-8 votes

Obama, Wall Street, and the Federal Reserve, A Fascist Regime

Obama's partnership with the Fed and Wall Street cronies equates to a fascist regime. A fascist regime creates monopolies and cartels that eliminate competitive markets and have the ability to buy judges, politicians and elections. This usurpation of our right to representation is a betrayal of all the men and women who've fought and died for American ideals.

The generally accepted definition of fascism is a dictatorial centralized regime that imposes severe economic and social repression. The Federal gov't, Federal Reserve and Wall Street created a subprime bubble. This precipitated the financial crisis and the creation of Too Big To Fail (TBTF) banks, which according to the CBO will cost taxpayers 8.6 Trillion to prop up. The links are short videos of Sen. Brown citing the CBO report, Rep. Sherman saying Dodd-Frank's Resolution Authority equates to taxation without representation, and Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron saying Dodd-Frank "institutionalizes TARP for bank holding companies".

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3343308
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3343222
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3343218

The subprime bubble led to the creation of TBTF banks, which led to Dodd-Frank. Dodd-Frank allows Trillions of tax dollars to be spent for future bailouts, without Congressional approval. So market manipulation by gov't and corporations has eliminated one of our core Constitutional rights, i.e., no taxation without representation. America's founders endured similar oppression under King George III and his private sector cronies, so they rebelled against tyranny and instituted a government to "secure" their unalienable rights, which are given to us by the Creator. For solutions to hold the fascist regime accountable and restore our rights, check out this post titled "Fraud and the Federal Debt".

http://www.standupforyourrights.me/?p=1047

Wild animals function in a social hierarchy based on the strong dominating the weak. They don't possess a transcendent morality like humans, which translates into moral judgments that protect the weak from being assaulted, robbed or killed by the strong. The same Darwinian principles that govern wild animals (strong dominate the weak), are practiced by Machiavellian tyrants who feign morality while imposing the full weight of moral judgement on their citizens. These Darwinian principles are used to justify the lawless, immoral activities of large corporations, their officers, and boards of directors. The combination of Machiavellian leaders and immoral corporatism has resulted in a fascist regime. The legal and moral double standard they practice is the root of increasing global corruption.

George Soros and others argue that markets are amoral, i.e., markets are not subject to judgments whether moral or immoral. But markets are created and run by humans, and all nations have laws against fraud, theft, murder, etc., and these laws are based on moral judgments. Furthermore, the human activities that animate markets are subject to these laws, so the argument that markets are amoral is just a clever attempt to place financial elites above the law.

When drafting our founding documents, the founders drew upon John Locke's Treatises on Government and Montesquieu's "The Spirit of Laws", among others. Within the moral framework of a Constitutional Republic, a competitive capitalist economy provides the greatest amount of economic freedom while providing for the free exercise of unalienable rights. And a capitalist economy requires rules, for example, if you commit fraud and bankrupt your business, you must be allowed to fail and go to jail. Rules when enforced, eliminate the problem of TBTF banks. Also, monopolies are anti-competitive and don't allow for price discovery based on supply and demand. So in a capitalist economy, rules are necessary to ensure the efficient allocation of resources, price discovery based on supply and demand, and an economy where success is based on merit, not privilege.

So the question is, which political and economic models provide the most freedom for the most people? I believe Ron Paul's libertarian concept of limited gov't is the political model that best secures unalienable rights, and within that moral framework, a competitive capitalist economy provides the most economic freedom. These are self evident truths proven by thousands of years of empirical observation. For common sense solutions to limit the power of fascist banking cartels and the government that supports them, check out this DP post.

http://www.dailypaul.com/274979

Thomas Paine said the following: If there were to be a king, it would have to be the rule of law, and if a day of celebration were to be set aside, then homage should be paid to the law, a crown set upon it to remind those gathered that the law is king.

Check out these posts titled "Morals, Ethics and the Role of Gov't in a Capitalist Economy" and "Occupy Wall Street". The OWS post demonstrates the leftist connection to fascist corporations.

http://www.standupforyourrights.me/?p=917
http://www.standupforyourrights.me/?p=523

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

consistency

Like I said yesterday, it is philosophically inconsistent to say that I have the right to be free from being raped, but that I also have the right to rape another. An anarcho-capitalist isn't an anarchist. To say that a person is an anarcho-capitalist is to imply that they agree to the philosophical principal that they have 100% ownership of their body, and likely would agree that they have no right to the involuntary abuse of someone else's body. An anarchist doesn't view things this way, but just like we had the discussion yesterday about capitalism vs. free market capitalism, I'd say the distinction between an anarchist and an anarcho-capitalist is even more important to distinguish. In short, an ancap wouldn't think he has the right to rape you, because he knows that it is inconsistent with the idea that he himself has the right not to be raped.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

Your argument falls apart right...

here. You say an ancap "likely would agree that they have no right to involuntarily abuse someone else's body." So there's also the possibilty they wouldn't agree they don't have that right. Why? Because in the world you describe, all rights are subjective, i.e., based on individual interpetation. So in the ancap world, there is no agreement on what rights exist, let alone what rights should be enforced, and this is antithetical to a Constitutional Republic. And based on empirical observation, I don't buy your distinction between ancaps and anarchists.

http://www.standupforyourrights.me

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

In an 'ancap world' it is in

In an 'ancap world' it is in fact not required that anyone agree on the nature of rights. They will, but they aren't required to do so. Why? An ancap world is consonant with human behavior. A collectivist world is not. All collectivist philosophy depends on ethical asymmetry.
The burden of proof is not on ancaps.
The burden of proof is on ye who assert what is moral for rulers, violence, is not moral for the ruled.
Full stop, you are done.

Not done

You're suggesting rules based societies agree to apply one standard of morality to the ruler and different standard to the ruled, i.e., a double standard. This is false. The core principle that's agreed to in a Constitutional Republic is equality before the law, the opposite of a double standard.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

The Rule of Law is important.

The Rule of Law is important. But it is not sufficient for a free society.

Again ancaps do think that if statutory laws are going to be forced on people, they should apply to everyone equally. If we have to have masters, we would prefer masters that are at least bound by the same laws we are. We are with you on this.

But we do think that is not sufficient for a free society. The Rule of Law does not try to prevent you from having to act on your rights.

IE a progressive income tax is a violation of the rule of law, because it treats people differently per income. I think you would agree with that?

A flat or capitated tax is not a violation of the Rule of Law because it treats everyone the same. You could argue that a flat tax isn't consonant with the rule of law either, which is why I suspect the Constitution only allows capitated taxes on people. But today people generally accept that a flat tax, is 'equal treatment by the law' because it's a fixed percentage, so we'll stipulate this.

So flat taxes or capitations are ok by the standard of the rule of law.

However ancaps have a problem with them, because they are a violation of rights. They conflict with your natural right to protect your property. They thus depend on ethical asymmetry. The rule of law is not an aegis vs ethical asymmetry. Someone is taking and someone is receiving even though the law in question does abide the Rule of Law.

Further ancaps have a problem with taxes, even when they conform to the rule of law, on the grounds that you cannot delegate to others a power you do not have. Ie you don't have individually a right to steal. Put better you have zero right to steal.

No matter how many people you get together, no matter how many zeroes you add together, you always end up with ZERO right to steal.

There is no morality imputed to government that doesn't derive from the individual. This is necessary due to ethical symmetry, which is the basis of any just moral system. The basis of all collectivist political philosophies is moral asymmetry.

They are all convoluted because they are trying to hide the fact that they ultimately say the same thing. What is moral for one man is not moral for another.

I'm a fan of the rule of law. We're on the same team so far as that goes.

Ancaps just don't pretend that moral asymmetry is ever ok. Probably most of us would not trouble ourselves any further if we at least had the Rule of Law back, in the form of a re-legalized Constitution. There would still be government predations, but they would be minimized to the extent most of us would likely just try to live our lives. That's not an admission that society would not still be immoral, just the remaining immorality might not be worth the trouble to extinguish.

Putting our differences aside, what do you think about....

ending the Fed's monopoly on our money supply? Post a new comment on this issue, or something else, so others can get in on the thread. Thanks for your input.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

It must be very frustrating being ancaped...

Are there any disability programs available to the ancaped?

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

What about the government's role in tyranny?

The government is just another corporation. What is to prevent a government from lying, stealing and murdering?

How does adding one more corporation to the mix solve any problems?

In 1913 the US Congress sided with wealthy corporation and indivicuals agaisnt the people. Now what?

The rights are unalienable. Governments and other organizations can and do ignore this all the time. Their ignorance does not change reality.

Free includes debt-free!

The gov't is just another corporation?

I don't recall the Constitution saying the gov't is a corporation. And regarding tyranny, it wasn't just King George III that had placed the yoke of tyranny on our forefathers, it was also his private sector cronies. The British East India Co. had partnered up with George and they were taxing the colonies without representation. Just like Obama's job czar, General Electric's CEO, who is calling for a carbon tax to fund expensive green energy we don't need. But he's not alone, Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, BP, Chevron are all calling for a CO2 tax that will fund their carbon trading schemes and R&D divisions, which will position them to monopolize alternative energy markets.

And what about Too Big To Fail banks that threatened to destroy the economy if taxpayers didn't bailout them out, if that isn't tyranny, what is. Tyranny has always been a combination of gov't and private sector cronies. Check out this short clip on Dodd-Franks's Resolution Authority. We're being taxed Trillions of dollars without any representation.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3343222

Some say banks paid back bailout money and taxpayers made a profit. But Senator Brown cites a Congressional Budget Office report saying it will cost taxpayers 8.6 Trillion to prop up failing banks.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3343308

And Neil Barofsky, the Inspector General for TARP, said "fraud" by the nine largest banks caused the financial crisis. William Black helped obtain a 1000 felony convictions of "elite" bankers after the 1980's Savings and Loan meltdown. In this radio interview, he lays out compelling evidence of Wall Street fraud that hasn't been prosecuted. The first link is Barofsky, the second in Black's radio interview. Just listen to the first five minutes.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3343248
http://onpoint.wbur.org/2011/10/18/prosecuting-wall-street/p...

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

In all fairness, Paul

We get the government we deserve.....
The people, us, have allowed too much.

"the founders would be ashamed of what we are putting up with"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97wghBjEmNY

We're getting what we deserve?

That's exactly what the bipartisan criminals in Washington DC love to hear. In one fell swoop, it absolves them of all their crimes. I can hear the criminals saying, it's not our fault we defraud our constituents on a daily basis. It's not our fault we're destroying the Constitution and stripping citizens of their liberties. It's not our fault we use troops to commit crimes against humanity and more of them commit suicide than die in battle, we're just giving them what they deserve. I agree with you though, the founders would be ashamed to hear you let our criminal leaders off the hook.

http://www.standupforyourrights.me

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

We are getting what we deserve, and

the politicians are committing criminal acts and have true moral guilt. Both are true at the same time.

Do all crime victims deserve what they get?

If not, why are citizens who are defrauded by corrupt officials getting what they deserve? If someone sells you product based on fraudulent information, and you have the right under the law to get restitution, will you tell the prosecutor to drop the case because you got what you deserved? And why do you spend time at DP, which is primarily about restoring justice and the rule of law? Are you here just to tell everybody to turn in their guns, get in line for Obamacare and let the Fed continue robbing America?

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

What I am talking about is

not any sort of a crime victim status of we the people. We are not victims. We have deliberately killed 60 million babies, we have turned our children over to the state via their schools, we are so self-centered that we can't stay married, which causes lifetime harm to our children, and great harm to our society. We are an adulterous, fornicating people. We put women into combat. We have sodomy in the public square and all over the highest levels of our land. We boo the Golden Rule. Our churches have become ignorant and corrupt. Millions of of we the people think it is good and right to bomb every other country in the world, rule of law be damned. I could go on and on. We are willingly doing these things. We have met the enemy and it is us.

This is why I say that we deserve what we have gotten and deserve worse. The reason I supported RP, hang around here some, and do whatever I can for spreading awarness is so that maybe we WON'T get as bad as we deserve. It's more amazing and wonderful to receive a gift that we don't deserve, than one that we do. May liberty be that undeserved gift.

Ending the Fed's monopoly on our money supply.

I want to get a new thread going on this topic so, if you'd like, post a new comment on this or some other topic that interests you so others can get in on the thread. Thanks for the input.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

I hear your argument a lot but...

the people in my community are pretty decent. Those who say Americans are a bunch of corrupt deadbeats must hang out with some pretty sleazy people, or maybe they believe too much of what they hear in the media. Dirtbags in the media cover up the crimes of the elite while constantly bashing average Americans. I believe average Americans are for the most part, decent, hard working people.

If our criminal leadership and economic decline are due to the immorality of average citizens, then why is godless Communist China, whose forced abortion policy has killed 300 million children, and society exceeds America's corruption in every category you've mentioned, doing so well?

I believe political leaders, Hollyweird, and Wall Street intentionally pump as much corruption and filth into our society as possible. Corrupting American society is big business. They want our society to rot from within so they blame average citizens while giving criminal elites a pass.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

You're right. Give a government an inch they take 10 miles.

The hand sign at the beginning looked like "I love you".
http://lifeprint.com/asl101/images-layout/ily_asl_1024h.gif

I hadn't seen that in 5 years. A couple months later the financial system was crumpling. The bailout provided the whitewash to cover the failing paper foundation.

Free includes debt-free!

Is gov't the only problem?

Do business leaders who seek to create welfare programs for their businesses bear some responsibility, and if so, what do you think should be done about it? Recent comments raised the issue of the Fed's monopoly on our money supply. If you want, post a new comment on these topics so others can get in on the thread. Thanks for the input.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

We would have to rollback to 1835.

For the first time in history the US government had no foreign debtors.

That lasted almost 40 years when Lincoln's War against South Independence drove the US to bankruptcy and sending Congress to beg foreign investors for help.

David Hume died before the Dclaration of Independence was published. He predicted failure if ideology trumped personal liberty and individual responsibility.

Like Von Mises saw the eventual failure of socialism, Hume saw the poetential for the failings of liberty. What did Hume see?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SLlpu...

Free includes debt-free!

In the (wild) animal world

In the (wild) animal world you don't really find much rape or murder. Generally a male waits for the female to come into heat. And animals don't really murder, they protect what is theirs. Theft is not uncommon, but that is due to the instinct we call survival of the fittest, certainly a free market principal. Most killing in the animal world is the death of the weaker trying to take property from the stronger. Killing usually comes with a reason, self defense or defense of property. The aggressor (thief) is usually aware that it risk its life for the booty, just as in the "civilized" world.

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence

In this earlier comment you say...

animals react based on instinct, but later you imply that bees are acting on a moral impulse similar to humans. Would you care to discuss this further? If so, post a new comment so others can get in on the thread. Thanks for the input.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

Animalistic humans and the free market

Wild animals function within a social hierarchy based on the strong dominating the weak. But they don't possess a transcendent morality like humans, which translates into moral judgements that protect the weak from being robbed and killed by the strong. The same darwinian hierarchy that governs wild animals (strong dominate the weak) is the underlying principle practiced by Machiavellian tyrants who feign morality while imposing the full weight of moral judgement on their citizens. This animalistic, darwinian principle is also used to justify the lawless, immoral activities of large corporations, their officers, and boards of directors, who define this business model as the free market. This moral and legal double standard is the root of corruption in human society.

Check out the post titled "Morals, Ethics and the Role of Gov't in a Capitalist Economy".

http://www.standupforyourrights.me/?p=917

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

This is all false. The

This is all false. The Government's role in capitalist economy is ZERO. The corporation is a CREATION of government. It does not exist in the FREE MARKET. 650 Trillion in derivatives could not be exist without government REGULATION. The Corporation is created by government as a "legal" person. Many of these legal persons have been convicted of many felonies, yet no man nor woman serves any kind of punishment for the deeds of the Corporation. This is the "privilege and immunities" of the US person incorporated. Fines become the cost of doing business. If derivatives collapse, the corporation looses. But the individuals walk away unscathed. Without the regulations created concerning Corporations none of this would be possible. Few individuals would not subject themselves to the risk of serving time for committing a felony, yet under the corporate protections they fear not. The 650 trillion derivatives could not exist without the regulations that create corporations, therefore the derivatives are the RESULT of regulation. More regulation is not the answer to regulation. Further regulation will only serve the money interest, which is who the original regulation was created for to begin with.

You see none of these problems in the Animal world. The strong eat the weak in nature which is the means for survival. The strong in human society do not dominate the weak as a means of survival, but simply as a desire for dominance. IN nature dominance creates a balance, in man's society dominance destroys balance.

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence

Derivatives have existed for centuries

even without gov't interference. The simple act of placing a bet can be considered a derivative and betting has been going on for millenia. If you want to reply, post it as a new comment so others can comment on the thread. I'll try not to be so disagreeable.

http://www.standupforyourrights.me

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

Not true

A derivative is not a simple bet. It is a function of government.
It requires insurance by the unsuspecting, fractional reserves and a gross expansion of debt/credit, thus currency.
Hedging and speculating is a legitimate function in a free market. Derivatives is not speculating and hedging, its the creation of something of value from nothing.....

Can they exist?

I dunno you tell me, can blue eyes exist in a free market? Can gravity exist in a free market? Unalienable means rights are part of the very fabric of your being, Unalienable rights are in your DNA. You cant vote them away any more than you can vote away gravity, or any more than you can vote the heavy out of lead. It's essential to understand the difference between rights and privileges. This will help you solve some of the questions you have.

You have Rights; the Government has Privileges
1.
http://youtu.be/of586VeeqSs
2.
http://youtu.be/uNjbIfzCEEI
3.
http://youtu.be/WQ5LnjVJcFc

total time is about 20min

DISCLAIMER:
http://youtu.be/2n34eeXWjUQ

Fancy Shmancy Fine Print:
http://youtu.be/plIH98Kxu58

Maybe you should've quit at I dunno

I don't remember blue eyes and gravity being included in the Bill of Rights. And why did the the States refuse to ratify the Constitution without a Bill of Rights? I don't think it had anything to do with gravity of the color of a despotic leaders eyes. And why did our founders fight a war to secure our unalienable rights. Well, it's in the Declaration of Independence, governments are established by men in order to secure our rights, and governments are abolished when they fail to secure our rights. So obviously, unalienable rights need to be secured, unlike gravity or the color of one's eyes.

http://www.standupforyourrights.me

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

nevermind

sorry I bothered

DISCLAIMER:
http://youtu.be/2n34eeXWjUQ

Fancy Shmancy Fine Print:
http://youtu.be/plIH98Kxu58

I'm trying to get a thread going on ending the Fed's...

monopoly on our money supply. If you want to reply, post a new comment so others can get in on the thread. Your input would be appreciated.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

I'm sorry too

My comment was on the snarky side. My apologies.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)