Posts Tagged ‘Thomas Jefferson’

Jefferson Stabbed in the Back: the Supreme Court’s Prayer Ruling

May 6, 2014

Jefferson’s beautiful Libertarian Republic has once again been stabbed in the back, and this time fatally. The blade entered through the wedge created by the overthrow of the necessity of Separation of Church and State, one of the key ingredients in Jefferson’s prescription for Human Liberty.

This overthrow was engineered by five Catholics, imposing their will on a nation that is predominantly Protestant, and which was created by Christian Radicals, mostly Protestant, fleeing the Church-State tyrannies that dominated and enslaved Europe for so long. It was overthrown by a court that does not have one Protestant or Atheist sitting on its bench, in a country which is overwhelmingly Protestant, though they are fractured into hundreds of different sects. And this is called representative justice.

But even the three Jews and one Catholic who did try to defend those Protestants who agree with Jefferson that a Church-State connection is one of the first steps toward tyranny, — even they put up a feeble resistance, and did not touch on the real violations in this case which are Involuntary Servitude, and Theft of taxpayer’s monies.

Moreover, the Justices did not address the great divisiveness and factionalism which this heinous ruling will bring about, the hatred and aggression between members of local communities who never before really thought or cared that much about their neighbor’s views on organized religions.

During the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, Catholics burned Protestants alive for their religious views and writings. Protestants burned Catholics alive for their religious views and writings. Protestants burned other Protestants alive for their religious views and writings. Catholics burned other Catholics alive for their religious views and writings.

And then came the Libertarian American Revolution, led by Thomas Jefferson and Thom Paine. “Build up a Wall of Separation between Church and State”, wrote Wisechief Jefferson.

And tragically, yesterday, the emasculated Supreme Court overthrew that Wall of Separation that has made America a country where people of all religions, agnostics, and atheists, can trade and fulfill their commodity needs in a generally orderly fashion, without religous differences having any significant impact on their market behaviour.

And this heinous overthrow was backed by that disgrace in the White House who was put there with the backing of leading Liberal Democrats, like Alan Dershowitz and John Rothmann, and supposed Liberal defenders of Civil Rights like the Southern Poverty Law Center and the ADL. They helped put this religous fanatic in the White House, and it will be everyone in America who is a true Jeffersonian Libertarian and truly religious, and who doesn’t want to have the Deity’s name in any way connected with such an immoral government, who will suffer.

Jefferson taught us that government is a necessary evil, but an evil nevertheless. Why then would you want to contaminate “That which is Sacred” by any contact with such an immoral government as the American Government has become? And it has become that way because it moved away from the Libertarian Principles which motivated Thomas Jefferson, and the Radicals of the American Revolution. Those principles lead to both Civil Liberties, and Free-Market Capitalism. The two are intimately entwined.

But the legal reason why any official prayer before a townhall meeting, or any public-government event, should be illegal is that it is both a form of involuntary servitude, and a form of theft.

Prayer before a government event, like a city council meeting, violates the Constitutional prohibition against Involuntary Servitude, by forcing an attendee at a townhall meeting to either wait through the prayer, or remove themselves from the hall. But the reason they came to the meeting was to conduct secular, government business. In that their time and energy has been wasted in the course of their carrying out their civic duties or necessities, they have been forced into involutary servitude. You should not have your time wasted, or be forced to leave a public hall, because of someone else’s religious practices. And this is the one of the real reasons why this ruling by the Supreme Court is wrong, immoral, and unConstitutional.

The other reason is the theft of those taxpayer’s monies who agree with Jefferson on separation of church and state. While the prayers are being said in the townhall, the lights are running, the air conditioner may be going, the electricity is being used — and all, not in the service of legitimate government functions, but to further the religious propaganda of one of our major organized religions. These lights and power all cost money, and the fact that that tax money is being mulcted out of the Jeffersonian Citizens to pay for this violation of Separation of Church and State is actually Theft of Money, which in Libertarian Doctrine is a very serious, heinous crime.

In short, these prayer-pushers at public meetings are Slave Owners and Thieves, breeding factionalism and division among the American Public.

And the five disgraceful “Justices”, who voted for this vile overthrow of the Separation of Church and State, need to be impeached.

Hooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

 

The Paranoia of Absolute Power: From King John to Modern America

June 26, 2013

It seems that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were, unfortunately, dead right. ‘Twould be much better if absolute power made the Chief into a benevolent angel, using his power for moral ends, to better the lives of the people in one way or another, if only to get out of their way.

In the future perfect Capitalist society, where the industrious will happily work at their callings, and be materially rewarded for it, and those who wanted little but the freedom to wander, or write poetry, could go to voluntary welfare societies set up by Capitalists who believed in Socialism, — in that society there will be no coercion. One Capitalist may be greedy, but another Capitalist may be a Socialist who thinks that  everyone is entitled to the basics of food (vegan of course), clothing, and shelter. The Socialist-believing Capitalist could donate, or set up himself,  a charity, and set the rules according to his Moral Views. Such a man might agree with Erich Fromm”s argument for Socialism, once made in an interview with Los Angeles television reporter Jerry Dunphy,: “You don’t expect your dog to work. But you feed him. I think a man should be treated as well as a dog.”

Such an argument carries much weight with Silverwolf. But it presupposes and forgets two facts: Firstly, while I may feel compassionate enough to give a meal to a hungry man, the next fellow on the block may not feel the same way, and I don’t have the right to impose my moral beliefs on my neighbor. As a Libertarian, I am only concerned with his actions; and that those actions do not constitute a violation of the Libertarian non-aggression axiom: No man or group of men may aggress against the Person or Property of another man. Such an aggression is regarded by the Libertarian as “invasion”, and it is. Such an invasion is a Crime against the Property Rights of that Man, and since we own our bodies, an attack on our persons is also technically a violation of Property Rights.

Secondly, the Socialist argument above flounders in the face of the fact that by confiscating, or voting to confiscate from my neighbor, money or “taxes” to fund my own personal Socialistic moral views, I am committing an act of Violence against my neighbor, which in itself, is a form of treating a Man like a dog, the very argument used above to justify Socialism.

So, what are we to do in the face of this inconsistency between Capitalism and Socialism?

To Silverwolf the answer lies in a radically free-Capitalist free-market society, where 95% of all people had voluntarily, through no coercion, found something they loved or liked to do, and so there would be a vast Middle Class. Some people, who for their own personal reasons, wanted to accumulate truly vast amounts of Capital and Wealth, could go ahead and do so, but most people would be satisfied with a type of upper class-Middle Class life, choosing leisure and amusement over passion-driven, fanatical accumulation. Emelda Marcoses could accumulate 700 pairs of shoes if they liked, but most sane people would settle for three to seven. More than that would become encumberences to all but the collector.

In this Free-Market  prosperous Free Society, with Thomas Jefferson’s Bill of Rights rigorously enforced, a certain percentage of people would be inclined to give to charity, which would, in turn, support those who were completely physically disabled, like someone in an iron lung, or those who wanted to live completely outwardly indolent lives, but focus all their energy on the Inner Life. These would be called Philosophers and Poets, but the Philosophers and Poets would know that if the people ever became hardened enough, they might stop giving to charity, and then the Philosophers and Poets would have to deal with a precarious situation.

All these arguments are pretty academic now that we live in a world where, given the capacities of our factories, everyone could easily be given a daily ration of grains and beans, a few Mao Suits to wear during the year, and a tent that could easily be Solar Heated. Mist collectors, as we recently saw reported, can now collect and condense enough water out of the air that people can survive on it in very dry climates or areas without a well. (Just the thing you need next time you break both your ankles hiking in Chemehuevi Valley, and your car battery goes dead when you try to start it.) With such condensers,  many desert areas could become livable again. Composting toilets, and the sanitary advantages of the vegan diet, or even charity built septic systems, could serve individuals or tribes when it came to the unthinkables of these few Philosophical Indigents and Poets. (But who would read them, or join in their philosophical explorations? The rest of Mankind would be busily working away at their Callings, havin’ a great ol’ time.) Some Philosophers and Poets would even be so brilliant and engrossing that their productions of Thought and Word would sell on the open- and Free-market, and they’d grow wealthy. Look at the Stones. Jagger is a Damn Good Poet.

But say we didn’t live in such a world. Say that five or ten men owned all the land in America, that they could charge a grand-a-night rent for every man, woman, and child, and since they owned all the agricultural land, they could charge a $100/lb for cornmeal and oats, those delicacies of a vegan society. Obviously people would starve to death, and there would soon be five or ten men left, and their families, and maybe some favored buddies and their concubines.

 Such circumstances of material inequality, Professor Rothbard maintained, only exist where the Crime of Land Theft has taken place in the past, as in Central and South America, and, on a local scale, in parts of the Old American West. In other words, such inequality indicates a massive violation of the Libertarian non-aggression principle, and would have to be rectified.

But in a truly Free-Market Jeffersonian Bill of Rights Society, with a vast Middle Class, no such draconian inequality would be possible. Monopolies and Trusts, though they may exist in certain markets and local economies, soon break down, as happened over and over again to the various “Trusts” in America, because of the phenomenon of the “Price Buster”, the guy in the Monopoly or Trust who starts giving secret kickbacks to favored customers in order to take advantage of the absurd price rise the Trust has created. This happened in Sugar, Kerosene, Train Freight Charges — every kind of Trust. They always went Bust. That is, until they learned to have Government help them restrict competition, from FCC licenses to Teaching Credentials to Barbers Licenses to the Screen Actors Guild, to that crucifier of Youths, the Minimum Wage Law.

So the arguments Socialists always pull out, about how a free-Market would lead back to the poverty of the 19th century and the robber barons, is absurd, and obviously a lie to justify their religion. The Industrial Revolution, as harsh and brutal as it was, had led by the 1920s to the possibility of a comfortable, Middle Class society, although still in the 1920s, 90% of Americans were poor farmers. But the momentum of prosperity was clearly there, and now in 2013 we have an absolutely incredible technological society, so complex that no individual can hope to understand it all, unlike the American Indian and the Kalahari Bushman who could completely understand their environment. They knew Everthing they needed to survive, and were Masters at it. We know nothing, except perhaps our little niche.

For example, in the future, modern  factories could easily manufacture super suits of clothes that were especially perfect for each of the four seasons. Each citizen could buy, or would be given by the Socialist charities, one or four of these suits, and that is all the clothing they would need. The suits would last a few years or decades. But the suits would probably be boring and functional, like Mao suits, as sterile and heartless as the modern bureaucratic services one sees in Great Britain, Australia, and America Northern. Only those who worked would have the capital to obtain their clothing on the free market, where they could satisfy their personal predelictions, like the late Brian Jones, or the connoisseurs of Saville Row.

One thing the anti-Capitalists don’t like to admit is that as people as a whole get wealthier, and the Middle Class grows, the number of goods and services that people want increases, providing more work or jobs, in increasingly more specialized areas, thus creating an even more prosperous society. There would be no end to this in a truly Free-Market society. In a poor society, a hungry arthritic pensioner is not going to hire someone to walk their beloved dog; in an upper-Middle Class society it is possible, and so someone who is unemployed but loves both to walk and to be with dogs, may and probably will be able to earn a wage. In a wealthy Rich society, you might even have those who specialized in walking certain breeds, or had a magical rapport with such breeds, and their wealthy arthritic owners might pay through the nose to hire such people to walk their dogs. Such walkers might become wealthy and noted celebrities, (and then there would be the profits from their book sales when they retire: “Vicious Great Danes I Have Known and Loved”).

But all this wealth, Freedom, and non-coercion is only possible if that Free Society has the Jeffersonian Bill of Rights, and it is here that we see in the Modern World the greatest threat to that great Capitalist Libertarian Society.

Sadly, very sadly for America, the fact that the two most powerful other monolithic Powers in the Modern World. who are completely anti-Libertarian in their attitudes and rule (Russia and the Old Soviet Republics, and Fascist China) and ruled by Paranoid, self-delusional Powermongers, are now in the process of being joined by the one place in the world where there still seemed to be some remaining spark of Libertarian creativity and Freedom left: The United States of America.

That was solely due to the Bill of Rights, and the fact that a large part of her economy was still in the hands of private Capitalists (the Small Businessman and the Investor). But these two Siamese twins, the Bill of Rights and Free-Market Capitalism, were dependent on one clear inalienable Right: the Right of Privacy.

It seems that when the Paranoia of Absolute Power strikes, it strikes first at this sacred, Natural Right, the Right of Privacy, the Right to be left alone if one is not violating the Libertarian Non-Aggression Axiom. This is what that beautiful thinker, Jefferson, as well as Madison and many of the others, could see so clearly, and what the modern politicians are trying to overthrow: that Beautiful Fourth Amendment.

They’ve succeeded in that overthrow of Privacy in the Totalitarian Societies, like Fascist China, and all the dozens of other unspeakable dictatorships that curse this globe, be it North Korea or Zimbabwe.

And they’ve succeeded in the castrated Socialist societies like Australia, where the Australian Board of Statistics can throw you in jail and fine you $170/day if you do not answer questions about your sex life, as we recently saw on a report. And England and the EU, where the individual is tracked and kept track of, from Birth to Death. Never his own Man, but always a cog in the Socialist Machine.

And now, thanks to the Paranoiac in the White House, and the Politicians of both Parties, this violation of the Right of Privacy is coming to America.

Sir Richard Evans, in his brilliant series of lectures on Victorian England, pointed out that it was entirely possible for a man to go through life in Victorian England without ever once having had contact or engagement with Government or the State.

Not so in Modern America, with her dog-sniffing random searches of law-abiding motorists, or Socialist Australia, or Fascist China.

When the Lords put the squeeze on King John, he was forced to cede to them with Magna Carta, and Libertarian Freedom had its first Outbreak.

But when we come to the psycopathic Criminals and Mass Murderers, Hitler and Stalin, we can see what those who achieve absolute power, by absolutely destroying Privacy, are capable of doing. And the more power they have, the more paranoid and bloodthirsty they become. It’s almost like a Law of Nature, a Law that Thomas Jefferson well understood. Go read defecting former-KGB agent Oleg Gordievsky’s great “KGB: the Inside Story”, and you will see what Absolute Power does to the men at the top, as we are now seeing in America, as it becomes more and more a bureaucratic police state, that can harass anyone who criticizes it.

The road from The Lords of England’s victory over King John with Magna Carta, to the Libertarian Jefferson’s victory over King George III with the Bill of Rights, was a long one.

The degeneration from Hitler and Stalin until today is a short one, made all the more sinister by the perversions of modern science and technology. And the Politicians are exploiting that technology to overthrow the Bill of Rights, a Bill that doesn’t talk of “balance” when it comes to Natural Rights, but “Inalienable Rights”, Rights that can never be taken away from any Human Being without violence being perpetrated.

Is Mankind to go forward into a bright upland of Prosperity, non-coercion, and Privacy, or is he to be the plaything of Socialists and Fascists like the head of Fascist China, or the sexually-prying questions of a perverted Hag like Australia’s PM, Julia Gillard?

Strangely enough, Silverwolf believes that Libertarian Man will eventually Prevail over the Fascism and Socialism of the modern Politicians at the top.

Hoooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

Libertarians: Capitalists or Free-Marketeers?

April 12, 2013

In re-reading Professor Murray Rothbard’s wonderful essay, “Capitalism vs. Statism”, we were reminded that “capitalism” is a term invented by Marx and used by the Marxists. In contrast to this is the idea of the “free-market”, which arises naturally whenever men are left to their own devices, as in a peasant or jungle society. It needs no central planning, as each man produces or does what he has in abundance or trades his unique skills for the products of other producers, without any coercion. Any contractual disputes between producers and consumers are brought before the wise elders of the community or tribe, and settled.

So, this distinction set us thinking about whether we should use the term “capitalist” at all, and choose rather to employ the term “free-marketeer” in its place. Is not using a term coined by Marxists to describe the free-market  playing into their hands?

Indeed, what image does the term “capitalist” conjure up in the mind? Does it not mean someone whose one drive is to acquire capital, or money? In other words, someone obsessed with money? In getting this term dispersed in wide-spread usage, the Marxists have achieved a popular view that capitalists are money-obsessed individuals.

Now, what does the term “free-marketeer” imply? Much more that someone who is money-obsessed. Firstly, it stresses that one wants freedom not only for oneself, but for the other party in the transaction. And also, one wants freedom for everybody else doing transactions, and making markets. Freedom for all! Not just for me. Secondly, it shifts the emphasis from the money-half of the transaction to the commodity-half of the transaction. In other words, the true free-marketeer is interested in the commodity he is either getting, or getting rid of in the market, much more than the money-half of the transaction. Certainly, the seller is very interested in taking receipt of the asking price in terms of cash, but that cash is almost always as a means to some commodity or service that the seller values. The wealthy seller may find it in the added security of having his cash balance just a little bit larger, and further away from bankruptcy; the hungry seller in the lentil sandwich he just bought with the proceeds of his last sale. But in both cases there is some value, be it the elimination of the physical discomfort of hunger or the psychological gratification of being slightly more financially secure, which makes it worthwhile for the seller or buyer to engage in his action.

This emphasis on the commodity and its implimentation by the new owner for some physical or psychological value is the real meaning of the “free-market”, not two parties to a transaction who are only interested in the capital-half of the transaction. Obviously, the buyer is far more interested in the thing or service he is receiving for his money rather than just his money, or he wouldn’t have spent it. Even when one is “forced” to sell or buy, it is always to achieve a desired physical or psychological need, be it bread or selling one thing to pay off the debt on another thing. So “free-market” implies not money, but action, i.e. the action to which the acquired commodity is put.

Now, it seems to us that Mr. Libertarian, Thomas Jefferson, saw this subtle distinction between physical property and the ends to which it is put. Jefferson, in our view, was a Renaissance Man; one of the greatest. In his life’s actions, one can see the intellect of the Renaissance Man constantly at work, whether he was approaching gardening and farming, the construction of Monticello so that the U.S. Mint could put it on the back of the nickel 180 years later, playing the violin, collecting and reading books, arguing for the Abolition of Capital Punishment in Virginia, or putting forth the most lucid case ever for the Natural Law philosophy of Libertarianism in his masterpieces, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

In earlier documents the phrase “Man is endowed with certain inalienable Rights, amongst which are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” had read “Life, Liberty, and Property”. But we believe Jefferson had the amazing insight to make the Libertarian leap from mere “property” to the much larger cause or aim to which it is put, that is “the pursuit of happiness”. This insight directly correlates to Ludwig von Mises subjective valuation principle which is one of the major breakthroughs in economics of the Austrian School — that the value of anything is its subjective value to the owner or purchaser, and that value can never be predicted. No wonder all the other schools of economics could never ever figure out how to measure the value of an object; it cannot be done except subjectively. It can only be measured it terms of its psychological gratification and value to the property owner.

Now, Professor Rothbard in his essay breaks Capitalism down into two breeds: “state Capitalism” and “free-market Capitalism”. State capitalism is what we have in America and the West: the government and associated industries looting wealth from individual Capitalists, a form of Mussolini’s Fascism. “Free-market Capitalism” would be — well, no one really knows exactly what it would be like since it has never really existed except in remote peasant and jungle communities that are probably unknown to modern history. Free-market Capitalism’s days as a world economic system are ahead of it, in the future, and not in the past which has never known it.

Whether we should use the rather longwinded terms “free-market Capitalism” and “free-market Capitalist” every time we want to refer to Capitalism or the Free-Market, or whether we should comply with the Marxists by using a term they coined which, as we have pointed out, has prejudicial connotations, or lastly whether we should always use the term “free-marketeer” instead  of “Capitalist”, is a hard decision which each Libertarian must make for himself. The subtle distinctions are probably beyond the comprehension (or interest) of most Socialists.

Hooooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

Silverwolf’s Jeffersonian Epistle to the Fascist, President Obama

June 10, 2012

In light of the Hitlerian NDAA Bill, signed by the President on December 31, 2011, a day that will live in Infamy, which allows the US Military to arrest and secretly detain in military prisons for an indefinite period any US Citizen without benefit of a lawyer, and in light of the President’s claimed authority to assassinate American Citizens at will on a White House “Kill List”, and in the light of the President’s Murder of another 18 women and children in a NATO air strike in Pakistan, and in light of all the other Human Beings he has Murdered and permanently maimed in his immoral drone strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen, and in light of the President’s denying to the terminally ill in those States which have legalized medical cannabis the use of that medication, which in itself is another form of premeditated Murder, Silverwolf addresses the following Jeffersonian epistle to the President:

Sire,

No longer persevere in sacrificing the Rights of One Individual to the inordinate desires of the Executive Branch, but deal out to all equal and impartial Right.

Let no act be passed by Executive Order that may infringe on the Rights and Liberties of the Individual, but deal out to all equal and impartial Right.

These are our grievences, which we have thus laid before Your Majesty with that freedom of language and sentiment which becomes a free people, claiming their Rights derived from the Laws of Nature, and not as the gift of their chief executive.

Let those flatter who fear. It is not an American art.

Presidents are the servants, not the proprietors of the People. Open your breast, Sire, to Libertarian and expanded thought. Let not the name of Barack Obama be a blot on the page of History. It behooves you  to think and act for yourself and your People. The whole Art of Government consists in the art of being Honest.

We are willing, on our part, to sacrifice everything which Reason can ask to restore tranquillity. On your part, be willing to restore the Bill of Rights on a generous plan.

The G-d who gave us Life, gave us Liberty. The hand of Force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.

This, Sire, is our last, our determined resolution: To vote you out of office.

Hoooooooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

Ron Paul and Thomas Jefferson vs. The Income Tax

September 25, 2011

O.K. class. Time for a pop quiz. Who said the following, Ron Paul or Thomas Jefferson?: “…, what more is necessary to make us a happy and prosperous people? Still one more thing, fellow citizens — a wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.”

If you said Ron Paul, you were wrong, though the passage could well have been taken from one of his speeches. (The quote was taken from Jefferson’s first inaugural speech, March 4th, 1801.)  But the speech nutshellwisely illustrates the essence of their common political philosophies.

Most telling in Jefferson’s pocket edition formula for good, and American, government is the phrase, “and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread that it has earned”. In other words, the income tax is illegal under Jefferson’s conception of good government. And the only presidential candidate we currently hear calling for the abolition of that illegal income tax is Congressman Ron Paul. Therefore, a vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Thomas Jefferson, for the abolition of the income tax, and for his conception of government.

There are many problems and issues in discussing the taxation necessary for the running of the minimal functions that a Jeffersonian “Minarchist”, or believer in minimal government, would think are the few necessary. Some have called them “unavoidable collectivist necessities”, such as running the military, the contract fraud and violent criminal courts, with the ancillary jails and police, and some mechanism to teach reading to the public (since you couldn’t read the Constitution and the laws if you were illiterate), though this could easily be accomplished over the internet or in local community workshops instead of building the whole giant edifice of the public school bureaucracies, which hoover up taxpayer dollars for themselves and their employees, while leaving the students stunned with boredom and lacking the real education they need to survive in the brutal jungle of modern-day America.

One of the main taxation problems is “Which tax?” Some argue for this or that tax, an income tax but no sales tax, a sales tax but no income tax, a melange of the two, taxing only land, a graduated income tax, a flat income tax, etc. They all have advantages and disadvantages, and perhaps the most important point, at least in the “democratic” taxes, or those that affect all citizens like a sales tax or consumption tax, vs., say, a land tax that hits only landowners in society, — the most important point is the level at which the tax is set. An income tax of 1% would be much better, though less fair,than a sales tax of 15%, and a graduated income tax that went in a range of 1% to 3%, would be much better, though less fair, than a flat income tax of 25%.

It is clear from Jefferson’s phrase “and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread that it has earned”, that it prohibits the income tax, though some in the constitutional law community have postulated that it merely prohibits government agents from breaking into your house while you’re munching a sandwich, and ripping it from your mouth, assuming of course that you are a laborer. Apparently those who did not work, under this conception of the law, could legally have their sandwiches ripped from their mouths, not only within the sanctity of their domiciles, but even in public places like Zuma Beach or on top of Mt. St. Helens.

However, Silverwolf does not accept this latter interpretation of the so-called “Sandwich Munchers” School of Constitutional Law. No, he feels Jefferson’s phrase clearly and simply outlaws any kind of income tax. One of the main priniciples of Natural Rights Law, whose validity was accepted in Jefferson’s day as much as we now accept as valid that the Earth is round, was that Individuals were entitled to the fruits of their labor. This is a principle which Ron Paul has repeated, again and again, over the many years he has campaigned for the Presidency.

 The income tax is unconstitutional not only because it violates Natural Rights Law, but also because it is so intrusive into our private lives that it also violates the Right to Privacy, another pivotal conception in the American Constitution. What Individual citizens do with their money should be no concern of the government as long as they don’t violate the Libertarian Non-Aggression Principle that no man or group of men may aggress against the property rights of any other man, including his physical person. So the income tax is extremely dangerous as being conducive to a Big Brother, we have a telemonitor in your living room, kind of mentality. Crushing it would be a big step in crushing and then prophylacting the Fascist State.

Finally, the (graduated) income tax is extremely detrimental to national GDP, not including its graduated disincentive motivations that cause the wealthy to make less, and thus pay less tax, than they would if there were a flat income tax. Its detriment comes in the form of the vast amount of time wasted having to fill out income tax forms, study the laws, and comply correctly with them, while at the same time the taxpayer must support the vast bureaucracy of the IRS. The time and income wasted complying with these laws, and the amount of capital that flows to accountants, tax lawyers, and government bureaucrats, –all that capital could be going into capital goods equipment loans and production, or some other condition that will increase the quality or lower the price of consumer goods, or improve the life of the consumer.

Much of this problem of waste of time and law study could be bypassed by a flat income tax with no deductions, and, though still unconstitutional and something Libertarian Capitalists should oppose, it would still be a great improvement, liberating Americans from many hours of involuntary drudgery imposed by government, piled on top of the drudgery of their own daily labor.

A sales, or consumption, tax has its own problems. It hits hardest the poorest, so progressives and those on the left should be wary of it. It is fair, though, in the aspect of affecting everyone equally, with none getting exemptions. It does however throw the whole burden of collecting the tax on the backs of businessmen, and the small businessman especially will be hurt since he must do much additional labor in collecting and handing over the correct amounts, a task that will affect no other citizens. Since large firms can absorb these costs much more easily than the individual wildcat businessman, it will tend to wipe out the competition of the little guys challenging the big guys, something the large corporations have always loved.

Silverwolf’s own ideas for a fitting taxation revolve around an excise tax on products entering America from countries that do not adhere roughly to a Jeffersonian Constitution and Bill of Rights, i.e. Fascist dictatorships, using Fascist in a broad sense. For example, products from Fiji, Red China, and Syria would have a hefty excise tax thrown on them, products from Denmark, Canada, and Australia would not. Also, since the left is saying we should tax the wealthy, and since the Supreme Court has upheld the legal absurdity that Corporations are Individuals, and have the same rights as Individuals, a infamous ruling that must be overturned some day soon in the Court, —- if Corporations are Individuals, then they could be taxed as current individuals are, and Silverwolf would propose some kind of Income Tax, perhaps in the range of 1-5% on corporations whose net profit exceeded $5 million/yr, even if the personal income tax were abolished. This would truly be taxing the wealthy since these include many many multi-billion dollar corporations, and their huge corporate accounting departments could deal with the tax, instead of the single minimum-wage worker whose life is spent drudging for the Democrats and their welfare agendas. However, we should realize that even with this tax, the consumer will end up paying most of it in the form of higher prices for consumer goods, since the corporation will merely pass most or all of the tax on to the buyer through higher prices. Still, the savings in time, labor, and dissipated energy for the American Individual would be enormous.

It is time to bring America up to the level of Jefferson’s dream of good government, and one of the main keys to realizing that dream into reality is to abolish the individual income tax. This would necessitate drastic cuts in the overseas military, and the national government bureaucracies. These savings could cushion the cuts in welfare spending which could be phased out over 5-10 years, with major charities offering emergency care and affordable catastrophic medical coverage, and perhaps a residue government program, funded by the minimal taxes we’d have, taking care of any overflow the charities could not deal with.

So when you go into that polling booth next year, vote not only to liberate yourselves from the income tax, not only to put Ron Paul into the White House, but also to bring about Jefferson’s beautiful conception of good government: that government is best that governs least.

Let’s close the circle of our felicities.

Hooooooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

President Obama: He’s Right and Wrong on Libya

March 24, 2011

Silverwolf is exceedingly glad that the British, French, and Americans read his last blog, recommending air action against Muther Qaddafi in order to avert huge massacres of civilians. Within twelve hours, they were following his advice, although he did state that America should not participate, due to the hatred felt towards her in the Middle East. America’s comparative silence in the face of daily massacres of peaceful protesters in virtually every Arab and Gulf capital is probably regarded as the usual way things run by the man in the Arab Street, and our hypocrisy in acting on Libya, but doing nothing about Bahrain and Saudi Arabian Human Rights Atrocities, not to mention our long support for Torturer Mubarak, shows how much the Administration “really cares about people”. We said that Britain, France, the Arab League, and those responsible for economically propping up Qaddafi, like Italy and Germany, were the forces that should be the ones engaged in overthrowing this Miscreant and Mass Murderer and Torturer, but that Silverwolf would not object if America joined in the force, either alone or through NATO, for he holds that genocide or mass murder of civilian populations are the responsibility of all Libertarians on the face of the Earth. However, when we talk of regimes that are comparatively mildly repressive (say, a regime that jailed political dissidents but did not engaging in murder or torture) then holding off on military action that could cost the lives of thousands of innocent soldiers and civilians versus a wait of a few years for a regime to economically crumble or internally reform may be a far better way to go. But in cases of outright genocide and mass murder of civilian populations  like Germany, Uganda, Turkey, Rwanda, Cambodia, Bosnia, Darfur-Sudan, the shelling of Sarajevo, and Qaddafi’s War on Libya’s Youth, it clearly is better for the individuals being murdered if the world intervenes and saves their lives, rather than standing around with its thumb up its ear.

Silverwolf believes that Jefferson’s Constitution was meant as a blueprint for all Mankind, and all civil governments, and he thinks that Jefferson believed these Rights he reserved for men were Universal Natural Rights, and not just confined to those living on the American continent.

Where the President is wrong on Libya is simply that he did not go to Congress for a Declaration of War, and even if he had, there is no obvious way that Libya is a threat to the borders of the United States, or her sovereignty, and so, even if the President had gone to Congress for a Declaration, he should not in theory have been given it. Ron Paul is absolutely right when he says that the President should have gone to  Congress for a Declaration, and that he, Ron Paul,  would have voted against it. Britain, France and NATO, as well as the big commercial backers of Libya like Italy and Germany, along with the Arab League, were the ones who really had the immediate responsibility for the mess in the neighborhood, and they certainly have the financial resources to carry out an operation. They could also enlist and organize into a fighting force any Libertarian-inclined freedom fighters in the area who want to help liberate Libya from Qaddafi. This would have been much more practical than having America overthrow its Constitution yet once again with the unConstitutional “War Powers Act”. And the damage done to the principle of the President consulting with Congress for this most grave move is far greater than any kudos America might earn in the eyes of the North African Youth for joining in the coalition. Once again President Obama has punched the U.S. Constitution in the face.

So, in sum, we are glad that the international coalition has got the lead out of its elbow and acted to prevent mass murder, at least in Benghazi. But we are very disappointed, though not surprised, that the President has, once again, trashed the Constitution and the principle of American non-interventionism unless our borders are under immediate threat

Heap not a furnace for your foe so hot that it do singe yourself.

Hooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

NATO Fiddles While Qaddafi Burns

March 17, 2011

The namby-pamby whimps of NATO and the UN are once again flapping their lips in useless impotence, as the War Criminal Mahmzer Qaddafi continues to burn and murder the Youth of Libya. Just as the Old Ladies of the League of Nations were impotent in the face of Fascist Murder when the War Criminal Mussolini was butchering the Ethiopians in the days of Haile Selassie,  we can see that, 80 years later, the old Castrati politicians and the Immorality of Northern Europe and the Arab League have not changed one iota.

The Libertarian Revolution in Libya is being left to flaunder by the regimes that were supposedly founded on Libertarian Revolutions — Cromwellian England, post-Bourbon France, and post-Georgian America. And now all three stand by and have all the potency of a Mrs. Clinton and Mrs. Merkel and Ms. Gizzard-Down-Under, in the face of the “nos” of Valery Puta, and the Dictator and Occupier of Tibet.  The Children of Libya are being abandoned to a cruel death when, if the politicians were so to choose,  the Harrier-Hawkers and Mirages of Britain and France could strike a blow for Liberty in a few short hours that would redound through the centuries. But the “great Democracies” are ruled by gutless politicians, not Libertarians bent on extending the Cromwellian and French Revolutions, not to mention the Jeffersonian Revolution, to all of Mankind.

Early in the American Revolution, Jefferson and his cohorts discussed the necessity of attempting to procure foreign assistance and backing in their fight for Independence. Those who always mention the Forefathers warning against entangling alliances, fail to mention that America was not shy is seeking to secure such foreign succor and assistance in her battle for Independence. Now that other peoples are crying out for Jeffersonian Liberty, it seems only fair that America should provide what support it can (short of direct military intervention, given how much it is reviled in the North African and Arab worlds, due to the $100s of billions in aid its Liberal Democrats have given to the Arab Fascist Regimes). Such intervention should be left up to the chief proppers-up of the War Criminal Qaddafi (remember Chad?), the European and Arab powers who have forged the closest economic ties with the Butcher of Benghazi.

Silverwolf hopes the Euro-whimps, and the NATO Castrati, will finally get their fingers out of their earholes and do something to help Liberty triumph in North Africa, instead of their usual do-nothing tongue exercises while massacres are taking place. Diplomacy may be about expensive bottled water, catered dinners, and “frank discussions”, for the well-paid, well-fed diplomats, but for the thousands with untreated wounds in Libya, or the tens of thousands cowering in fear in their hovels, because of the violence of one Fascist Miscreant and his Mercenaries in the face of a Castrated World, — for them, diplomacy is a matter of Life and Death. And it seems that the Euro-pigs have left the Youth of Libya to the latter.

What is happening in Libya is the responsibility of the Europeans, of all Libertarians, and of all Human Beings. NATO and America should not stand by idly fiddling while the Miscreant and Criminal Moammar Qaddafi burns the Youth of Libya.

If Qaddafi re-instates his Reign of Terror, then please remember the names and faces of the countries and politicians who did not act. Their names and nations will live long in the annals of historical infamy.

The Brushfires of Liberty will Liberate Libya yet.

Hooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

Eyeless in Benghazi: The Arab Fascists Trembleth

February 18, 2011

The Arab Fascists trembleth, as the proverbial “Brushfires of Liberty”, that Sam Adams talked about 240 years ago, sweep through the accumulated kindling of Fascist dross that has been building up for 40 years in the Arab world. Amnesty International reports that 24 Libyan demonstrators have been murdered by the Qaddafi regime in the last few days, mostly in Benghazi, including a 13-year-old boy shot dead,  but the crowds of thousands of youthful Libertarians will be too much for the Fascist Criminals and their security forces to deal with. You can be sure that when the troops are firing on The People, and then the troops don’t get paid because the Regime runs out of money, then the troops will  soon be turning their guns on the Regime. According to a dissident interviewed by the BBC, Libya has a 31% unemployment rate, and, he added, you need to know someone to get anything done there, even obtain an airline ticket. A typical situation in a failed Collectivist State, right out of Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom”, where government interference in the free-market leads to shortages, and only the privileged government-connected people are able to get necessary commodities, just as under Stalin and his successors. The Youth of the Arab world will no longer tolerate this American-backed Fascist horsescat, and  Tony Blair’s buddy, The Butcher of Lockerbie, the Criminal Qaddafi, is probably defecating in his kaftan right now, as he seen his little Islamo-Commie “Green Revolution” come to a crashing end. The Libertarian Spirit of Thomas Jefferson and Murray Rothbard, of James Madison and Ron Paul, will conquer the putrid Fascism of Moammar Qaddafi, and the Fascism of the Criminal Rulers in Bharain, Iran, Yemen, Algeria, and Saudi, so strongly supported by the  hypocritical Clinton and Obama Administrations, just as that Libertarian Spirit has brought down the government in Egypt and Tunisia. The internet, Ron Paul, the bloggers, and the Rolling Stones have done their work, and the Arab, North African, and Persian worlds will never be the same.

The Ghosts of Lockerbie have their fingers around the throats of the Butchers.

Arab Fascists trembleth!

Hoooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

Libertarianism is Bustin’ Out Al-Egypt

January 29, 2011

It looks like the “happy disease” of Libertarianism is busting out in Egypt, and all over the Arab and North African world, as the youth of these countries finally get sick and tired of the corporatism and governmental corruption than has kept them down and impoverished for decades. The governments and Islamists can continue to blame Jews and Zionism for every single problem in the Arab and Islamic world, but the secular youth of these countries, and many of the educated middle class, know that the problem is corporatism or state socialism mixed and allied with the big private corporations and local wealthy magnates, and the perennial problems of government corruption and the arbitrary power of the “state”.

Over and against these tyrannies stands the old Jeffersonian Liberalism that motivated the writing of the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the beautiful Bill of Rights, one of the great documents of Mankind. These instinctively known values about the Rights of Man are surging up in the youth of North Africa, and they will overwhelm all resistance before them, whether the governmental Leviathan State, or the religious fanaticism and Jew-hatred of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group with long ties to the Nazi ideology since its inception.

Silverwolf finds it both singularly interesting and seminal that this whole revolt was sparked by one young man in Tunisia protesting against a Communist regulation: having to have a business license to sell vegetables. This  is a gross violation of the Capitalist Rights of the Individual to earn a living without the government interfering by either requiring a license to vend, or by looting part of the fruits of one’s labor through an individual income tax (a corporate income tax may or may not be allowable because a corporation is not an individual, but a notional, fictional entity and thus not subject to the Rights of Man).

And so this whole “revolution” began as one man’s capitalist protest against a communist system of regulation in Tunisia, and the extreme levels of unemployment which socialism, corporatism, and minimum-wage laws bring about,  and while Silverwolf does not approve of self-immolation as a form of protest, that extreme act of anti-Communist protest has sparked a revolution so furious and of such magnitude, of which that dead young man could never have dreamed a few weeks ago, that it shows us Libertarians the power and ability of One Individual to change the course of history.

Such is the Power of Freedom and the Thirst for Liberty in all sane men.

Of course, the battle will rage between this new secular, anti-government Libertarianism which unfortunately probably has little more than anger behind it (how many in the streets of Cairo have read their Jefferson, Madison and Murray Rothbard?), and the religious fanatics who would like to see a repeat of Carter’s Folly in Iran of backing a brutal torturing dictator. Already we hear bleatings from Ms. Rodham that Hosni Baby should be given just a little more time. I guess thirty years ain’t enough, is it, Madame Secretary of State, as long as you’re not the one being tortured or unemployed all through the years of your youth? Maybe when you have $70 million, it’s easy to wait? But believe me, Ms. Rodham, those young Capitalists in the Streets ain’t gonna wait.

Rolling the dice like this of course roils a readily rabid world. The excitement and uncertainty of seeing the cornerblock piece of land between Africa and the Middle East wracked by mayhem may seem like a one-off event, but it really fits in with a world pattern, from the American  Tea Party anger and reaction to the Obama extension of the Federal mandate by forcing Americans to pay a corporate insurance toll just to exist in America, and having themselves strip-searched if they must travel, to the growing unrest and malcontent manifest in Europe, and expressing itself in the Greek protests, the Paris and London Student protests,  and the whinings of the unions and the French pensioners who may have to wait to 62 instead of 60 for their lifetime dole.

And perhaps forshadowing this wave of Libertarianism, though not linked by any observers except Silverwolf here, was the unheard of reaction of a group of London protesters to the appearance of a Royal motorcade. The press reported that they chanted “Off with their heads”, and threw paint on the car, although when Silverwolf listened to the tape, it sounded like they what they were actually saying  was “Offer them beads”, and the paint on the car may have been an attempt to spruce up the appearance of the Royal conveyance, since the financial crisis has brought budgetary embarrassments to even the finest of British families. Knowing the British people’s love for their monarchy, it’s hard to imagine any other possible explanations.

However, he is willing to accept the official portrayal of the event, and, if it is true, it is a telling description of the disgust which youth, whether in Tunisia, London, Paris or Cairo, hold for the Establishment.

Yes, indeed. Libertarianism is bustin’ out all over the Arab world, and it ain’t even June.

Hoooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

America’s Day of Infamy: The Administration Welcomes a Dictator

January 19, 2011

American Libertarians can only hang their heads in shame, as they see the highest representatives of a government they didn’t vote for greet the head of the world’s largest dictatorship. It is a black spot indeed on the national honor, and we should not forget that it is “Liberal Democrats”, people who supposedly hold the rights of the little guy and the working man as sacrosanct, and who consistently market themselves as moral, principled people, who are the exact ones who are greeting the Dictator, and thus legitimizing and enabling the continuation of one of the world’s most despicable dictatorships. Murder, torture, religious prosecution, horrible exploitation of both workers and animals, kangaroo capital punishment courts, sale of body parts for profit: the list of crimes committed by the Red Chinese government gangsters is legion. How many innocent people and young soldiers did they kill in their wars against Vietnam and India?; how many Tibetan priests did they murder and torture? And have they ever been forced to return the booty they have looted in Tibet?

None of these issues seemed to deter the immoral triumvirate of Obama, Biden, and Clinton, from welcoming the head of this gangster regime to Washington, and forcing moral Americans to have to waste their taxpayer dollars in the purchase of Chinese flags, red carpet treatment, and elaborate dinners for the head of the torture gang.

Yet one does not see thousands of Liberal Democrats in the streets of our major cities, protesting against this crime against the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, and everything that Jeffersonian Republicanism stands for: due process of law, and the inalienable Rights of the Individual to be free of state tyranny, the exact antithesis of that State which Obama and Biden have legitimized on this Black Day for America.

During the mid-30s, Hitler’s greatest fear was that a boycott or embargo could have been passed by Congress which would have cut off American investment and contact with Nazi Germany. No boycott was instigated; America went to the Munich Olympics in 1936, thus legitimizing a torturing regime that engaged in religious persecution just as Red China does. And the rest is history.

Silverwolf would put it to you that America should treat Red China just as it should have treated Nazi Germany during the 30s, by a complete boycott and cutting off of all government recognition, a repudiation of all U.S. Government Bonds held by the Red Chinese regime, and withdrawal of immoral Most Favored Nation trading status granted to China, instigated under the Clinton Administration.

American and Jeffersonian Political Ideals are not just some toilet paper to be used to wipe up the scat of Fascism. In welcoming the Miscreant Criminal Hu, the Obama Administration has reduced those Ideals to such a state.

And Jefferson is cursing in his grave.

Hooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf