corporate powers, and rival media concerns. And there is, of course, the culminating moment of national elections when the attention of the nation is required to make a choice of personalities rather than a choice between alternatives. What is absent is the political, the commitment to finding where the common good lies amidst the welter of well-financed, highly organized, single-minded interests rabidly seeking governmental favors and overwhelming the practices of representative government and public administration by a sea of cash."
For an in-depth study of Mr. Wolin’s ideas, review Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism. He asks the following questions:
"Does a demos have a future in the age of globalization, instant communication networks, and fluid borders? Is the notion of "a" demos as a single, compact body with a "will" and an identity that persists over time at all possible or even a coherent notion in the age of the political bloggers? Is there time for a more authentic politics, more reflective of the pluralistic character of reality?"
He defines democracy as,
"Democracy is about the conditions that make it possible for ordinary people to better their lives by becoming political beings and by making power responsive to their hopes and needs. What is at stake in democratic politics is whether ordinary men and women can recognize that their concerns are best protected and cultivated under a regime whose actions are governed by principles of commonality, equality, and fairness, a regime in which taking part in politics becomes a way of staking out and sharing in a common life and its forms of self-fulfillment. Democracy is not about bowling together but about managing together those powers that immediately and significantly affect the lives and circumstances of others and one’s self."
The Angry Cheese
2012 Winner of the George Orwell Most Brilliant Blog in the Whole World. Awarded by Delia Centreville, founder of the Media Standards Tryst, an off-shoot of the leadership training program ComeOn Porpoise.
Communitarianism is NOT Communism
“Look past the right and left wing rhetoric... get all the facts, and a whole new picture emerges."
Niki Raapana
“The facts surrounding the implementation of Agenda 21 are being misled into a conservative versus liberal debate.
The right is blaming only the left and refusing to acknowledge their own role, the left is assuming that because the most organized and funded vocal opponents are JBS that it can be neatly lumped into a left v right divide.
This allows people to avoid arguing the core issue at the heart of LA21 and all related U.N. plans. Agenda 21 and ICLEI are only a piece of the overall plan for Global Governance, which is what the U.N. says it's building. Global Governance with an international court with enough funds and manpower to enforce the 11 Laws of Nature are one of the proposals on the U.N. table right now. Global Governance and Global Citizenship are not a conspiracy theory or a right wing fantasy.
The very public goals of the next round of Agenda 21 meetings, called Rio+20, includes granting full Human Rights for Mother Earth and tying the law together with a Global Green Economy. Americans from all walks of life may be interested in how this plan has been introduced and will affect them personally. It's almost hilarious that commenters will admit they never heard of it once in the entire 20 years it's been going on, and that doesn't seem to make any difference to them. If Agenda 21 was such a legitimate, benign plan, why wasn't anyone told about it (let alone asked to vote)? And before you slander me with accusations of my inferior ignorant right wing status, I am not a conservative, I don't promote the Bible, I've never been opposed to abortion, and I don't engage in useless dialectical arguments. LA21 is real as it gets, and it's going to get a lot more real over the next 20 years.
As a recognized expert in global communitarianism who has studied the spreading communitarian virus since 1999, I can assure you, communitarianism is NOT basically communism. It's the BALANCED Middle/Third Way between the two opposing sides.
It's the Marxist Capitalist Christian Zionist synthesis between market and social responsibility. It includes a little bit of all the old and new values, and it comes to us bearing an amazing coalition of religions that all suddenly say their core principles were always communitarian. Like the Bolivians who wrote the 11 Laws of Nature after they rewrote their national constitution into a "socialist communitarian" constitution, we're all communitarians now. When Bill Clinton recently told a crowd of American students at Berkeley "we're more communitarian now," they gave him a standing ovation. Obama was trained by Communitarian John McNight, the Bush family is communitarian, and most American Christian churches are all communitarian now too.
All three leading contenders for the Republican ticket are communitarians, and so is the Pope.
The Saudi Arabians are funding the new World Religious Governing Body's new building in Vienna and American police train with the Mossad in Israel.
Look past the right and left wing rhetoric... get all the facts, and a whole new picture emerges."
Ken-Welch.com
-PROJECT CENTRAL-
Atheistic/Deistic Satanism
The Hidden Tyranny
Henry Makow
Humanity is Satanically Possessed
A Satanic cult has colonized the earth.
This is the key to understanding history and avoiding the pitfalls of modern "cult--ure."
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
If you wish to escape the ravages of modern life, understand that
Mankind is satanically possessed. We are being inducted into the lowest ranks of a satanic cult, the Illuminati.
I am not speaking from a Christian or Biblical perspective. I am from a secular background. The difference is that I recognize, in secular terms, that God is the magnificent moral and natural order governing the universe.
The prevalent Illuminist denial of God is a satanic rebellion that ultimately cannot be won.
Our satanic possession is the product of a highly organized long-term conspiracy to establish a "New World Order." Today, the cancer has spread to all social institutions, public and private, including charities and the church. As a result, humanity has fallen into a coma, hardly able to recognize the sickness, let alone resist.
As I have said, the mainspring of this diabolical conspiracy is the Cabalist (Illuminati) dynastic families who own the world's central banks. Their control of most large corporations, especially media, and consequently politicians ensures that their cancer is all pervasive.
Here are just some logos with Illuminati motifs. Politicians and entertainers adore making the sign of Baphomet and the Masonic handshake.
The instrument of this secret control is Freemasonry, a Cabalist secret Society. (The Illuminati is a secret society within Freemasonry.) Essentially you will rise in Freemasonry and society according to your willingness to serve Lucifer, and betray your community to the new Luciferian dispensation.
DEMOCRACY
Democracy is a charade. Sure, we can decide where the sewers will go, but the big issues have been taken out of our hands. All the politicians are Freemasons: Ron Paul, Obama, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum.
They divide into a House League, with certain Masons taking the Right, and other Masons taking the Left. The people are polarized, distracted and deceived. No one sees the puppet master. Nothing fundamental ever changes.
Left Vs. Right: Two apparently opposing forces advancing the same goal, a thinly veiled world police state ruled by Satanist billionaires.
The same applies to the international stage: Islamists vs. Zionists: Both Masons.
Nothing illustrates our peril better than 9-11. Essentially the Illuminati bankers through their Masonic proxies murdered over 3000 Americans in broad daylight and got away with it.
This mass trauma brainwashing was designed to justify foreign wars and a domestic police state. It could not have succeeded without the collaboration of the mass media and virtually the whole political elite, who are an occupying power, a colonial administration.
The essence of Satanism is to turn the natural and moral order upside down i.e. "revolution."
God is Reality. Satanism turns reality on its head.
Thus, the good is made to appear evil and vice-versa. Lies have the authority of truth. The Truth can never be known. It is a matter of perception. It is whatever the Illuminati say it is.
Beautiful is ugly and ugly is considered beautiful. What is healthy and natural (e.g. marriage, family, heterosexuality) is painted as unhealthy while what is sick (e.g. homosexuality) is presented as natural and healthy.
These examples of our satanic possession should be seen in this light:
1. The divorce of sex from love, marriage and procreation. The promotion of anonymous sex in place of courtship degrades all human contact to the level of sex appeal. Anonymous sex is hyped as the best experience in life.
Pornography, the sex addicts' cocaine, is made widely available. 70-80% of teenage boys watch online porn regularly. Girls need to behave like porn stars to be loved. The sexualization of children takes place and eventually, acceptance of pedophilia. In Japan, porn is killing heterosexual relations.
2. Gender bending - the relentless media promotion of feminism, lesbianism and homosexuality is designed to destroy heterosexual identity and values, including marriage and family.
3. Incessant wars have no purpose other than to increase the wealth and power of the Illuminati and undermine nation states. All wars are contrived by the Illuminati to kill off natural leaders and demoralize, degrade and destroy humanity. Ironically, they are an excuse for Illuminati "world government."
4. Entertainers are members of the Illuminati and part of the Satanic initiation. Madonna's Super Bowl half-time and Nicki Minaj's performance at the Grammy's were both Satanic rituals.
5. The dumbing down of the public through sports, entertainment and a defective education system.
My whole website is devoted to this topic. The point is -- mankind is satanically possessed.
CONCLUSION
The masses are in denial. Corruption and sexual abuse (e.g. Gerry Sandusky) abound but no one mentions Freemasonry. The legal system and police are compromised.
Society is a full accomplice in its own subversion. The masses have Stockholm syndrome. They hope that the psychopaths won't harm them if they keep their heads down and play along.
Fully invested in their enslavement, people are too venal, craven or dumb to face reality. They prove Aldous Huxley's prophesy that the slaves "will love their slavery."
Eventually the Illuminati will degrade us until humanity's promise is lost, and the Illuminati's depraved vision of man is vindicated. Then our culling under some pretext will seem like Divine Justice.
Our best hope is the Internet. It's very hard to institute a police state in an age of instant communication.
As long as the Internet is free, we will remain free. Let's defend it with our lives!
---
Related - Scientists Who Recognize Intelligent Design are Rejected
Related - Rejection of the Feminine is Rooted in the Occult
Will Newman - Is Lucifer the God of Judaism?
Richard Evans - The Kabbalah is a Hoax
Makow - The God of the Kabbalah
------ -Kabbalah Explains Current Events
Satanic Signs Everywhere! -- Illuminati Logos
Henry Makow
The Satanic Core of Libertarianism
Satanism defines man by carnal rather than spiritual desires, "liberating" the former and crushing the latter. De Mandeville's Fable of the Bees demonstrates that Libertarianism is rooted in Satanist dogma.
Libertarianism is part of the Illuminati Dialectic with Communism
"Essentially, two seemingly opposed forces advance the same goal: a world police state governed by an oligarchy of billionaire Satanists."
By Memehunter
(henrymakow.com)
In Proof Libertarianism is an Illuminati ploy, we covered the Jewish Money Power's ongoing involvement in Libertarianism.
In The "Catholic" Wing of Libertarianism, we explored the Jesuit a.k.a. Illuminati connections with Libertarianism.
In this article, we explore the Illuminati creed at the root of Austrian economics and Libertarianism: Satanism.
The obscure hero of Libertarianism: Bernard de Mandeville
Born in Rotterdam in 1670, Bernard de Mandeville came to England in the wake of William of Orange's accession to the throne. A doctor by profession, Mandeville became better-known as a satirist. More importantly, Mandeville was also a Satanist, linked with the Blasters and Hell-Fire Clubs of 18th-century England.
Although Mandeville's name has been all but erased from contemporary mainstream economical discourse, many free-market thinkers lavish glowing praise on his insights.
In a lecture delivered at the British Academy in 1966, Friedrich von Hayek extolled Mandeville as a "mastermind" and "great psychologist" whose theories anticipated those of David Hume, Adam Smith, and Charles Darwin, and praised his poem The Fable of the Bees as a "remarkable" work.
According to Hayek, Mandeville's ideas "returned to economic theory" through the work of Carl Menger, the founder of the Austrian School by way of 19th-century German historian Friedrich von Savigny.
Ludwig von Mises also paid tribute to Mandeville in his Theory and History, observing that
"He [Mandeville] pointed out that self-interest and the desire for material well-being, commonly stigmatized as vices, are in fact the incentives whose operation makes for welfare, prosperity, and civilization."
Even John Maynard Keynes, surely not an Austrian, recognized Mandeville as one of his main precursors in The General Theory of Employment and Money.
These days, Austrian economist Gary North introduces The Fable of the Bees on his website as "the most important poem in the last 300 years".
But what is so special about the Fable of the Bees that this fairly obscure poem, and its author, could have inspired such eulogies from Hayek, Mises, and Keynes?
Good comes from evil, and other perversions
Mandeville's Fable of the Bees or Private Vices, Publick Benefits was published in 1705, but was reworked and supplemented with abundant commentary over the next 25 years.
In his writings, Mandeville argues that liberty represents man's uninhibited pursuit of his basest material and carnal instincts. Rather than being evil, selfishness and licentiousness lead to prosperity.
According to Mandeville, "Evil is the grand principle that makes us social creatures, the solid basis, the life and support of all trade and employment without exception".
(Talk of a Romney-Paul ticket. Romney: "I'm not concerned about the poor...")
Influenced by Mandeville, Adam Smith came to the conclusion that self-interest is the pillar of a prosperous society. Hayek and Mises went even further. They railed against altruism and solidarity as hindrances to a society's economic success.
Of course, Smith is right to identify the added value brought by the division of labor and to point out that producers and sellers are primarily motivated by self-interest. But that does not mean that self-interest should be the fundamental principle of civilization. This is plain evil and the antithesis of what civilization is all about.
Mandeville also claimed that a nation's wealth was predicated on the maintenance of an underclass of poorly educated laborers.
Following in Mandeville's hoof steps, Mises emphasized that "men are born unequal and that it is precisely their inequality that generates social cooperation and civilization."
The "Right to Allow your Child to Die"
To his credit, anarcho-capitalist Murray Rothbard distanced himself from Mandeville's ideology. However, the same Rothbard advocated that parents have "a legal right not to feed [their] child, i.e., to allow it to die", and for the emergence of a "free market in children".
Since Rothbard's system denies that humans have moral obligations to each other, he rejects aggression (the "non-aggression principle") but allows outright neglect, to the point of causing death.
This is the evil outcome of taking libertarian ethics to their logical extreme. Clearly, the "non-aggression principle" is necessary but not sufficient to design a just and humane society.
Satanic Ideologies in Modern Libertarianism
Below are three well-known quotes.
Satanist Alastair Crowley's Law of Thelema reads thus:
"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law".
Libertarian novelist Ayn Rand's mouthpiece Howard Roark proclaims in The Fountainhead:
"Man's first duty is to himself. His moral law is never to place his prime goal within the persons of others. His moral obligation is to do what he wishes, provided his wish does not depend primarily upon other men."
Finally, a passage from Austrian economist Ludwig Von Mises, who admired Rand's elitist stance:
"The ultimate end of action is always the satisfaction of some desires of the acting man. Since nobody is in a position to substitute his own value judgments for those of the acting individual, it is vain to pass judgment on other people's aims and volition." (Human Action)
Beyond differences in wording, and even though Mises's version is more nuanced than Crowley's or Rand's, these three extracts are essentially saying the same thing.
Now, it is one thing to point to similarities between Satanism and Libertarianism, but, Satanist propaganda is actually at the core of the Libertarian doctrine and of Austrian economics.
The Satanic-Libertarian connection is very much alive today. Libertarian candidate Ron Paul, a self-avowed Rand admirer, may strike the right chord on many topics, but he has been linked to the Illuminati and has been seen displaying Satanic hand signs.
The Satanic Dialectic
The Austrian School is not the only economic school infected with Satanism, far from it. Like Hayek, Keynes was a member of the infamous Fabian Society. He was also known as a child molester. Karl Marx was himself a Satanist.
In fact, Socialism, Zionism, and Satanism were originally joined at the hip: 19th-century Jewish activist Moses Hess, an influential precursor of modern Zionism, was also an early proponent of socialism and a collaborator of Marx. It was Hess who initiated Marx and Engels into Satanism.
The end goal of all these ideologies is domination by a transnational, oligarchic, Satanic elite. Marxism and Austrianism both oppose nationalism and support free trade.
Mises' collaborator, the arch-Zionist, Jesuit-trained, high-ranking Freemason Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi summarized the Illuminati dialectic thusly:
"The fight between Capitalism and Communism over the inheritance of the beseeched blood aristocracy is a fratricidal war of the victorious brain aristocracy, a fight between individualistic and socialist, egoist and altruist, heathen and Christian spirit.
The general staff of both parties is recruited from Europe's spiritual leader race [Führerrasse] the Jews."
Essentially, two seemingly opposed forces advance the same goal: a world police state governed by an oligarchy of billionaire Satanists.
Rising Above the Illuminati Dialectic
To be sure, Austrian economics and Libertarianism have introduced useful concepts in both ethics and modern economic theory. The same can be said about Keynes and Marx. Illuminati ideologies always contain some savory morsels of truth, in order to make the Satanic deception more effective.
In rising above this Illuminati dialectic, our challenge is to digest these nuggets of wisdom, and spit out the evil lies and half-truths that defile them.
In the end, the real war waged by the Illuminati is a spiritual one. It is not merely about which monetary system is conducive to prosperity or which economic model is optimal. It is not solely about which political system is superior. It is, at heart, a battle between God and the Devil, for our souls.
Special thanks to Anthony Migchels. See his Deconstruction of AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS
(H/t to deadeyeblog regarding Marx's position on free trade)
Faux Economics / Anthony Migchels
Austrian Economics
Addresses manipulation of volume as the cause of the boom/bust cycle. But blames the State for this, instead of the Money Power. Ignores the wealth transfer from poor to rich through interest and tries to explain it away as a normal free market price for money. Favors interest bearing Gold.
Modern Austrians want a free market for currencies, which is positive. They mistakenly claim Gold will prove to be best in such market. But Gresham’s Law predicts people will hoard gold and pay with paper.
Clamors for deflation. Deflation hurts debtors (90% of the population), as the value of debts and the interest paid over them increases in value. Kills economic growth because people hoard cash instead of investing and consuming.
Deflation is a result of crashing demand, due to a contracting money supply. The associated declining prices are not a boon, but a symptom of a serious disease.
The Satanic Core of Libertarianism
The “Catholic” Arm of Libertarianism
Libertarianism’s main fault: Blaming the State while ignoring the Money Power
Why Gold is so strongly deflationary
How the Money Power created Libertarianism and Austrian Economics
The Daily Bell tolls for another round in the debate
Phoenix Rising, the Return of the Gold Standard
Top Ten Lies and Mistakes of Austrian Economics
Alex Jones joins Alan Greenspan in calling for a Gold Standard
Who is Ed Griffin?
The Inflation vs. Deflation Dialectic
Bitcoin, a Positive Step forward in Monetary Reform
Usurious Usurpation
Austrian Economics is still ‘Jewish’ Economics
What Gary North is not telling you about Interest
Discussing Gold and Interest with the Daily Bell
Daily Bell: wrapping up
Why Bankers love Gold
The Problem with Gold
In defense of Ellen Brown
The U.S. Constitution doesn’t say money should be gold or silver coin, by Faux Capitalist
Greenbackers vs. Goldbugs, by Eric Blair (Activist Post)
Taking Aim at the Austrian school of Socialism, from the perspective of Land reform by Keith Gardner
Inflation is Interest, Deflation is Theft, by Keith Gardner
Keynesian Economics
Sees the deflationary tendencies of the Gold Standard and proposes reflation of the economy in times of depression. However, they don’t understand that reflation with currency based on interest bearing debts implies ever growing costs for capital.
Currently they say money is cheap, with low interest rates. But these debts will have to be rolled over in a few years. And history shows that interest rates are guaranteed to rise.
‘Quantitative Easing’ as perpetrated by Ben Bernanke has nothing to do with reflation. Bernanke handed out trillions to the banks to support their destroyed balances. ‘Reasoning’ that banks were undercapitalized due to the Credit Crunch and therefore not lending. They are still not lending. Meanwhile those who failed have been given trillions, at the cost of the public.
The reflation must be done with interest free capital supplied to the real economy: consumers and firms.
Krugman’s Misunderstanding of Debt
Nobel Prize winner on Debt
Webster Tarpley criticizes Wall Street and ‘deregulation’. Not bad, but he also avoids the monetary system itself, let alone interest.
Full Reserve Banking
Full Reserve Banking is the next step after getting rid of Fractional Reserve Banking. It is relevant both under a Gold Standard and debt free money.
The problem is that the Money Power can (re) gain control of the Money Supply through compound interest, even if the money was created debt free.
Debt free money alone does not solve compound interest
Lecture on a Master Mind
Dr. Bernard Mandeville
By F. A. Hayek
A Fellow of the Academy
Read 23 March 1966
http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=846&layout=html
The Online Library of Liberty
The Fable of the Bees or Private Vices, Publick Benefits
By Bernard Mandeville
(1732)
Prefatory Note On the Method of This Edition
Introduction
I: Life of Mandeville 1
II: History of the Text 1
III: Mandeville’s Thought
IV: The Background
V: Mandeville’s Influence
The Preface [iii]
[1] the Grumbling Hive: O R, Knaves Turn’d Honest.
[25] the Introduction.
[27] an Enquiry Into the Origin of Moral Virtue.
[45] remarks.
[285] an Essay On Charity, and Charity-schools.
[371] a Search In the Nature of Society.
A Vindication of the Book, From the Aspersions Contain’d In a Presentment of the Grand Jury of Middlesex, and an Abusive Letter to Lord C. A 1
The Economic Treason of "Free Traders"
[This page consists mainly of excerpts from various journalistic pieces, except portions in brackets and closing section.]
Adam Smith Unmasked
In October 1776, a 28-year-old English barrister named Jeremy Bentham wrote contemptuously of the American Declaration of Independence, which had been signed as an Act of the Continental Congress on July 4th of that year: "This,'' he spewed, "they 'hold to be' a 'truth self-evident.' At the same time, to secure these rights they are satisfied that government should be instituted. They see not ... that nothing that was ever called government ever was or ever could be exercised but at the expense of one or another of those rights, that ... someone or other of those pretended unalienable rights is alienated.... In these tenets they have outdone the extravagance of all former fanatics.''
Shortly after penning this venom, Bentham made his philosophical breach with the American republicans all the more clear in a lengthy tract titled An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1780). That manuscript would not only prescribe the founding principles of British philosophical radicalism; it would propel Bentham into the very center of a then-emerging new British Foreign Office and British Foreign Intelligence Service, consolidated under the guiding hand of William Petty, Lord Shelburne, a man who at the time was the de facto, if not de jure doge of Britain.
...
Lord Shelburne was so taken with Bentham that he installed the writer, who fancied himself alternately as the reincarnation of Sir Francis Bacon and as the "Sir Isaac Newton of the moral sciences,'' in an apartment at his Bowood estate. Shelburne assigned to Bentham an English and Swiss editor in order to ensure the widest dissemination of Bentham’s works in both the English- and French-speaking worlds.
...
By this time [June 1780] also, King George III had declared himself wholly subservient to the Shelburne-led East India Company faction--the Venetian Party [which was the carrier of the high-level Satanism which surfaced briefly in the form of the Hell-Fire Clubs, and which was partly exposed by The Franklin Cover-up].
...
Smith Assigned To Scribble Against America
Lord Shelburne, as foreign minister, took the position that the former colonies in North America MUST BE ONCE AGAIN BROUGHT UNDER THE BRITISH YOKE, BUT NOT THROUGH THE DEPLOYMENT OF MILITARY MIGHT OR THROUGH CLAIMS OF PROPERTY TITLE. FOR SHELBURNE, THE BATTLE CRY OF THE NEW VENICE/NEW ROME WAS "FREE TRADE.''
As early as 1763, in a famous carriage ride from Edinburgh to London, Shelburne had commissioned two works from one of his East India Company scribblers, Adam Smith. First, he had commissioned Smith to prepare the research outlines for the study that would be later completed by another India House propagandist, Edward Gibbon, on the decline and fall of the Roman Empire--a study critical to Shelburne’s commitment to establish a new third Roman Empire headquartered in London. In addition, he ordered the preparation of an apologia for free trade, which Smith completed in 1776 under the title The Wealth of Nations.
["Free trade" is feudalism from the oligarchy's perspective. By "freedom,” Adam Smith means freedom for the oligarchy to enslave mankind without interference from "big government," i.e. any government strong enough to protect its citizens from the predations of the oligarchy. He essentially plagiarized his material from a group of French apologists for feudalism known as Physiocrats.
The oligarchy created Communism and socialism partly to discredit the American System of political economy (which builds strong republics through coordinated economic activity), by lumping them all together in the ambiguous category of "collectivist." They conveniently forget to mention that the purpose of Communism and socialism is opposite to that of the American System.)]
In 1787, Shelburne's leading intelligence agent Jeremy Bentham went one better than Smith by publishing a series of letters from Russia that were assembled in a pamphlet titled In Defense of Usury. The final letter, addressed to Smith, chastised the India House economist for not going far enough in his embrace of unbridled monetary dictatorship. Bentham demanded an end to all restrictions on usurious interest rates, employing the liberal argument that suppression of usury stifles invention. SMITH IMMEDIATELY WROTE OF BENTHAM’S IN DEFENSE OF USURY, "THE WORK IS ONE OF A SUPERIOR MAN.''
...
Shelburne's policy of unbridled free trade between Britain and the United States nearly destroyed the American republic in its cradle. Some of the American Founding Fathers clearly understood the danger in Shelburne's free trade ruse.
...
Shelburne unleashes Jacobins against France
Even with matters still unresolved in North America, Shelburne and Bentham turned their attention to another critical front across the English Channel in France. The Seven Years' War of 1756-63 had stripped France of its once formidable maritime capacity. Shelburne now sought to destroy France as an economic and military rival on the continent. From the outset, the Jacobin Terror was a British East India Company-, British Foreign Office-orchestrated affair. The bloody massacre of France's scientific elite was systematically carried out by French hands, manning French guillotines, but guided by British strings. [Emphasis added] [1]
Hayek's "Conservative Revolution":
A renewal of the feudalistic backlash against evolution
Writing The Road to Serfdom in London in 1944, while teaching at the British Fabian Society's London School of Economics, von Hayek was certainly in no position to pen an apology for Adolph Hitler and National Socialism. Instead, he took a sophisticated detour to arrive at the same end result. Von Hayek denounced National Socialism as a classic expression of statist, totalitarian ideology, and then argued that all forms of dirigist government involvement in the economy strangle freedom, crush the free market, and lead inevitably to Hitlerian totalitarianism.
Von Hayek slandered Friedrich List, Germany's great "American System'' economist, and the Weimar-era German political figure, Walter Rathenau, as part of the same "socialist'' camp as Hitler and Lenin. Von Hayek let his own Anglophiliac sentiments all hang out, as he pilloried List as the principal author of the "German thesis'' that "free trade was a policy dictated solely by, and appropriate only to, the special interests of England in the nineteenth century.''
The radical alternatives that von Hayek posed--strict monetarism, near-total deregulation, and Pan-European federalism--WERE ALL EXPRESSIONS OF THE SAME FEUDALIST OUTLOOK THAT PRODUCED HITLER'S NATIONAL SOCIALISM and the thousands of other varieties of Conservative Revolutionism after World War I.
"We shall not rebuild civilization on the large scale,'' he wrote in The Road to Serfdom.
"It is no accident that on the whole there was more beauty and decency to be found in the life of the small peoples, and that among the large ones there was more happiness and content in proportion as they had avoided the deadly blight of centralization.''
Prince Philip Mountbatten, head of the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF), WHO ADVOCATES THE GENOCIDAL ELIMINATION OF 80 PERCENT OF THE WORLD'S POPULATION, could not have been more explicit.
The Austrian School
Friedrich von Hayek was born in Vienna in 1899. After obtaining a doctorate in political science from the University of Vienna and spending the early 1920s in New York City, von Hayek returned to his birthplace to participate in a private seminar series given by the Austrian School ideologue Ludwig von Mises. THE AUSTRIAN SCHOOL HAD BEEN FOUNDED BY CARL MENGER (1840-1921), A RETAINER OF THE HAPSBURG AND WITTELSBACH ROYAL HOUSES OF AUSTRIA AND BAVARIA, who was a fanatical opponent of Prussia's industrialization policies, which were modeled on the American System of Political Economy. MENGER WAS THE FIRST OF THE AUSTRIAN FREE MARKET ECONOMISTS TO EQUATE THESE AMERICAN SYSTEM IDEAS WITH STATE SOCIALISM, lumping Friedrich List together with Henri St. Simon, G.W. Hegel and Karl Marx.
Menger trained a generation of Austrian School economists, including Eugen von Boehm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises, and Friedrich von Hayek. Before his brief New York City venture, von Hayek attended the Boehm-Bawerk seminars at Vienna--along with future Bolshevik leader Nickolai Bukharin. THIS CONVERGENCE OF RADICAL FREE MARKET AND BOLSHEVIK PERSONALITIES UNDER THE VIENNA SCHOOL TUTELAGE WAS NOT AS STRANGE AS IT MIGHT SEEM ON FIRST REFLECTION. Boehm's insistence on the inevitability of the collapse of capitalism due to "over-production'' caused by the reinvestment of profit into new infrastructure, research and development, and other capital improvements through the mechanism of credit, was stolen directly from Karl Marx. AND BOEHM FULLY SUBSCRIBED TO THE SUPERIORITY OF THE PRE-CAPITALIST FEUDAL GUILD SOCIETY OVER THE MODERN INDUSTRIAL STATE, a theme Bukharin would elaborate in his own 1914 work, The Economic Theory of the Leisure Class.
...
Attack on the Renaissance
Another seminal figure in the formation of the Austrian School was the nineteenth century "individualist philosopher’’ Jacob Burckhardt, who would provide the inspiration for the pre-Nazi philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, and his overtly Nazi successor, Martin Heidegger.
Burckhardt attacked the fifteenth century Golden Renaissance as one of the worst events in history. FOR BURCKHARDT, THE PRE-RENAISSANCE FEUDAL ALLIANCE BETWEEN THE OLIGARCHY AND THE CHURCH REPRESENTED THE HIGH POINT OF CIVILIZATION. IT WAS A THEME THAT VON HAYEK WOULD TAKE UP MORE THAN HALF A CENTURY LATER IN THE ROAD TO SERFDOM, and in another critical work, The COUNTER-REVOLUTION of Science, which he published in 1952.
In that 1952 book, von Hayek, reflecting the strong influence of Burckhardt, RAILED AGAINST THE TWO GREAT ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE COUNCIL OF FLORENCE AND THE GOLDEN RENAISSANCE: THE CREATION OF THE MODERN NATION-STATE GOVERNED BY PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL LAW, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN SCIENCE. Von Hayek rejected the idea that the individual was capable of creative scientific discovery, describing it as a fraudulent construct, demonstrating the “collectivist prejudices'' which he claimed were inherent in all science.
Von Hayek totally rejected the principle that man was created in the image of God. IN FACT, HE TRACED HIS OWN PHILOSOPHICAL ROOTS TO THE EARLY EIGHTEENTH CENTURY SATANIST, BERNARD MANDEVILLE. In a lecture he delivered at the British Academy on March 23, 1966, von Hayek lauded Mandeville as a "master mind,'' as the inventor of modern psychology, and as the true intellectual forbearer of David Hume, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, Carl Savigny and Charles Darwin.
VON HAYEK ARGUED IN HIS MANDEVILLE LECTURE THAT MANDEVILLE'S POEM, “THE FABLE OF THE BEES,'' WAS PERHAPS THE GREATEST PHILOSOPHICAL TREATISE EVER COMPOSED. HE CREDITED MANDEVILLE WITH INSPIRING ADAM SMITH’S ARGUMENT FOR THE UNBRIDLED FREE MARKET.
In 1931, von Hayek accepted an invitation to visit London to deliver a series of lectures at the London School of Economics. During this period, HE BECAME FORMALLY AFFILIATED WITH THE BRITISH FABIAN SOCIETY [considered by many populists to be a socialist organization]. He eventually accepted a full-time teaching chair at LSE. And in 1939, he initiated an organization that would evolve into the Mont Pelerin Society. The earlier group, the Society for the Renovation of Liberalism, included Frank Knight and Henry Simons, both of whom would train Friedman at the University of Chicago; the American Fabian socialist Walter Lippman; Viennese Aristotelian Society leader Karl Popper; fellow Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises; and Sir John Clapham, a senior official of the Bank of England who from 1940-46 was the president of the British Royal Society.
It was this group, with the exception of Knight, who died, that gathered--at von Hayek’s initiative--at Mont Pelerin, Switzerland in April 1947 to form the Mont Pelerin Society. AMONG THE OTHER FOUNDERS OF MONT PELERIN WERE OTTO VON HAPSBURG, THE HEIR TO THE AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN THRONE; AND MAX VON THURN UND TAXIS, THE REGENSBERG, BAVARIA-BASED HEAD OF THE 400-YEAR-OLD VENETIAN THURN UND TAXIS FAMILY. THE EXPLICIT PURPOSE OF THE SOCIETY WAS TO REVIVE AND SPREAD THE CONSERVATIVE REVOLUTIONARY IDEAS SPELLED OUT IN VON HAYEK'S THE ROAD TO SERFDOM. [Perhaps the true meaning of the title is now apparent.]
The sister organization to Mont Pelerin from the very outset was the Pan European Union. Leading Mont Pelerin figures, including von Hapsburg and Walter Lippman, were pivotal figures in the Pan Europe movement. THE CONCEPT OF A PAN-EUROPEAN FEDERATION WAS A CORNERSTONE OF VON HAYEK'S SCHEME, WHICH DEMANDED THE REPLACEMENT OF THE NATION-STATE WITH A "BENIGN’’ FEUDALIST SYSTEM.
Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, THE FOUNDER OF THE PAN-EUROPEAN UNION, WAS HIMSELF THE OFFSPRING OF AN 800-YEAR-OLD OLIGARCHICAL FAMILY. The Kalergi branch had ruled the island of Crete and forged the thirteenth century treaty that brought Crete under Venetian control. The Kalergi family eventually migrated to England as part of the "Venetian Party'' takeover of the British Isles.
...
In 1923, Count Coudenhove-Kalergi launched the Pan-Europa Union, an organization that won the immediate support of the very people who would install Hitler in power.
...
At the same time, PAN-EUROPA ENJOYED THE ACTIVE BACKING OF WINSTON CHURCHILL; Columbia University President Nicholas Murray Butler--the leading patron of the Comintern's Frankfurt School; Archduke Otto von Hapsburg; and Walter Lippman. The latter two, were also founders of von Hayek’s Society for the Preservation of Liberalism and the Mont Pelerin Society.
The fact that Winston Churchill was an advocate of Pan-Europa would prove to be particularly significant. Following the defeat of Hitler, and the further collapse of the Hapsburgs' power, Churchill became the leading postwar patron of the Conservative Revolution. Today, the entire Mont Pelerin apparatus is an asset of the House of Windsor-led Club of the Isles. [See Note 2 for information on a connection between the MPS and the Mob.]
The Mont Pelerin Society
The Mont Pelerin Society, from the outset, was to be a clandestine agency committed to implementing the “Hayekian'' Conservative Revolution.
One of the key figures in this effort was Antony Fisher. Born in London in 1915, educated at Eton and Cambridge, Fisher was elected to the Mont Pelerin Society in 1954. The following year, he founded the Institute of Economic Affairs in London, as the first of dozens of front groups for Mont Pelerin that he would help launch. Other IEA founders included von Hayek, who at this point was at the University of Chicago; Ralph Harris, a leader of the British Eugenics Society which had earlier helped draft Hitler’s race laws; Keith Joseph and Allan Walters.
When Margaret Thatcher was elected Prime Minister of Britain in 1979, the Mont Pelerin apparatus moved right into 10 Downing Street. IN RECOGNITION OF THE MONT PELERIN SOCIETY'S LOYAL SERVICE TO THE HOUSE OF WINDSOR, Queen Elizabeth II appointed Ralph Harris a peer for life, as Lord Harris of High Cross, and knighted Antony Fisher and Allan Walters. Walters was given an office at 10 Downing Street as Thatcher’s resident economic advisor.
On Feb. 20, 1980, Margaret Thatcher added her endorsement to the project in a letter to Fisher; and May 8, Milton Friedman threw his support behind the international effort: "Any extension of institutes of this kind around the world is certainly something ardently to be desired.''
To carry out this global effort, Fisher launched the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in 1981. Originally based in San Francisco, Atlas is now headquartered on the campus of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia near Washington, D.C. IN A STRATEGY PAPER WRITTEN IN FEBRUARY 1985, FISHER WROTE OF THE NEED TO TRANSFORM THE "EXTREMIST'' ANTI-GOVERNMENT, RADICAL FREE MARKET POLICIES OF THE VON HAYEK MONT PELERIN SOCIETY APPARATUS INTO THE "NEW ORTHODOXY'' THROUGH THE LAUNCHING OF HUNDREDS OF SMALL THINK TANKS ON EVERY CONTINENT. "TO INFORM [i.e. con] THE PUBLIC, IT IS NECESSARY TO AVOID ANY SUGGESTION OF VESTED INTEREST, OR INTENT TO INDOCTRINATE [by a centralized organization]....
The lesson in all of this? Don't be fooled by cheap Madison Avenue propaganda. There is nothing "American’’ about Newt Gingrich's "new American civilization,'' and there is no truth in Dick Armey’s "true Hayekian agenda.'' And, as this morning's panel amply demonstrated, there is no "free market.'' Remove sovereign nation-states from a role in economic development and all you have is the oligarchy's cartels. The so-called Gingrich Revolution is just the latest effort by the House of Windsor’s agents and useful fools to repackage the same Conservative Revolution that has brought death and destruction to civilization throughout much of the past century. [Emphasis added] [3]
The Walpole Era
To any sane person, it is clear that Mandeville speaks for the Prince of Darkness--denying God and Heaven, and advocating a dictatorship of evil over all humanity, to confine it to a living Hell. MANDEVILLE WAS WIDELY KNOWN TO BE THE LEADING FIGURE AMONG BRITAIN'S SATAN-WORSHIPPING SECRET SOCIETIES, WHICH PROLIFERATED RAPIDLY AMONG THE DEGENERATE FINANCIER ELITE. They became notorious after George I’s accession to the throne in 1714--typified by the infamous Hell-Fire clubs--and flaunted their political ascendancy following the devastating financial blowout of the South Sea Bubble in 1720. Huge fortunes disappeared overnight, along with scores of fictitious stock companies; but vast sums were raked in by the Anglo-Dutch oligarchy and the political thugs they employed.
To what remained of the decent, informed portion of the British population, the entire affair had a specifically Satanic, Mandevillian character. It was vividly captured by the artist William Hogarth in his 1721 engraving, The South Sea Scheme, portraying the Devil presiding over an orgy of obscenity and brutality, IN CELEBRATION OF THE DESTRUCTION BROUGHT ON BY THE CRASH. To keep matters from getting out of hand, a King’s Order-in-Council was issued that year banning the Hell-Fire clubs, AT LEAST IN THEIR PUBLIC FORM. [Emphasis added] [4]
These [Hell-Fire Clubs] were loose groupings OF SOCIETY'S ELITE, the “beautiful people," drawn from the ranks of the nations' politicians, poets AND WRITERS [the forerunner of today’s media; see my related comment on the media in my Bohemian Grove article]. The members dedicated themselves to debauchery and blasphemy. The Hell Fire Clubs caused such outrage in genteel society that in 1721 a Royal Edict was passed which condemned, "Young People who meet together, in the most impious and blasphemous manner, insult the most sacred principles of our holy religion, affront Almighty God himself, and corrupt the minds and morals of one another."
The most famous Hell Fire Club was that founded by the English gentleman and member of Parliament, Sir Francis Dashwood during the 1740's. Again, the membership was exclusively made up from the rich and powerful of society. It was rumoured that the American politician Benjamin Franklin was also a member [he was actually spying on what were his enemies - although a womanizer, Franklin was obviously not a satanist]. Dashwood would base his club on Rabelais' fictional Abbey, the inscription "Do As Thou Wilt" being above the entrance to the club's headquarters. The club was actually known to its members as The Monks of Medmenham, The Friars of St Francis of Wycombe, or The Order of Knights of West Wycombe. THE MEMBERS MET AT MEDMENHAM ABBEY AND LATER IN A SERIES OF CHALK CAVES THAT DASHWOOD HAD CONSTRUCTED UNDERNEATH WEST WYCOMBE HILL. POPULAR GOSSIP OF THE TIME TELLS OF DASHWOOD AND HIS “MONKS" PERFORMING BLACK MASSES and how prostitutes were brought to the caves, dressed as nuns, to cater to the unholy monks' carnal desires. While many of the claims leveled against Dashwood and his friars were based on religious outrage and hearsay, there seems little doubt that the Monks of Medmenham were involved in the pursuit of sensual pleasures and the study of heretical and arcane matters. [Emphasis added] [5]
[end of excerpts]
We get the talk, the Establishment gets the action
Don't bother to try to make sense of the blather being spewed by the Establishment’s puppets and talking heads on the subject of economics and finances. Each instance is geared toward clueless people with the attention-span of hamsters, and toward providing a plausible excuse for whatever they're trying to excuse at the moment. There is no cohesion to these excuses, nor is there any philosophical basis for them.
On the other hand, if you examine the EFFECTS of the major policies they advocate (as opposed to the occasional token gesture they make in favor of the General Welfare), you will see a consistent pattern of abandoning the masses to the ancient feudal oligarchy which tried to kill this nation in its cradle, and has been trying to kill it ever since. The economic warfare known as "free trade" is just one of the many fronts in the oligarchy's war against America and mankind, and those who continue to support it despite the rapidly mounting evidence of its destructive effects are traitors, pure and simple, to America and mankind.
To website's home page
References and Notes
[1] Jeffrey Steinberg, The Bestial British Intelligence Of Shelburne and Bentham
[2] "The Mont Pelerin Society, the radical-free market secret organization founded in 1947 by Friedrich von Hayek, and patronized today by Prince Philip, maintains the most accurate accounting ledgers on the world's underground economy. How is that possible? Because the Club of the Isles, since the era of the Opium Wars against China, and the escapades of Lord Palmerston's personal agent Giuseppe Mazzini in the last century, has been the leading sponsor and controller of global organized crime."
From The Largest Empire In the History of the World by Jeffrey Steinberg
[3]Richard Freeman and Jeffrey Steinberg, The Legacy of Friedrich von Hayek: Fascism Didn't Die With Hitler
[4]Graham Lowry, The Mandeville Model for Fascism
[5]Do What You Will: Three Men, One Spirit
<|>
Count Richard Nicolaus Coudenhove Kalergi
Practical Idealism
(Praktischer Idealismus)
The Racist and Supremacist Root of the Ideology behind the European Union
Marx and Engels, 1848
On the Question of Free Trade
Table of Contents:
Introduction, Engels 1888
Protective Tariffs or Free Trade System, Engels Jun 1 1847.
The Protectionists, the Free Traders and the Working Class, Marx Sep 23 1847.
The Free Trade Congress at Brussels, Engels Sep 30 1847.
Marx's Speech, On the Question of Free Trade, Jan 9 1848.
The Kölnische Zeitung on the State of Affairs in England, Engels Aug 1 1848.
Free Trade and The Chartists, by Karl Marx in the New-York Herald Tribune
MARX AND SATANISM
By Richard Wurmbrand
Requiem for Marx
By Yuri N. Maltzev
(1993)
Addendum
From The Review Of The NEWS, June 23, 1971.
Condensed from American Opinion
Sugar Keynes
By Zygmund Dobbs
14. CHILDREN AND RIGHTS
DEADEYEBLOG
<|>
Parity: The Key to Economic Sovereignty
Francis Hutcheson
Teacher of Adam Smith
Teacher of Adam Smith
By Murray Rothbard
Aftermath News
Ron Paul and Freemasonry
Animal Scam
Rocky Top Freedom Campaign
The "Next" TEA Party
Maps
Report: Large Landscape Conservation Key to Nature Preservation
House Wages War on Transit
GOP Bills Would Cut Funding for Rail, Walking, Biking
Bill Threatens U.S. Transit Funding
The U.K. Moves Ahead With High-Speed Rail. Can the U.S. Follow?
Remaking the San Francisco Peninsula Corridor with a Bicycle Expressway
Press Release: High-Speed Rail Will Deliver Growth, Improve Access to Jobs in California
<|>
SonsOfLibertyAcademy.com
RNC exposes Agenda 21
By Planet Prisoner
There were several resolutions adopted by the RNC on January 13, 2012. You may read them all on this link. One of the most formidable resolutions adopted is one that is long overdue for reconsideration. Agenda 21 has long been a thorn in the foot of personal rights, property rights, and economic stability. The resolution has not been “officially” released but Planet Prisoner hopes that this news spreads far and wide. Could this be a sign that we may be making some headway in getting OUT of the UN?
I doubt it….but it’s a start. I have taken the liberty to reprint the resolution here.
<|>
Govern America guest, Jim Beers 2/25/12
<|>
EXOPOLITICS
Politics, Government, and Law in the Universe
Politics, Government, and Law in the Universe
Omnicide
Give Me Some Truth / Audio Interviews
Truth Quest with Melodee
Growing Organically
From a grower using “Gaia’s Harvest” Ormus: “These plants are freaking Monsters!” and “…every part of this plant is useable.”
Ormus, is the key to future agricultural productivity.
Here are Blue Water Alchemy we make/create a liquid called Ormus (Orbitally Rearranged Mono-Atomic Elements – ORMEs) referred to as the Milk and Honey, the Manna from Biblical times.
These trillions of mono-atomic Elements in Ormus act to profoundly focus the “Chi” the life-force energy, thereby supercharging the plants as they grow.
The Ormus is to be used at the rate of one to two tablespoons per gallon of water at the beginning of the vegetative state and then again just as plant flowering begins.
Time to maturity is shortened by about 1/6th while yields, at a minimum, are 50% greater… Some growers even get yields 5 to 10 times greater!
The plants are far more resistant to insects, disease, mold, fungus, and variations in light intensity… Because the plants are so vibrant it even buys the grower some tolerance when grown with hydroponic systems if there happens to be some kind of mechanical failure that isn’t corrected right away.
Because the ORMEs are trans-dimensional in nature, clones have FREQUENTLY demonstrated spontaneous genetic changes. This is fascinating stuff.
As planet Earth goes through some very powerful energetic changes, it appears as if the ORMUS is allowing new strains of green to appear on this planet.
There is no greater return on investment that you can make right now than the addition of mono-atomics to your grow arsenal.
This is a partial list of the elements, in the mono-atomic or diatomic state extracted from Pacific and Dead Sea salt, that are found in Gaia’s Harvest Ormus: Cobalt, Nickel, Copper, Ruthenium, Rhodium, Iridium, Palladium, Silver, Osmium, Platinum and Gold.
These elements are commonly referred to as Sea-11 or C-11.
Each of these 11 elements has a critical role in growing the best plant possible.
We look forward to working with you to begin growing the biggest and healthiest crops you’ve ever had using this ancient vibrational technology!
GREENMEDINFO.com
Why The Law Forbids The Medicinal Use of Natural Substances
GREENMEDINFO.com
Has Drug-Driven Medicine Become A Form of Human Sacrifice?
"Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution the time will
come when medicine will organize itself into an undercover
dictatorship. To restrict the art of healing to doctors and deny
equal privileges to others will constitute the Bastille of medical
science. All such laws are un-American and despotic."
~ Attributed to Dr. Benjamin Rush,
Signer of the Declaration of Independence
Pharmageddon: The Death of Natural Medicine
What is so remarkable about the present state of affairs, is that it may have been predicted long ago, as evidenced by this passage in Revelation:
"At the end of times the merchants of the world will deceive the nations through their Pharmacia."
(sorcery) - Rev 18:23
Some believe we are now on the precipice of a medical end-of-times or “Pharmageddon," if you will, where medicine is no longer directly associated in any way with healing, rather, is a form of mass control and a highly organized means of defrauding the public of both its wealth and health, simultaneously.
After all, is there any greater absurdity than a medical model that treats the symptoms of disease with sub-lethal dosages of toxic chemicals and in which there is no attempt to uncover, understand or remove the causes of those imbalances?
After all, what disease has ever been found to be caused by a lack of a drug?
Is acid reflux caused by a lack of proton-pump inhibitors?
Is heart disease caused by a lack of statin drugs?
Is osteoporosis caused by a lack of Fosamax?
Is cancer caused by a lack of chemotherapy?
Is depression caused by a lack of Paxil?
Absolutely not! Then why would anyone consider it sound practice to use potentially toxic chemicals as a first-line treatment for conditions that are not caused by a lack of a chemical? To the contrary many diseases are caused exactly by culminative exposures to chemicals that not unlike drugs are biologically alien to the body. i.e. we are treating poisoning with poisons!
Can we dignify this approach by calling it medicine? Or, is it more accurately described as a form of sorcery?
THE HEALER'S TOOLBOX
GREENMEDINFO.com
[Guest Writer, Capt. Randall, is the author of Forbidden Healing, The Curiously Simple Solution To Disease]
In “The Healer's Grail” I outlined our predicament as Earth-dwelling biological entities. We operate on Solar ENERGY in the form of ELECTRONS and must consume Sun-charged phyto-nutrients and metabolize carbon bonds with the help of OXYGEN.
Opposing life today are mismanaged soils and electrolyte mineral deficiencies, oxidized/damaged fats, processed electron-stripped foods and all manner of toxic metals and organic poisons that lead to acidity, damaging free radical formation and electron shortages...ALL of which prevent oxygen delivery to mitochondrial motors and the generation of more electrons. When lacking charge, our cell structures become prone to oxidation, so membranes, enzymes, mitochondria and DNA all come under attack, OXIDATIVE STRESS! A “mechanical” approach to healing can address this energy shortage and electron imbalance using a toolbox full of common supplements.
Master the use of these basic “tools” first;
Vitamin C
Baking soda (sodium bicarbonate)
Apple cider vinegar
Magnesium Oil
Oregano Oil
Lugol's iodine
MSM Sulfur Crystals
Food-grade Hydrogen Peroxide
Chlorella
The repair protocol begins with large electron inputs. When “mechanics” (healers) measure body voltages and pH to assess electron inventories, they find that where there is illness... there is acidity and shifting voltages. The first step obviously involves raising charge. This can be performed using large inputs of the electric vitamin, Vitamin C. Quantity is key here, and creating overwhelming surges in body charge is what initiates healing. (Loosely; electrons=voltage=pH=Oxidation Reduction Potential)
Counter-intuitively, the next order of business is to oxidize. Vitamin C not only restores electron inventories, but in IV application or in oral mega-doses to bowel-tolerance it releases hydrogen peroxide around cells, cleaning them of pathogens, toxins, waste materials and unwanted debris. These oxidative bursts mimic normal immune function in inflammatory response. Food grade hydrogen peroxide, MMS, ozone and even iodine are other helpful oxidizers and HBOT a super-oxygenator.
Then, to boost oxygen penetration, alkalize. When pure Vitamin C is mixed with baking soda, sodium bicarbonate, in a small glass of water, the acidity of ascorbic acid is neutralized, producing sodium ascorbate and CO2 bubbles. The left-over bicarb or even an added half-tsp of sodium bicarbonate alkalizes blood and acts as a pH buffer. K and Mg levels and sulfur intake should be optimized to enhance oxygen supplies.
Real nutrients are the long term answer. Fats are critical, but most folks use the wrong oil in their “crankcase.” Easily oxidized feed-lot animal fats and unholy homogenized milk, heat processed “polyunsaturated “ vegetable oils and all their hydrogenated misshapen trans molecules become incorporated into membranes, blood vessels and nervous system tissues where they diminish oxygen transport and surface charge. It's important to supply fresh Omegas, monounsaturates and forbidden saturated fats like butter, coconut oil and those from grass-fed animals. Sugars/carbs turn into bad fats when consumed in more than small amounts as they raise acidity. High sugar intake results in glycations, sugar-protein caramelizations that stick to various cell structures like Gorilla Glue.
We have lists of acid forming and alkalizing foods to guide us toward a slightly alkaline balance and we have ORAC ratings (Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity) to make-plain antioxidant values in food choices. Note the wide range of conditions impacted by single substances in GreenMedInfo.com abstract correlations. Note the universality of Vitamin C or turmeric or garlic.
Charge detractors include metal burdens like amalgams, root canals, bromine, chlorine, fluoride, intake of burnt/oxidized foods,“dead” water, electromagnetic pollution and the toxic mental frequencies of fear and stress. Detoxification and elimination are enhanced using chelators that catch toxic molecules mobilized by inputs of electrons and oxidizers above. Chlorella, clays, humic/fulvic acids and charcoal do that job.
Usually once biochemical balance is restored, mood and intelligence become elevated and one regains emotional equanimity. Some will have to become more mindful in order to benefit and realize that the condition of their body and their life's eventual destinations are purely the result of their own states of consciousness. Chance enters the equation only rarely. Personal responsibility implies freedom from all the externally inflicted rules and irrationalities of our enculturation... permitting the free expression of the spirit, the will. Higher states of mind empower electrochemical “placebo” healing within and impact surrounding matter via the universal energy matrix.
The Forbidden Healing protocol follows an electrochemical path, but there are many variations on the theme now being used successfully by innovative healers around the world. Breathing, acupuncture, electrical, magnetic, bio-frequency, aroma, sound, bio-photon and other energetic therapies cross-over into the realm of physics and enter healing through different doors. In the end, they all provide more electrons, stronger body charge, increased oxygen penetration and mitochondrial output, expressive DNA function and enzyme production, higher vibratory frequencies and normalized biochemistry. “Electrons is electrons,” energy gathered... energy generated....any which way you can.
Understanding redox principles in health and healing ends the disorganized approaches common to both drug and natural therapies. When we accentuate Electrons and Oxygen, and eliminate acidic free radical varmints, optimal conditions can do nothing other than promote life. We have labeled hundreds of symptoms as individual diseases, yet basically all boil down to oxidative stress. This perspective is proven out every time efforts are directed at reversing it... when multiple “diseases” disappear. Just a new way of thinking.
Natural Society
How to Prevent Asthma Before Turning to Harsh Pharmaceuticals
Asthma is a health ailment that strikes both children and adults with breathing and respiratory issues. Approximately 17.5 million adults had asthma in 2009 and 7 million children had asthma in 2010. Causing wheezing, shortness of breath, chest tightness, and coughing, the western medical establishment suggests (as always) taking a pharmaceutical drug. But before you do, I would suggest educating yourself on not only the harms of such drugs, but how natural solutions can help you as well.
How to Prevent Asthma Before Turning to Harsh Pharmaceuticals
Following a long line of reports finding pharmaceutical drugs to be deadlier than traffic accidents and many illegal drugs, it was uncovered that many asthma drugs are actually killing more patients than asthma itself. The use of these drugs have been shown to result in nearly 4,000 deaths per year, which is more than the disease itself. What’s worse is that the Food and Drug Administration has known about this for years. Instead of heeding the warnings of many doctors and recalling or even just ending the production of these products, a simple makeover of warning labels on the drugs were mandated.
So if you shouldn’t take the drugs, then what should you do? As always, there are things to avoid as well as many natural solutions for taking care of asthma.
Due to the widespread usage of air fresheners and similar chemical concoctions such as scented candles, plug-in deodorizers, and wick diffusers, many more people are suffering from more asthma and allergies than normal. The chemicals used in these items have been shown to trigger nasal congestion, sneezing, and runny nose.
In addition to avoiding these aromatic products, soda consumption should be decreased. Research has pinpointed soda for upping the risk for respiratory diseases like asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). After conducting a survey with nearly 17,000 individuals, researchers found that 13.3 percent of those with asthma and 15.6 percent of those with COPD drank more than two cups, or about half a liter, of soda each day.
While avoiding these causes of asthma, there are also few dietary changes to implement that can help fight asthma. A study published in the American Journal of Respiratory Critical Care Medicine showed that adults who ate apples twice a week reduced their asthma risk by about a 1/3. Another study showed that children with mothers who ate apples during pregnancy were less prone to asthma for their first five years after being born.
In addition to apples, you may want to try a little-known herb called khella. Khella has been used to treat many conditions for many, many years. Commonly known to be a solution for kidney stones, this herb also treats asthma by soothing muscle spasms of the bronchial airways.
Even if you don’t find these solutions to help you personally, consider this before indulging in harmful medication or inhalers. According to results of a pilot study published Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine, thirty-nine asthma patients reported about as much perceived relief from a placebo inhaler and sham acupuncture as from an inhaled dose of the steroid albuterol. There have been numerous occasions where pharmaceuticals have been shown to be ineffective while placebos pave the way for your mind to ignite self-healing.
Explore More:
Asthma Drugs Kill More than Asthma, FDA Ignores Risk
Benefits of Apples Help Ward Off Asthma and Hiccups
Soda Consumption Increases Asthma and COPD Risks
Asthma Costs Economy 56 Billion Per Year
Magnetic Field Exposure May Cause Asthma
Could the Microwave be to Blame for Children’s Asthma?
Electro-Sensitivity: Is it Real?
video tutorial short
The World's Biggest Secret
The symptoms of electro-sensitivity relate to neurological disorders; they affect your heart they affect your skin, they affect your eyes, they affect your organs. Some of the key symptoms are chronic pain, fatigue, insomnia, palpitations, anxiety, depression, skin problems, ringing in the ears.
Many of the symptoms resemble the effects of the aging process and sufferers assume that they're just "getting older" and that such pains are "normal."
The World Health Organization defines electro-sensitivity as "...a phenomenon where individuals experience adverse health effects while using or being in the vicinity of devices emanating electric, magnetic or electromagnetic fields (EMFs)" and it presents it as arising from an "idiopathic," i.e., an "obscure or unknown cause."
Here however, Magda Havas, PhD., Professor of Environmental and Resource Studies at Trent University, Ontario, Canada presents five documented cases of electro-exposure from her formal studies, where both the causes and symptoms were found to be physiological and not psychological.
Radiation Poisoning Videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JChdk_5jqs
Essential Cannabis Hemp Oil Making Tutorial Using Safe Countertop Distiller & FROZEN Alcohol
video tutorialhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgEP9FdIzT8&feature=share
The Power of RAW Cannabis
video tutorialhttp://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/health-and-wellness/stockpot-broth.html
NextWorld TV
Stockpot Broth
Bringing Back The Healing Elixir Of Ancient Times
video tutorial short
The return of the stockpot to every American kitchen could actually revolutionize our health as a people, and save us millions of dollars in health care.
To clarify up front: this post is not about advocating eating more meat, and certainly not factory farmed meat. But if you DO eat meat, this is way to eat much, much less while getting all the nutrients and more.
Americans are catching on to what pioneering nutritional researcher, and dentist Weston A Price reported in his landmark book "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration".
Published in 1939, culminating over forty years of travel and study around the world. Dr. Price, once referred to in a medical journal as “the Charles Darwin of nutrition” was a dentist, who, with his wife, traveled the world to study the health of traditional people—from the Lotschental in Switzerland, the Native Americans, the Polynesians, the Pygmies and the Aborigines.
It began when Dr. Price took note that degenerative disease that afflicted Western cultures in the '20s and '30s, from dental decay to Tuberculosis, were not present in non-Western cultures.
He found that it was actually our increasingly modern ways of preparing and storing food, for greater convenience, that was stripping our diets of critical vitamins and minerals necessary for disease prevention.
As modernity progressed, and especially in today’s world, we stopped using all parts of the animal, which our forebears did. What is most essential for our health is not meat per se, but the vital nutrients—primarily vitamin A, D and K-- stored in animals fats, in bone, cartilage, and organ meats. The nutrients come from the grass that the animals have grazed on.
The parts we throw away today are the parts richest in healing nutrients. Organ meats, for example, have 10 to 100 times more nutrition than the filets and boneless chicken breasts packaged for us in today’s supermarkets.
Dr. Price swore by a few nutritional staples in the diet—animal fats, fermented vegetables, butter, whole milk, liver, eggs, grains, salt, and last but not least, broths.
Broths cooked over a couple of days, made from whole chicken, beef bones, or fish actually repair the same parts of our own bodies as the animal parts we ingest. These broths—the more gelatinous the better-- not only cure the common cold, they also build strong bones, heal the digestive tract, cure arthritis, joint pain, strengthen the immune system, beautify the skin, and provide the body with every single mineral it needs for optimum health to protect against a variety of diseases—even TB, diabetes, ulcers, and cancer.
Broths made from whole animal parts—bones, feet, hooves, knuckles—extract a healing elixir containing calcium, magnesium, phosphorous, silicon, sulphur and trace minerals. As the Weston A Price foundation reports on its website: “”It contains the broken down material from cartilage and tendons—stuff like chondroitin sulphates and glucosamine, no sold as expensive supplements for arthritis and joint pain,” also citing an old South American proverb: “
Good broth will resurrect the dead.”
The Acid Alkaline Balance Diet
An Innovative Program That Detoxifies Your Body’s Acidic Waste to Prevent Disease and Restore Overall Health
By Felicia Drury Kliment
(2010)
Giza Death Star Deployed
The Ancient War for Future Science
The Physics and Engineering of the Great Pyramid
By Joseph P. Farrell
(2002)
Cultural Mythology and Global Leadership
Edited by Eric H. Kessler and Diana J. Wong-MingJi
(2009)
THE GOLEM
A WORLD HELD HOSTAGE
Israel’s Nuclear Hell Bomb and the Road to Armageddon
A study of the “Israelization” of American foreign policy and its implications for the survival of mankind
By Michael Collins Piper
(2007)
The Great Epic of Israel
The Web of Myth, Legend, History, Law, Oracle, Wisdom, and Poetry of the Ancient Hebrews
By Amos Kidder Fiske, A.M.
(1911)
YouTube
Ray Hagins: The illegitimacy of a people called JEWS
Agenda 21 Forum for the Future Fully Exposed:
Post Industrial World Order
Post Industrial World Order
An exclusive podcast fully exposing Agenda 21 and its plan for a Post Industrial controlled world order.
For all of those who don’t believe that Agenda 21 is real, strap in and brace yourself for this podcast from Joe Joseph of Freedomlink Radio and Popeye from Federaljack.com.
They breakdown how Agenda 21 has been broken up and repackaged as three new organizations:
America 2050, Forum for the Future, and the Rewilding Project. The re-branding of Agenda 21 also allows the globalists to advance another older concept that has been in the works for a long time; The North American Union.
Through these three organizations, the globalists have implemented and started executing a strategy that will bring about an Orwellian state where all 50 states are merged into mega regions and people are rationed food, water, and energy.
Get ready… get set….
Real Jew News
Who’s Behind The Firing Of Pat Buchanan?
video short
Closure with Abusers
video tutorial
Everything You Need to Know about Narcissists, Psychopaths, and Abuse - click on this link: http://www.narcissistic-abuse.com/faq1.html
For her traumatic wounds to heal, the victim of abuse requires closure - one final interaction with her tormentor in which he, hopefully, acknowledges his misbehaviour and even tenders an apology. Fat chance. Few abusers - especially if they are narcissistic - are amenable to such weakling pleasantries. More often, the abused are left to wallow in a poisonous stew of misery, self-pity, and self-recrimination. Depending on the severity, duration, and nature of the abuse, there are three forms of effective closure. From the book "Malignant Self-love: Narcissism Revisited" by Sam Vaknin
The Ulsterman Report
WHITE HOUSE INSIDER: President Obama Says F**k Israel
EXOPOLITICS
Politics, Government, and Law in the Universe
'We Will Force You to Be Free' - Full Film
BBC: Adam Curtis - The Trap
IRAN War: The planned omnicide by American and European leaders
History They Don’t Teach – Zionist Terrorism
video short
Chernobyl Legacy
GHOST TOWN
- Chernobyl Pictures -
Elena's Motorcycle Ride through Chernobyl
Newsvine
A fishy tale which could only mean that DWH blowout was a planned event
Union of Concerned Scientists
This animation depicts a proposed weapon with a one megaton yield. The funding for this weapon was cut in 2005 defense appropriations. However, the United States still has a B61-11 nuclear 'bunker buster' in its arsenal which has a 400 kiloton yield, which could still cause hundreds of thousands of deaths and spread radiation to other countries. Learn more.
Next World TV / TED Talks
Zero Waste in Europe
video short
Joan Marc Simon is the coordinator of the Zero Waste network in Europe.
In this Ted talk he explains the goals, strategy and philosophy of Zero Waste. This is a movement that believes we can move toward a world where NO garbage is created.
He starts by saying that in the last 100 years, more waste has been created than in all of human history prior to then combined.
And where is it? There is no such thing as throwing "away" anything. It's just in a different place, often in some toxic form, not degrading organically, not being used.
It is indeed "wasted"!
Waste is a product of bad design, inefficiency in a system. He explains that when you break down what is in an average household garbage bag it is almost all "resources" that can be composted, recycled, or reused/repaired -- if only they were made to be diverted from the landfill.
In the Zero Waste community they maintain that if something cannot be reused, composted, recycled or repaired, the industry should not be making it and we should not be buying it.
The Zero Waste movement creates jobs he explains. Indeed, common sense tells us that doing anything in a less "convenient" way is by definition more time consuming, and people will be doing this extra work.
In Italy, there is a grocery store that only sells in bulk - no extra packaging, you bring your own. And some 60 towns that have signed up for the zero waste strategy for 2020!
"Zero Waste is the new peace movement", says Simon.
Waking Times
One Man, One Cow, One Planet
video short
Peter Proctor teaches Biodynamic agriculture in India, demonstrating how healthy soil creates healthy plants, which creates healthy food for healthy people. And throughout this cycle, every additive needed to produce natural and bountiful results is naturally produced and supplied by the farm. Biodynamic farming brings together the forces of nature in a unique way that can heal, land, livestock and people.
This movie is a model for our post-industrial future and how we can reclaim healthy living in a world where multi-national corporations have robbed the soil of its nutrient, the farmers of their techniques, and the people of their health.
Age of Propaganda
The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion
By Anthony R. Pratkanis and Elliot Aronson
(2010)
Architects of Deception
By Juri Lina
(2004)
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.4&thid=135cdbc1b9f26b66&mt=application/pdf&url=https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui%3D2%26ik%3Ddca63b2732%26view%3Datt%26th%3D135cdbc1b9f26b66%26attid%3D0.4%26disp%3Dsafe%26zw&sig=AHIEtbRsHR-fNhlRWmXhqHLvIyR4GNgU5g
The Myths of Zionism
By John Rose
(2004)
Ether Zone
Patriotpainter
IT'S ALL PROPAGANDA!
DROWNING IN LIES
The Beacon
Insinuation as War Propaganda
Waking Times
Politics is Exhausting – And that’s Exactly Its Point
Real-Debt-Elimination
Choosing Evil – Are Elections the Great American Illusion?
Since 1933 you and all other Americans have been pledged for the debt of the UNITED STATES owed to international bankers, most of whom are foreign to our country. Your credit, labor, productivity and property have been used and is now being used as collateral by the incorporated UNITED STATES OF AMERICA without your knowledge or consent. This is legal until you take back your implied consent by a special, lawful process.
In fact, you are unknowingly volunteering to be chattel for a mortgage held by financiers from the founding of this nation. Perhaps you infer that the name on the tax statement is yours and so you respond as though it were. This is voluntary servitude. To make this legal it was necessary to “cut a hole in the fence.” No matter that the escape route is hidden, obscured by legal brambles to make escape difficult. Unused it presumes consent.
As long as you do not use the escape route provided by law it is presumed that you are content to “remain in the pasture and be milked and used as chattel.”
Thwarting A False Flag
By Joseph Ehrlich
2-24-12
EMP has been around since about 1945 and over the past decade discussed as a very potent tactical weapon. This I believe is the first time I am discussing the subject, but do so because I have channeled into the portal that the Moabites do intend to foster a false flag attack and they intend to deploy an EMP field to actuate what is nothing less than another 9-11.
The reason they have played up Iran and the inspections and Iran's progress is because they want it globally accepted that Iran could effectuate an EMP attack on the USA and also they recently have played up that Homeland Security has detected a plethora of Iranian agents all over the USA.
The reason I see for the EMP attack is that it like 9-11 affords the Moabites moral justification to address all global realities linked to nuclear weapons. It also when implemented gives the Moabites third party cover for attesting to an economic depression for the USA something they have adeptly masked all along, including keeping up the facade for the US dollar. Needless to add that all real estate under the umbrella of any EMP attack will lose half its value, instantly.
Of course the EMP attack will allow the Moabites to fully trigger and implement the police state reality, which they have prepared for all along. When local police find themselves unable to contain the riots and carnage resulting from it, then US military personnel will find a home in the USA and I have no doubt that many of these assigned personnel will be of Mexican descent, hiding here since Bush 43 as a enemy military always ready to act when signaled but now they will be upgraded to wearing US military gear.
Please recognize that even among TSA and Homeland Security agents you have a plethora of personnel who have served hard time. Our lives will be at the mercy of people who should not hold the power over us they will hold -- as those in WWII had to bow and bend to the unabated power and abuse of the Nazi SS and similar organizations.
I tried to channel into the states where the EMP field will be deployed. I could not see it but there is little doubt that it has to be an area that has a significant economic impact on the nation. The Moabites detest New York and most other eastern areas and of course by impacting both New York and the tri state area and possibly also Washington, the battle cry for warfare against Iran will be heard globally and actualized.
It is hoped that this email helps thwart this stratagem from proving itself a reality. They have held this ploy a long time and the Moabites love it because it serves their global design while allowing them to effectively attack the USA without anyone knowing the truth that this is an attack the Nazis relished since giving up on WWII.
I include material below on EMP. It really is an ideal false flag providing the Moabites with the same platform of moral outrage seen with 9-11. If they could get away with 9-11 they have no doubt they can get away with an EMP attack as a similar false flag dynamic.
==== EMP material
Take a look at this 2006 article implanting into the Iranian strategic mindset an effective way to deal with the USA, to punish the USA for its involvement in Iran and the Middle East. The message to Iran is go for it, and also whenever you need it here is something to undermine the USA. The point of course is that the Moabites do position the USA as an inviting target because it is in itself a Moabite target (as long is proven the case).
===THE FOLLOWING IS AN INTERNENT COMMENT FROM JUNE 2011
Ah -- here is what you need first to understand: nuclear weapons can be TAILORED to produce a large EMP burst over a nation (the height can be selected to cover more or larger areas) WITHOUT producing ANY fallout on the earth's surface.
Russia, China and the USA (and probably others) have super-EMP weapons.
No fallout. Essentially all that garbage goes off into space -- since the bomb is detonated at a height of 250-300 miles. You would not even be able to HEAR the nuclear blast! You might see a flash.
It is true that all nuclear weapons produce SOME EMP -- but that is not relevant here. We are talking about a weapon TAILORED to produce a huge, devastating electro-magnetic pulse, without producing fallout or blast effects on the earth's surface.
Again -- it is cheap (less than $50 million to cripple the US economy and electrical grid and computerized vehicles) -- and thus accessible to multiple groups. VERY likely because it would be so devastating to the US (also Europe if deployed over Europe). It would leave buildings, bridges, roads, dams etc. untouched...
I don't think an EMP blast would provoke an all-out nuclear war (on the surface) if the agent behind the EMP blast was not knowable.
We're not talking about a car accident that might take a few lives.
We're talking about an EMP weapon that would send the US back to 1880 in less than a second, and cause widespread famine. Conservative estimates place the death-total in the US at around 250-300 Million, after about one year, mostly due to lack of transported medications and food, and concomitant gang-killings for food, drugs, etc.
====FROM WIKI
Post-Cold War nuclear EMP attack scenarios
The United States military services have developed, and in some cases have published, a number of hypothetical EMP attack scenarios. [44]
The United States EMP Commission was authorized by the United States Congress in Fiscal Year 2001, and re-authorized in Fiscal Year 2006. The commission is formally known as the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack. [45]
The United States EMP Commission has brought together a group of notable scientists and technologists to compile several reports. In 2008, the EMP Commission released the Critical National Infrastructures Report.[34] This report describes, in as much detail as practical, the likely consequences of a nuclear EMP on civilian infrastructures. Although this report was directed specifically toward the United States, most of the information can obviously be generalized to the civilian infrastructure of other industrialized countries.
The 2008 report was a follow up to a more generalized report issued by the commission in 2004. [22][46]
In written testimony delivered to the United States Senate in 2005, an EMP Commission staff member reported:
The EMP Commission sponsored a worldwide survey of foreign scientific and military literature to evaluate the knowledge, and possibly the intentions, of foreign states with respect to electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack. The survey found that the physics of EMP phenomenon and the military potential of EMP attack are widely understood in the international community, as reflected in official and unofficial writings and statements. The survey of open sources over the past decade finds that knowledge about EMP and EMP attack is evidenced in at least Britain, France, Germany, Israel, Egypt, Taiwan, Sweden, Cuba, India, Pakistan, Iraq under Saddam Hussein, Iran, North Korea, China and Russia. . .
Many foreign analysts-particularly in Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia-view the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons, including nuclear weapons, in a first strike. They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack, and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances.
Russian and Chinese military scientists in open source writings describe the basic principles of nuclear weapons designed specifically to generate an enhanced-EMP effect, that they term "Super-EMP" weapons. "Super-EMP" weapons, according to these foreign open source writings, can destroy even the best protected U.S. military and civilian electronic systems. [19]
Clarification of common misconceptions
In non-technical writings about nuclear EMP, both in print and on the Internet, some common misconceptions about EMP are nearly always found. These widely-repeated misconceptions have led to a very considerable amount of confusion about the subject. In 2010, a technical report written for the US government's Oak Ridge National Laboratory even included a brief section addressing some of those EMP myths.[47] Here are some further clarifications on common areas of confusion that have already been discussed (with references) in the above sections of this article:
1. Most nuclear weapons effects vary greatly depending upon the altitude of the detonation. This is especially true of nuclear EMP. The standard reference text on nuclear weapon effects published by the U.S. Department of Defense discusses this relationship extensively in the first two chapters, and provides mutually-exclusive definitions for phrases such as "air burst" and "high-altitude burst." [48] As explained in above sections of this article, nuclear detonations at all altitudes within the Earth's magnetic field will produce an electromagnetic pulse; but the magnitude of the EMP and area that is affected by the EMP are strongly affected by many factors, and is especially strongly dependent upon the altitude of the detonation. (See the discussion above in the "Weapon altitude" and "Weapon distance" sections.) A nuclear explosion in deep space and not in a strong planetary magnetic field would be ineffective at generating EMP.
2. EMP is not a new kind of weapon effect. As stated in the "History" section above, nuclear EMP from a nuclear air burst has been known since 1945. The unique characteristics of high-altitude nuclear EMP have been known since at least 1962. Non-nuclear EMP has been known since at least 1951. Electromagnetic pulse is a prompt secondary effect of a nuclear explosion, and nearly all of the nuclear EMP is produced outside of the weapon. All nuclear weapons can produce EMP as a secondary effect, but the effect can be enhanced by special weapon design. [19][22]
3. The E3 component of nuclear EMP that produces geomagnetically induced currents in very long electrical conductors is roughly proportional to the total energy yield of the weapon. The other components of nuclear EMP are less likely to be dependent on total energy yield of the weapon. The E1 component, in particular, is proportional to prompt gamma ray output; but EMP levels can be strongly affected if more than one burst of gamma rays occurs in a short time period. Large thermonuclear weapons produce large energy yields through a multi-stage process. This multi-stage process is completed within a small fraction of a second, but it nevertheless requires a finite length of time. The first fission reaction is usually of relatively small yield, and the gamma rays produced by the first stage pre-ionize atmospheric molecules in the stratosphere. This pre-ionization causes the gamma ray emission from the high-energy final stage of the thermonuclear weapon (a fraction of a second later) to be relatively ineffective at producing a large E1 pulse.[33][34] (See the blue pre-ionization curve in the "Peak Electric Field at Ground Zero" graph above.)
4. It has long been known that there are many ways to protect against nuclear EMP (or to quickly begin repairs where protection is not practical); but the United States EMP Commission determined that such protections are almost completely absent in the civilian infrastructure of the United States, and that even large sectors of the United States military services were no longer protected against EMP to the level that they were during the Cold War. The public statements of the physicists and engineers working in the EMP field tend to emphasize the importance of making electronic equipment and electrical components resistant to EMP - and of keeping adequate spare parts on hand, and in the proper location, to enable prompt repairs to be made. [22][34][49] The United States EMP Commission did not look at the civilian infrastructures of other nations.
Theosophical Society
The Theosophical Society is an organization formed in 1875 to advance the spiritual principles and search for Truth known as Theosophy. The original organization, after splits and realignments has (as of 2011) several successors. Theosophy is an active philosophical school today, and through a process of schism has also given rise to other mystical, philosophical and religious beliefs and organizations.
Formation
The Theosophical Society was officially formed in New York City, United States, in November 1875 by Helena Blavatsky, Henry Steel Olcott, William Quan Judge and others. Its initial objective was the "study and elucidation of Occultism, the Cabala etc." After a few years Olcott and Blavatsky moved to India and established the International Headquarters at Adyar, in Madras (Chennai). They were also interested in studying Eastern religions, and these were included in the Society's agenda. After several iterations the Society's objectives evolved to be:
To form a nucleus of the universal brotherhood of humanity without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste, or colour.
To encourage the study of comparative religion, philosophy, and science
To investigate the unexplained laws of nature and the powers latent in man
The Society was organized as a non-sectarian entity. The following was stated in the Constitution and Rules of the Theosophical Society, "Article I: Constitution":
4. The Theosophical Society is absolutely unsectarian, and no assent to any formula of belief, faith or creed shall be required as a qualification of membership; but every applicant and member must lie in sympathy with the effort to create the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity.
The Society reformulated this view in a resolution passed by the General Council of the Theosophical Society on December 23, 1924.
The Hidden Masters
One of the central philosophical tenets promoted by the Society was the complex doctrine of The Intelligent Evolution of All Existence, occurring on a Cosmic scale, incorporating both the physical and non-physical aspects of the known and unknown Universe, and affecting all of its constituent parts regardless of apparent size or importance. The theory was originally promulgated in the Secret Doctrine, the 1888 magnum opus of Helena Blavatsky. According to this view, Humanity's evolution on Earth (and beyond) is part of the overall Cosmic evolution. It is overseen by a hidden Spiritual Hierarchy, the so-called Masters of the Ancient Wisdom, whose upper echelons consist of advanced spiritual beings.
Blavatsky portrayed the Theosophical Society as being part of one of many attempts throughout the millennia by this hidden Hierarchy to guide humanity – in concert with the overall Intelligent Cosmic Evolutionary scheme – towards its ultimate, immutable evolutionary objective: the attainment of perfection and the conscious, willing participation in the evolutionary process. These attempts require an earthly infrastructure (such as the Theosophical Society) which she held was ultimately under the inspiration of a number of Mahatmas, members of the Hierarchy.
The Society's seal incorporated the Swastika, Star of David, Ankh, Aum and Ouroboros symbols.
Ouroboros
The Ouroboros (or Uroborus) is an ancient symbol depicting a serpent or dragon eating its own tail. The name originates from within Greek language; οὐρά (oura) meaning "tail" and βόρος (boros) meaning "eating", thus "he who eats the tail".
The Ouroboros represents the perpetual cyclic renewal of life and infinity, the concept of eternity and the eternal return, and represents the cycle of life, death and rebirth, leading to immortality, as in the phoenix.
It can also represent the idea of primordial unity related to something existing in or persisting before any beginning with such force or qualities it cannot be extinguished. The ouroboros has been important in religious and mythological symbolism, but has also been frequently used in alchemical illustrations, where it symbolizes the circular nature of the alchemist's opus. It is also often associated with Gnosticism, and Hermeticism.
Carl Jung interpreted the Ouroboros as having an archetypal significance to the human psyche. The Jungian psychologist Erich Neumann writes of it as a representation of the pre-ego "dawn state", depicting the undifferentiated infancy experience of both mankind and the individual child.
Theosophical Society in America
The Theosophical Society in America (TSA) is a member-based nonprofit organization dedicated to the teaching of Theosophy and affiliated with the international Theosophical Society based in Adyar, Chennai, India. The name "Theosophical Society in America" was legally adopted by the American Theosophical Society in 1934. Previously, other organizations had used the same name during the years 1895-98 and 1898-1908.
Philosophy
The Theosophical Society is composed of individuals united by their concurrence with its three Objects, by their dedication to promoting brotherhood, and by their interest in study and spiritual self-transformation. Theosophists consider that belief should be the result of individual study, experience, and insight, rather than reliance on dogma. They see each religion as an expression of Divine Wisdom, adapted to the needs of a particular time and place. Theosophy regards the universe as alive and interrelated, with an intelligent order guiding the cyclical evolution of all life. The Theosophical Society supports the right of individual freedom of thought for every person, and no doctrine is in any way binding on any member of the Society.
Objects
The three declared Objects of the Theosophical Society are:
To form a nucleus of the universal brotherhood of humanity, without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste or color
To encourage the comparative study of religion, philosophy, and science
To investigate unexplained laws of nature and the powers latent in humanity
Mission statement
The Theosophical Society in America encourages open-minded inquiry into world religions, philosophy, science, and the arts in order to understand the wisdom of the ages, respect the unity of all life, and help people explore spiritual self-transformation.
History
Russian noblewoman Helena Blavatsky and American Colonel Henry Steel Olcott founded the Theosophical Society with attorney William Quan Judge and others in late 1875 in New York City. After his two major co-founders departed for India in 1879 to establish the international headquarters of the Society in Adyar, India (near Madras, now known as Chennai), young Mr. Judge carried on the work of advancing interest in Theosophy within the United States. By 1886 he had established an American Section of the international Society with branches in fourteen cities. Rapid growth took place under his guidance, so that by 1895 there were 102 American branches with nearly six thousand members. Madame Blavatsky died in 1891, leaving Colonel Olcott and English social activist Annie Besant as the principal leaders of the international movement based in Adyar, and William Quan Judge heading the American Section.
During the contentious Ninth Annual Convention of the American Section in 1895, eighty-three lodges voted for autonomy from the international Theosophical Society Adyar. The international President-Founder, Colonel Olcott, interpreted this action as secession, and revoked the charters of those lodges, whose members reorganized into the first “Theosophical Society in America” under William Quan Judge. After Judge's death the following year, Katherine Tingley stepped into the leadership of that organization, and in 1898 folded the Theosophical Society in America into the Universal Brotherhood, resulting in the Universal Brotherhood and Theosophical Society. After several changes in location and name, the successor organization is now known as the Theosophical Society Pasadena. Other groups split off from Tingley's organization over the years, becoming Theosophical Society in America (Hargrove) the Theosophical Society of New York, the United Lodge of Theosophists, and Temple of the People in Halcyon, California. The second “Theosophical Society in America” headed by Ernest Temple Hargrove dropped the words "in America" from its name in 1908.
The Myth of the One Version of the Truth Part 1 in a Continuing Series
By Frank Buytendijk
Solving the One Version of the Truth Conclusion of a 2-Part Series
Plato and the Art of IT Governance Part 1 in a Series on Business, IT and Governance
By Frank Buytendijk
"Until kings are philosophers and philosophers are kings, cities will never cease from ill.”
- Plato
Machiavelli and Sun Tzu on IT Governance Part 2 in a Series on Business, IT and Governance
IT Governance Redefined Part 3 in a Series on Business, IT and Governance
To Govern or to be Governed, That is the Question
I wouldn't be surprised if research showed that most governance problems are not caused by a lack of process, structures and mechanisms of governance, but for other reasons. For instance, a lack of alignment between governance principles and the real world (too much Plato, not enough Machiavelli), or equally likely, because of political games, dysfunctional behaviors and people putting their own goals before the organizational goals.
Let's make a comparison between an organization and a society. Philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and John Locke (1632-1704) have argued that creating a state is not a top-down exercise, in those times described as a given by God. A society is the result of a social contract between citizens, who prefer handing over some natural rights to a government rather than a state of nature in which everyone has to fight for their own survival. As Hobbes stated, life without a social contract would be "nasty, brutal and short."
Employment is very much the same way. Although business futurists for years now have advocated for everyone in the brave new world to be self-employed, going from one project to the next, most employees prefer a safe employment over the anarchy of the open market and a nasty, brutal and short career trying to make some money here and there. Entrepreneurship simply isn't for everyone. Classical organizational theory even defines a salary in the same terms as a social contract. For the benefit of receiving a salary, employees give up the pursuit of their own goals, at least for the number of working hours per day, and they have a boss to tell them what to do.
But obviously, it doesn't work that way anymore. We can all attest to that. There must be another angle that we haven't discussed yet. So far we have discussed how to govern and often that is all that is discussed in corporate life. But Confucius brings up a good point. What about the opposite; what about how to be governed? The numerous employees working across the organization play a role too.
Locke and Hobbes already defined the social contract as a bottom-up principle, instead of society being imposed top-down. But it wasn't until the twentieth century, around the 1980s, when the idea of looking at society from a public-debate-in-small-communities point of view emerged. Or should I say re-emerge, as this is how Plato described a direct democracy in the Greek city-states. Politics is too important to leave to the politicians, the communitarians would say. Communitarianism emphasizes the need to balance individual rights and interests with that of the community as a whole, and argues that individual people (or citizens) are shaped by the cultures and values of their communities. Two prominent communitarians are Michael Sandel (1953), philosophy professor at Harvard, and Amitai Etzioni (1929), director of the Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies at George Washington University.
Communitarianism is an interesting angle to explore to get new insights into governance for two reasons. First, unbridled capitalism, the view that business is amoral, and the lack of a sense of community have been causing severe societal and business disruption in recent years. So any examination could be helpful in improving business governance. Second, communitarian thinking very much aligns with the 2.0 trend in business and technology.
Sandel sees a more important role for solidarity, social responsibility and a general sense of community. Translated to business, this would lead to a different view on governance. The following principles read like an "Anything 2.0" manual:
Communitarians don't believe in top-down rules, but rely on the assumed wisdom and experience of a community that has a strong and distinct culture.
Citizens should not only know their rights, but particularly their responsibilities. Citizens should involve themselves in society because they feel a sense of ownership and care for the society in which they belong.
Communitarianism leans heavily on mutual communication within the community. Within the tight structure of the family, the church or other social structures it is easier to keep people on the straight path.
Sometimes privacy and other personal goals are subjected to other, higher purposes, serving the whole community.
Is this back to the old days? The moral society of the 1950s? On the contrary; it is pure 2.0 thinking. The current generation that has entered the workforce, called Generation Y (people born after 1980), are collaborative in nature, expect decision-making to be a group process and seek advice from their peers more than from their superiors. Today already the impact of the use of social networks within business can hardly be overestimated.
So what does this all mean for IT governance within business? Let's recall part of the definition of IT governance: "... addresses the definition and implementation of processes, structures and relational mechanisms in the organization..." From a communitarian point of view, these processes, structures and mechanisms shouldn't come from management and shouldn't be imposed on all employees. Instead, good governance would be facilitating a company-wide ongoing discussion on what is right and wrong. Good governance would be governance on the metalevel: creating a process that creates the process. The definition of governance would come out of the group, but also the enforcement of it. The role of management is to facilitate the process and make sure the right people are involved.
But be careful what you wish for, because it might come true. It does sounds like a dream come true for employees, as their voices are finally heard and they become an integral part of the organization's strategic process. But with great freedom comes great responsibility. Employees also become accountable, and through 2.0 technology the community discussion is transparent. Brilliant ideas are visible to everyone, as well as less brilliant ideas. And not participating in the process is also very visible. In fact, everything you do and don’t do becomes uncomfortably visible. With hierarchic boundaries removed, every voice competes with all others. It becomes a step back to the state of nature – survival of the fittest.
It would also be foolish to assume that an enterprise 2.0 would no longer need management and would become self-organizing. In fact, I would argue that in the 2.0 world, management and leadership skills become even more important. It requires wisdom and a lot of experience to moderate communication and decision-making processes in such a way that everyone has been able to contribute, that there is buy-in from everyone, that the topic of discussion is aligned with other topics, that all external aspects such as regulations are considered as well, and that the result is both in time and practical. In fact, in Plato's terms, it would take a philosopher king to manage such a process.
The communitarian view raises the stakes for management in other ways too. I am not even addressing the fear of letting go, and hoping the discussion goes in the right direction. Moderating discussion is a management task anyway, whether it is in the 2.0 world or not. No, I am addressing a much more fundamental issue: the true nature of governance.
Governance in practice today is often not much more than "organizing compliance." Making sure the company obeys all Sarbanes-Oxley regulations, industry-specific rule, and other legal requirements. Fundamentally, as hard as it is, it is a tick-in-the-box-exercise. Compliance is like being a child: cleaning up your room because you have to.
I believe the definition of governance we've been using is missing the point. Governance is like being a grown-up: running a decent household because you want to, and because it serves the purposes of everyone in the family. Governance communitarian style is about what is right and what is wrong, according to the values and culture of the organization. It’s about the strategic principles and how they affect the entire organization. It is governance as we would define it in our personal lives, e.g., governing ourselves as human beings, composing ourselves, controlling ourselves in difficult situations, questioning and analyzing our own behavior. We behave ourselves because we want to, not because we should. A challenging perspective indeed.
References:
You may remember Marcus Aurelius leading the troops on campaign in Germany in the first act of the movie Gladiator.
Being reasonable doesn't necessarily equal being rational.
Recent articles by Frank Buytendijk
Machiavelli and Sun Tzu on IT Governance
Plato and the Art of IT Governance
Solving the One Version of the Truth
The Myth of the One Version of the Truth
---
ANTIWAR.com
Israeli Assassinations and American Presidents
By Allison Weir
On Jan. 13 the Atlanta Jewish Times featured a column by its owner-publisher suggesting that Israel might someday need to “order a hit” on the president of the United States.
In the column, publisher Andrew Adler describes a scenario in which Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu would need to “give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel.”
The purpose? So that the vice president could then take office and dictate U.S. policies that would help the Jewish state “obliterate its enemies.”
Adler wrote that it is highly likely that the idea “has been discussed in Israel’s most inner circles.”
Numerous Jewish leaders quickly condemned Adler, who has now apologized for the column, resigned, and put the newspaper up for sale. An Israeli columnist noted that the hatred being stirred up against Obama is similar to conditions in Israel that led to the murder of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a Jewish extremist.
Many of those criticizing Adler claim that he defamed Israel by suggesting that it would ever do such a thing. Abe Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), proclaimed: “There is absolutely no excuse, no justification, no rationalization for this kind of rhetoric. It doesn’t even belong in fiction.”
In reality, however, Adler’s expectation that Israel’s inner circles have explored such a course of action, and would be willing to undertake it, may be entirely accurate. The fact is that Israel has killed and plotted to assassinate people throughout the world; a number have been Americans. One alleged plot was chillingly similar to Adler’s suggestion.
There is evidence that in 1991 an Israeli undercover team planned to assassinate a U.S. president. The intended victim was George Herbert Walker Bush.
The first person to write of the plot was a former 11-term Republican congressman from Illinois, Paul Findley. In a 1992 article in the Washington Report for Middle East Affairs, Findley described the alleged scheme and how it was revealed.
Findley wrote that the U.S. Secret Service had received a warning that elements of Israel’s spy agency might target Bush when he went to Madrid for the opening day of the peace conference to be held that year.
According to Findley, a former Mossad agent named Victor Ostrovsky, who had written a book exposing Israel’s spy agency, told a group of Canadian parliamentarians that he had received secret intelligence suggesting that the “the Mossad’s hatred of Bush — and support for Vice President Dan Quayle — might lead to an attempt on the president’s life.”
Israel considered Quayle much closer to Israel than Bush. Bush had particularly angered Israel by attempting to pressure Israel into ending its illegal settlement expansion on confiscated Palestinian land by withholding loan guarantees until Israel ended this practice.
Findley wrote that Ostrovsky’s statements were relayed to Findley’s friend and former colleague Paul “Pete” McCloskey, a prominent former Republican congressman from California who had recently been named by Bush to the National and Community Service Commission.
McCloskey, a decorated Marine veteran and graduate of Stanford Law School who had at one time been considered a presidential contender, flew to Ottawa to debrief Ostrovsky in person and evaluate his information.
Findley reported that Ostrovsky told McCloskey that the Mossad wanted “to do everything possible to preserve a state of war between Israel and its neighbors, assassinating President Bush, if necessary.” Ostrovsky said that a PR campaign was already underway in both Israel and the United States to “prepare public acceptance of Dan Quayle as president.”
Convinced that Ostrovsky was legitimate and his information significant, McCloskey jumped on the next flight to Washington, where he reported Ostrovsky’s intelligence to the Secret Service and State Department.
The apparent plot never went forward, perhaps because Ostrovsky and McCloskey had given it away.
Ostrovsky gave more details about the plot two years later in his 1994 book, The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad’s Secret Agenda, published by HarperCollins.
In the book, Ostrovsky wrote that an extremist group within Mossad was responsible for the plan. He said they kept the plan secret from then–Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, though they believed that Shamir would have ordered such a hit himself if he hadn’t been constrained by politics. In the lead-up to Israel’s 1948 founding war, Shamir had headed up a terrorist group known for its assassinations.
In his review of Ostrovsky’s book, Ambassador Andrew Killgore, a retired career foreign service officer and publisher of the Washington Report, called the book an “insider’s probing exposé of some Middle East realities that have been hidden too long from all but Israeli eyes.”
Ostrovsky wrote that the Israelis planned a “false flag” operation, in which they would pin the assassination on Palestinians. They kidnapped three Palestinian militants from Beirut who were to be the scapegoats, took them to Israel’s Negev desert, and held them incommunicado.
“Meanwhile,” Killgore writes, “Mossad-generated threats on the president’s life, seemingly from Palestinians, were leaked. These were designed to throw suspicion on the organization of rogue Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal. Names and descriptions of the three terrorists were leaked to Spanish police so that, if the plot was successful, blame would automatically fall on them.”
Ostrovsky reports that after the assassination plot was eventually canceled, the three Palestinian prisoners were “terminated."
Targeting Americans
If the plot had gone forward, this would not have been the first time that Israel targeted Americans for death. Nor would it be the first false-flag operation.
• In 1954 the Mossad planned to firebomb American installations, libraries, and other gathering places in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood was to be blamed for the attacks, thus causing American animosity toward Egypt. An accidental early detonation of one of the devices caused the plot, known as the Lavon Affair, to unravel before it could kill or mutilate the intended Americans.
• In 1967 Israeli air and sea forces perpetrated an almost two-hour assault in which they tried to sink a U.S. Navy ship with a crew of 300. While the attack failed to sink the ship, it succeeded in killing 34 Americans and injuring 174. Some analysts have conjectured that this was also a false-flag operation; it is highly likely that Egypt would have been blamed for the attack if the ship had gone down.
• In 1973 Israeli fighter pilots were ordered to shoot down an unarmed U.S. reconnaissance plane (at the time the U.S. was delivering massive weaponry to Israel to prevent it from losing the “Yom Kippur War” with Egypt and Syria). While the Israelis were unable to reach the altitude of the U.S. plane, they did manage that same year to shoot down a civilian Libyan airliner that had strayed over Israeli territory, killing 104 men, women, and children. One was an American.
• In 1990 a Canadian-American scientist and father of seven, Gerald Bull, was assassinated in Belgium. All indications are that it was an Israeli Mossad hit team that drilled five bullets into the back of his head and neck. (Israel has assassinated a number of scientists of various nationalities. The most recent is a 32-year-old father of a young son from Iran.)
• In 2003 it came out that Israeli leaders had officially decided to undertake assassination operations on U.S. soil. An FBI spokesman, queried about the Israeli plans, said only: “This is a policy matter. We only enforce federal laws.”
• In recent years a growing number of American peace activists have been intentionally killed, maimed, and injured by Israeli forces, including 23-year-old Rachel Corrie, 21-year-old Brian Avery, 37-year-old Tristan Anderson, 21-year-old Emily Henochowicz, and 21-year-old Furkan Dogan.
All of this has been minimally reported in the U.S. press. While major news organizations from England to Israel to Australia covered the Jewish Times’ apparent endorsement of a possible Israeli assassination of a U.S. president, the scandal has been largely missing from U.S. media. Even Atlanta’s AP bureau inexplicably initially decided not to write a report on it, only finally sending out a story many days later.
Such news omissions concerning Israeli partisans are not rare. In 2004 a fanatic Israel loyalist wrote a letter saying that he was going to burn down Presbyterian churches while worshippers were inside (he was furious at the Presbyterian Church’s decision to divest from companies profiting from the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian land). This grisly threat also received minimal media play.
Despite Israeli violence against Americans (even while American taxpayers have given far more of our tax money to Israel than to any other nation) American presidential candidates, with the exception of Ron Paul, continue to vie over who is most devoted to Israel.
It is ironic that Adler considers Obama so bad for Israel, given that Israeli analysts have rated him second only to Mitt Romney in his fidelity to Israel. And Obama has now released a seven-minute video that may catapult our first African-American president into first place in pandering to an apartheid nation.
Perhaps he’ll be safe from assassins.
Read more by Alison Weir
The Real Story of How Israel Was Created – October 10th, 2011
American Taxpayers Subsidize Israel’s Prosperity – August 31st, 2011
Israeli Video Games in Gaza – August 23rd, 2011
Israel Lobby Dominates Congress, Media Covers it Up – August 10th, 2011
Critical Connections: Egypt, the US, and Israel – February 4th, 2011
---
<
<
<
<
<
