56 votes

Liberty, Can You Make a Little Room For Reality?

In America today some half of the population is dependent on direct assistance from the state. The great majority are those receiving social security and medicare in old age. The rest are on unemployment, whether by need or choice, and EBT, housing assistance, disability, etc.

If we count those who receive outsized tax credits in excess of what they paid, the number is greater.

Millions of others skate along the edge of poverty, working for a low wage, saving nothing, and foregoing assistance to which they could legally receive, out of principle, pride or habit.

Millions work directly for the state and depend on that employment for pensions and generous non monetary benefits.

Millions depend on public statute for matching contributions to medical and retirement benefits from private employers, and contribute to these benefits through payroll taxes.

Millions more work for corporations with direct ties and privileges from the state, foremost among them the gigantic financial sector.

Nearly all Americans have federally insured bank accounts, and save in US dollars with banks whose solvency and liquidity often depend on the policies of state.

Millions own treasury securities and mortgages the value of which are guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the government. If not directly, then through pension funds, mutual funds, 401ks, etc.

The middle class have their children schooled at public expense in public schools, and by and large do not wish to take on that extra expense. This middle class likewise has no desire to take in and support their aged parents.

These are not the poor, condemned wastrels of the public dole, oft cited in the anti state rhetoric. They are the self reliant, active, tax paying base of our political advances and appeals.

The state, to grow its power, to make itself the indispensable provider to every dependent, has worked to break down and replace every non state institution that in the past provided the supports and structures for the economic and political independence of families, communities, and individuals.


A father works 12 hour days for 20 years to support his children; he never once accepts a dime in public aid. He neglects costly medical care to put food on the table, and dies. The widowed mother gladly accepts social security, to which she feels justly entitled. The extended family breathes a sigh of relief and is grateful to avoid the burden.

The state has just weakened the family.

A family is struggling to get by, to save a little, ever conscious of its comparative status. More than mere desire to keep up with the Jones'es, they work to skirt the edge of a neighborhood with a half decent school district. It leverages itself happily to the hilt to pay for a house. The state offers public aid for tuition. The family, mindful of the ruthless social sorting process of the climb toward a decent paying job, happily accepts the aid.

The disabled or inept cannot make ends meet. They turn to the state for public housing assistance and a monthly food or cash stipend. The local Church, its pews half empty, congregations of mostly grey heads, is closing parish schools every year.

A hearty thanks to the state and God's blessing upon it! The church is unburdened of the expense of public charity for these individuals.

The state has just weakened the Church and the community.

A working man, lacking the capacity to make more than 10 or 11 dollars an hour, accepts assistance from the state to provide for his people. His fellows do likewise.

The corporation rejoices! it is freed from the political pressure of the laborers. The labor movement breathes its last, unions dissolve, and the new order of the Global corporation has a free hand to find the most degraded, desperate pool of labor anywhere in the world to work for a subsistence wage.

The labor movement and the middle class is weakened.

The middle class father of two works and saves; his wife works and saves; they purchase the most expensive house they can afford, not out of vanity, but to give their children access to a school without metal detectors.

They save every dime for tuition to get the kids into a good school. They know that in the highly competitive sorting process a degree from a good university seems to count for everything.

The grandparents have soaring medical costs. This good middle class, Republican family doesn't for a minute consider paying those bills or taking the grandparents in, and foregoing the aid.

The state is strengthened, the family weakened.

An aging activist for Libertarian principles, after decades of unpaid, selfless service to his political cause, is at the end of his financial rope. He cannot work, has no medical insurance. He is faced with the unimaginably painful moral dilemma of taking state assistance, or facing abject misery.

Where are all the Libertarian comrades in arms who preach their gospel of dismantling the state? Where is the community of voluntarists to contribute to providing a minimum of dignity to this brother in arms?

What have they offered to ANY of the above individuals, besides pretty words that mean nothing?


Amidst all the polemicizing, rhetoric, electioneering, pamphleteering, and fruitless academic scribbling; the endless disagreements over every nuance, who has even taken the FIRST STEP toward providing any, let alone all, of the basic, fundamental structures and supports of social order and stability, in lieu of the state? Who has even suggested doing so?

Do any of you consider for a moment the absurdness and futility of trying to eliminate the state without first building a social structure outside of the state to provide these basic needs? Law and order, financial security, education, a functioning credit system, a stable payments system for commerce?

Do you just criticize, and build nothing, secretly knowing you will never achieve your goals?

Is it all just a game, a futile exercise in ideological wordplay, logical hairsplitting, and an intellectual diversion?

Or is it the sublimated expression of alienation from the present order, carried on with pens rather than arms, for the timid and weary?

Or a complex spinning of conceptual webs for addled brains?

None of it has even the slightest relation to the real world and the interests, needs and motivations of real people.

I am shocked at the complete immersion in ideology, the total disregard for the real nature of the social organism, of human behavior and motivations, and the total ineptness of the means chosen to effect even the least ambitious of stated ends.

Setting aside the purely fantastical notions and utopian dreams regularly disseminated here, ideas divorced from all history, sound logic and observed experience -- putting these aside -- even the narrowest range of possible goals of the voluntarists and minarchists almost never refer to real political conditions and practical realities, or how they could be realistically achieved.

No heed to the actual nature of human behavior, interests, motivations, social forces of power and influence, or how ideas are actually spread in society and institutions captured.

Instead they are set upon the wobbly legs of moral assertion, the clay feet of dogmatic ideology, and the eternal, impotent "ought" of what people "should" do rather than what they actually do; the "If..." that relies on a fundamentally different human nature than actually exists, and these, combined to form the axiomtic refrain "if everyone behaved as they ought, all would be well."

A Humble Plea For Realism

If you want to eliminate the state, you have to supplant the state, and replace the functions that legitimize it.

If you want to dislodge the present elite, you have to form an elite of your own and engage it in its own arena.

It did not argue its way into power; whatever absurdities belong to its ideology, and they are legion, it is not their ideology that brought them to their high place.

They got there by occupying the actual bases of social power, and by understanding the actual nature of the social organism. They did not convince anyone of anything by argument. How could you imagine you could win by argument what was won and is held by the exercise of power and the political acumen of propaganda?


The last refuge of the disappointed ideologue is the morbid indulgence in Apocalyptic wishful thinking. The belief that your Truth will prevail because the existing order, being False, cannot sustain, and must inevitably collapse in ruins. But friends, you fool yourselves there as well!

When the present deranged elite is done destroying the entire fabric of society, and a collapse does come, whether hastened by its opponents or not, the result will not be a flowering of Liberty, the holding of hands and the echo of a thousand voices raised in the praise of individual Liberty and non aggression.

No. Rather, a new, worse tyranny will arise, borne not of evil but of necessity, to restore basic order and security for hungry, disillusioned millions, morally and socially bankrupt, and turning to whatever primitive bonds of group cohesion that promise to allow at least survival and basic security, liberty be damned.

If you have not done your work to serve those functions when that time comes, you will be scattered to the winds, and remembered, if at all, as a fleeting, intellectual aberration, borne of the luxurious freedom of folly in a world secure and well fed.

But don't despair, the world will keep on turning, whether you're right or not. It does not care. And that is its most cruel insult.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

You bring up some important points

Many of those who are dependent upon Gov't are very likely to resist any change that would bring hardship upon them. It's kind of like kicking a child out of the house before they are capable of living on their own, you might kick them out, but they will either stay on your doorstep or result to immoral means to sustain themselves.

In Systems Engineering, specifically transitioning from one System to another, Organized Change Management or lack thereof is one of the primary reasons for failure. The Implementers often fail to recognize that resistance is common because change brings uncertainty, and uncertainty causes people to entrench themselves.

It is best to get your community (people affected by the changes) to Adopt the new system, rather than forcing it upon them. It is better to convince than coerce for long term success. This means communicating the disharmonies that are causing ills and how the new system will relieve the disharmonies.

The transition must recognize that not everyone will benefit equally at first, especially those in control of the current system. Most resistance will be from those who profit from the disharmonies. In our situation that is the Democrat and Republican Parties and all those who have been coerced to rely on them for various reasons.

The book "The Innovators Way" by Dunham and Denning is a great guide to getting people to Adopt Liberty rather than resist it.

Cool comment, thanks. Noting

Cool comment, thanks. Noting the book.

Some of us are getting there

I own several acres of land, grow my own vegetables, slaughter my animals for meat, and produce my own power. Over the last several years I've managed to get my neighbors to start doing the same thing (which they largely did anyway) and they have slowly begun to connect the dots and realize that there's very little that our community can't produce that government can't. Never has politics or religion come up. Common sense, networking, action, and a positive attitude have been the recipe for success on my end. We practice target shooting, cook big meals together, enjoy life, talk about work,false construct of being members of a country.

I'm aware of the "ivory tower anarchists" who scream that we must starve the beast, all while enjoying a movie at home while connected to the grid and drawing water from their local municipality; I'm sorry for their hypocrisy. However, there are those of us who are leaving the state behind, we're small in number but the growth is a net positive. Every person that shrugs their shoulders, looses interest in the legitimacy of the United States government, and takes control of their own destiny is worth 100 "work within the system" types, at least in my book.

“Facts don’t cease to exist because they are ignored.” – Aldous Huxley

The "War of Ideas" is an Important One

Great post BILL3, well put and well written.

I do not necessarily want to oppose or challenge the thoughts that you put forward; they are relevant points, and points that are not often discussed.

Consider this analogy: Bob are living in the US in 1850 in the south. Bob comes to the strong realization that slavery is immoral and wrong and should be put to an end. So Bob goes about convincing others about the immorality of slavery.

But Bob does little to nothing about creating "post slavery" facilities; Bob seems to HAVE NO IDEA what the freed slaves will do, or where they will stay after the end of slavery.


If Bob simply wins the minds of some people, has Bob done SOMETHING WRONG?

Doesn't Bob first have to win THE ARGUMENT about what is truly happening to the slaves? Doesn't Bob first have to GET PEOPLE TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPLICATIONS OF THEIR DAILY ACTIONS before Bob should proceed to lay the foundation for the aftermath of abolition?

It seems illogical for Bob to proceed to step 2: provide for freed slaves.

The truth? It probably would

The truth?

It probably would have been a good idea to actually prepare a social and political framework for eliminating slavery.

One that did not involve the senseless slaughter of some 600,000 of the best Americans, mass atrocities that set the bar for coming wars, the dismantling of the constitution, the political and cultural shattering of the American body politic.

Worst of all perhaps, the loosing of some hundreds of thousands of people from the bonds of the only social order they knew, with nothing whatsoever in its place; people without literacy, property, without even the most basic cultural forms like the nuclear family or basic concept of political organization.

Loosed into an occupied war zone and then left to fend for themselves without any economic resources or social capital in a state of de facto slavery, without even the security afforded by actual slavery, or the salutary benefit of close interaction with religion, literacy, education, manners, law, marriage, etc., necessary for success in a free society and complex market order.

Because of that madness, fueled by moral fervor untempered by reasoned forethought, allied with political opportunism, today, 150 years later, we have a huge underclass of blacks whose condition in life is more morally degraded than even that experienced on the plantation; a black middleclass dependent nearly completely on the federal and state civil service subsidy, and affirmative action; a lower class living in barely civilized conditions, likewise dependent on a faceless master.

Housing projects where elevators serve as public bathrooms. Addiction and vice rampant and unchecked. Schools that are poorly disguised factories for the prison system. Gangs rule the neighborhoods and operate as press gangs for fresh blood in the prisons through which some half of black youth circulate at one time or another.

Marriage is hardly known, commerce and business totally absent and impossible, and a police presence akin to what would be needed in an occupied war zone.

Add on top of all of this a powder keg of barely suppressed hatred and resentment ready to explode at any time, and stoked regularly by classes of political opportunists from within and without the black community. Anger and alienation that will spill over into violence the moment the demographics shift sufficiently in a specific locale, and has done so like clockwork, one city and neighborhood after another in a spreading wave of urban ruins.

Before you respond with pretended moral outrage, look around your neighborhood and tell me where you choose to live; anyone who can afford to runs the other way, and every year the problems grow greater and less amenable to constructive remedy. You can turn your head the other way, feign moral outrage, or blame some scapegoat like the drug war or the "Democrats." That is convenient and also not reality.

What you're looking at, if you choose to do so, is the obvious outcome of one of history's most reckless moral crusades to rip apart social institutions without deigning to set one stone upon another in the construction of some social edifice to replace it or to even make an attempt at sane transition.

Your argument is all the weaker when you consider the greater power of the moral imperative to end slavery, than that of tearing down a state that today is at least in pretense sanctioned by popular ballot, free speech, and freedom of the press, etc.

So yes, the moral opponents of slavery SHOULD have considered practical realities, real world conditions, likely outcomes, and heard sober voices and arguments about the proper course to take to end the blight of slavery. Unfortunately, that did not happen.

Don't think that playing the rhetorically powerful slavery card will make me shy away from controversial facts. I will still have the better hand.

tasmlab's picture

Social and political framework?

Hi Bill,

You suggest a social and political framework, which I'm going to assume would need to be designed and implemented by the government.

But this same government in charge issues the war, killed the people, then later set up the housing projects, helps destroy the family through welfare, fights the drug war against blacks and so forth.

Would you trust the same group to put forth a workable and superior 'social and political framework'? It's hard not to think they wouldn't botch it all to hell.

Wouldn't this be realistic w/r/t precedent?

Currently consuming: Morehouse's "Better off free", FDR; Wii U; NEP Football

didn't refer to govt.

didn't refer to govt. however, any collective action by a group of people that enforces its decision on even one individual who does not consent can be called government.

even the common example of a property cooperative, in which every individual voluntarily submits his person to the contract and government of the bylaws. this is a territorial monopoly of force by the governing authority. even if anyone can leave the contract at will (not true aboard ship or on the old wagon trains which were voluntary contracts), the child coming to legal maturity in the territory never contractually consented to the laws. so you're back to square one: a legal territorial monopoly which offers the same option as any government: follow the laws or leave the territory.

we have to have some delineation between mere government and the state.

there will always be government. the state is something different. i would define the state as something that has become omnipotent beyond mere law and order by taking over things like the education, making money public fiat, claiming the right of the draft, the right of capital and price controls, and which generally endeavors to be the only institution in society of any import, besides the individual.

its not a perfect definition... but that is the modern state, the total state. its very different than something like the limited monarchy of earlier times, which recognized a whole civil society of potent institutions that organized the social life with minimal interference. the state has always claimed the right to tax and the right to use force. what makes today's state unique is that it has a built in incentive to grow and multiply, its budget its personnel, its functions, etc. there for it has to take aim at every sub state network or institution that serves any function the state can take over.

even today we don't have a total state. there are elements of social power besides the state and the individual; the corporation for one. they may all work together but the state is not total yet. and in any case, every form of society, with or without a total state, will be organized and controlled by minority or elite.

so when i say social or political framework, what i mean is the process in reverse. walking back the state the same way it walked forward. it grew by destroying and replacing institutions and taking their function. to roll it back you have to enable those functions, at least the necessary ones, to be provided adequately and competently by some more local or direct governing body or for that matter by a voluntary organization.

Freedom to Move and Choose...

Forgot to mention that libertarians also will move and find greener pastures. We aren't dependent on the tits of the government. If things get bad, we move. You can see it in the less free states such as California and New York that have a net loss in American Citizens. This in turn creates a concentration of free thinking people in other parts of the country or the world. And as the USA slows down economically and culturally, other parts of the world begin to receive these free thinking minds and thus begin to prosper. **It was the story of the USA.**

You think we have lost the battle in the USA against the oppressors, but I say Freedom is winning the WAR. Continents like Africa and South America have gained so much freedom in the last half century it is almost unbelievable when you compare it to any other moment in history. Asia is on an explosion of freedom that cannot be stopped. New technologies spread this idea even faster than before.

So while many people are pessimistic, I am extremely upbeat about the world. Yeah the USA sucks right now, but even then we have to remember how unfree the USA was to many of its people only a short time ago.

It is all about PRINCIPLES

Libertarians and even more so Objectivists, express themselves as they do because they live by their principles. They will refuse any compromise that creates a less free society, but accept that to reach their goals of freedom, it will take decades, maybe even centuries to achieve. We understand that the tyrants and politicians like OBAMA, BUSH, CLINTON, and yes, even REAGAN (he did increase the size of government) are no match to the powers of economics. In the current path the USA will have to stumble and take a brutal fall; why, because the laws of economics say so. We believe that the laws economics are just as strong as the law of physics.

Look at human history; is the world more or less free, say 50 years ago? How about 100 years? 200? 500? 1000? 5000? Slowly but surely people become more and more free. There is a trend and it is to a freer society. Of course there will always be setbacks, but the trend will still continue. So what you see us Libertarians and Obectivists doing is the same that millions before us have done, spread the word of freedom.

My father raised 5 children to become libertarians. The ideas simply make sense. They don't contradict each other. Once you have become a libertarian, always a libertarian. I've spread it to my fiance, and her to her sister. Even her OBAMA loving mother has voted for libertarian candidates.

AS for replacing the current state...we are...one mind at a time.


So many words, so many thoughts, are an inspiration. I feel the compulsion within me to free associate intuitive conclusions that I sense: so for what you can get out of it, here's how I see things coming. (1) the money will collapse, fiat currency will be replaced, because so much debt will bury its own self. (2) this will cause people to look after their own health needs, and not rely on a evaporated medical system that went away with the fiat currency. (3) self reliance becomes reality through information and knowledge gained through the internet. (4) the engine of making a new society free and real is the use of free energy, which machines can no longer be suppressed, fiat money and its influence having disappeared. (5) laws are adhered to because people have arms and so insist, courts no longer influenced by corruptions, jury nullification abounds (6) honor returns, a spiritual satisfaction with life and liberty return. There is time enough for love. Laugh!

Is it reality...

Reality that 40% of bank accounts in Cyprus were siezed?

Reality that Bitcoin has passed $180?

Reality that 401(k) seizures are coming next?

Then none of this is futile.

I am willing to bet and accept they "need" the 401(k)s. Dosen't really change anything. Whether they need it or not, perhaps the owner of one, while they still own it, might want to find another method of storing it.

One example of why this is all worthwhile. More than just a hobby. There are real fundamental changes in the world underway and this is the most insightful means to know and discuss what they are.



I completely agree with your

I completely agree with your closing statements. There is no light at the end of the tunnel if we keep going along the same path to ruin. Anyone think stealing most of our income and savings is the worst they can do? It will get worse than we ever dreamed if the system fails, in whole new ways, and history has shown us that a libertarian utopia does not spring out of the rubble when the system collapses. There are always authoritarians who seize control at the first opportunity. When it gets to a certain point, a farm and guns won't save you.

It's the criminal elite who are best...

positioned to benefit from a systemic collapse. If you think the anarchists at DP don't know this, I've got some subprime loans I'd like to sell you. Anarchists are nothing more than a front for the criminal control freaks they claim to oppose.

Just ignore the utopian anarchist fantasies and focus on restoring Constitutional restraints on government, i.e., the enumerated powers doctrine and the tenth amendment which ascribes all powers not specifically given to the Federal government to the States.

Convicting bipartisan leaders of treason is also part of restoring Constitutional government. For evidence of treason check out the sections "American and Chinese Communism, a Partnership" and "Closing the Loop on Terrorism" in the pdf file "Knowledge is Power". Here's the link:


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 nonsense. How did it

This is nonsense. How did it get voted up? "Anarchists are nothing more than a front for the criminal control freaks they claim to oppose."? I'm sure you had to be very creative to connect the obscure dots to come to that conclusion. Focus on restoring constitutional restraints on government? Convicting bipartisan leader of treason? Bwahahahaha! Now that's a utopian fantasy!

can you explain how this works?

"Anarchists are nothing more than a front for the criminal control freaks they claim to oppose."

Well said

And very true. That is why I don't harbor any fantasy that we will change anything for the better. Like I keep telling my friends, if the economy crashed it would not seed a new beginning but would just serve to further solidify the control that the current powers hold. We are set on a course that cannot be changed and there is no hope for this physical world.

But some of us have an ACE in the hole.

tasmlab's picture

That was pretty good

I like how it ended. Bravo sir!

On REALISM: I'll admit, my libertarianism is a HOBBY. I study anarchism and social theory and economics and morality because I enjoy it. But I'm powerless to put anything in effect beyond my household. It would be just as REALISTIC to call myself a bunny rabbit and think it would become true as it would be call myself libertarian and hope to change society.

Even if I had this SUPER-REALISTIC worldview where I thought minimum wage should be 15 cents lower/higher or I wished that one less bullet be fired overseas, I'd still be just as powerless to affect this super-realistic worldview.

Cruel insult indeed!

This said, it's better to be right than be realistic, because as you suggest, the world doesn't care.

Currently consuming: Morehouse's "Better off free", FDR; Wii U; NEP Football

Iactually went through something like this

One of my neighbours, who had a host of problems, was abandoned by her husband of 2 years and kicked out into the street with her 5 kids and several animals. I had done my best to help her, taking care of her children, providing transportation, helping her clean her home and pack, accompanied her when she went to court, calling on extra bodies for help, and opened up my home for her and her children. She deliberately chose to not move in with me, but instead rely further on the government to help her, because she didn't want 1) to be a burden on someone who has been so kind to her, 2) wanted her oldest child to be away from her bad friends, and 3) didn't want to live in a situation where she would be living under someone else's rules, feeling judged for having such a different lifestyle. I was very much frustrated and insulted that she refused to accept my offer, and I feel that if I was in her situation I would've made different choices, but the reality was that she was a different person than myself, so of course she would make different choices. As a friend, all I can do is support her the best I can.

That was a few months ago. Today, she still lives in a hotel, and I am almost due with my 4th child. Though I felt that I could take her in back when I was in my 2nd trimester, I don't feel that I can now. I wish she had taken up my offer back when I was capable of housing her, because I think that in the 2 months or so that I could've kept her that she'd have saved up enough money to better help herself. But now, I am relieved that I don't have to be a mother for 2 sets of kids. It was hard being a cheuffuer for her, taking her kids to and from school every day, and now I'm glad that it's a month long spring break and that her mom now has a car (even if it hardly functions). Slowly, her situation is improving. Hopefully, she'll be able to move to a place where she can afford the housing, and get a job and a car of her own.

It'd be nice if I could just tell her to look for work, except that she not only has no reliable transportattion to get to work, she's practically physically disabled. I'd like her to call the schools and have them send a bus to pick up her kids from the hotel, but I don't know if they would, having never public-schooled my own kids. I wish she would manage her money better and not buy chips and cigarettes, and other things that do nothing but destroy her ad her family's health, but she's already so stressed and overwhelmed that her kids do have to feed themselves, and if the only thing they'll eat before school is the least expensive-yet-tasty convenience "foods", I have no right to judge.

Basically, it's going to take a lot of than ideology and "suck it up! Just ask the church or your family for help," because she had already gone to churches for help, and her family either can not or has a history of deliberately not helping her. I feel like the only way her life can get better us for her to have a spiritual change in her life, but having always been a church-goer and with her reading the Bible, she probably feels that she doesn't need to change spiritually.

Anyway, it's hard, seeing the hard realities of what the current state of life has done. The change that's needed to really help her and her family is far more foundational than politics.

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." -- Thomas Paine

That's a great comment,

That's a great comment, thanks.


the last refuge of cowards. Granted, idealists today have it harder than ever. Destroy all hypocrisy, judge yourself!


"The world has never known more oppressive governments or bigger governments than those which profess the cult of liberty." - Donald Sanborn

Awesome contribution

Destroying without building alternatives is an exercise in futility. This is what I have been waiting to hear from Ron Paul. Perhaps the home school initiative is a beginning.

Some of us are working on this. But the castle libertarians and the anarchists seem to get caught up in separatism without an equal appreciation that man is a social animal that seeks communion with others. We need to use our independence to build voluntary alternatives as this author so adroitly recommends.

We are trying:


Where did this idea come from

Where did this idea come from that Libertarians don't seek communion with others? Of course we do. Do you know Libertarians that are against collectively working without coercion? It appears to me, according to the author and yourself, that any of our efforts are futile? Of course it would be easier if we had the numbers of one of the big two parties but we have to work with what we have.

I pretty much endorse every word

written in this great post. Very well done! My first suggestion to all libertarians/anarcho-capitalists would be to stop whining and begin taking steps to getting out of the harms way of collectivists that run their daily lives, by not just preaching about but living their lives as a free people as much as possible. Move to a corner of the world with small(est) government footprint, pay the least amount of taxes possible, acquire and hold sound money, make your money work for you - not the other way around ... The consequences of continuing to feed the collectivist machine that gambles with your money and life will (as is so well explained in the above article) in due time come down hard on you with a vengeance; just think of the people who are retiring now - how well off they are.

Once you are out of the harms way, then you can have so much more time to actively promote ideas of freedom around the world. And you will have yourself as a great example of freedom at work to show for.

Greetings from Hong Kong!

Ron Paul Revolution is spreading around the world: Freedom and Prosperity TV: libertarian network of alternative media in Western Balkans

Paradigm Shift

The hundredth monkey effect, Ron Paul knows. Why do you think he is focusing on the kids? Besides, once you are awake you can't go back to sleep. If you can't change the world change yourself and the way you live. Screw the corporations out of profit by boycotting their garbage as much as possible. Take care of yourself so you don't need so much medical care. Grow and eat your OWN food so they can't poison you with theirs. That's what they fear. That's why it is so easy to be a "homeland terrorist" these days. A homeland terrorist is ANYONE that wants to not suck on the government tit! When enough people do these things then society can change. I just hope we have time. Anyway, things CAN'T keep going like they have been. It's IMPOSSIBLE to keep being a world of consumers. The planet can't keep supplying the lust for "junk". Sooner or later every host dies from being fed on.


desperation. Liberty must be winning!

Full of logical fallacies & demagoguery... slippery slope, cherry picked anecdotal "evidence" and strawman arguments.

Following the law of the land, US Constitution, won't end civilization. Move some responsibilities from gun wielding megalomaniac Federal Gov back to gun wielding semi-megalomaniac States and voluntary/peaceful private freemarkets.

What if freemarkets where allowed to work and medical care was cheaper like computers & cell phones? Maybe expensive medical care is an important market signal. High prices are telling people to get medical degrees. High profits tell private investors to direct their capital. Maybe Gov control scares good people out of the field. And price controls scare capital away from production causing shortages. Maybe we need less control from mindless bureaucrats. Maybe 310 million minds are better than ~600 politicans, 10,000 technocrats or even 100,000 PhDs!

Nobody said kick people off Gov doles. First cancel ObamaCare, get Fed Gov out of marriage & other civil liberties, Repeal Patriot Act, start bringing troops home from Europe, stop all future bailouts. Second, change FED's 2-3% planned inflation to a 0-(-0.01)% goal. Then let people opt-out of SS&MC. Allow them save money into private accounts. If unable or unwilling to go private, stay in the system. We won't steal money from your "lock-box" and y'all can equally divvy it up.

Churches are empty because Federal Gov is the new unholy temple. With a low-flat or no income tax hundreds of millions will flow into them. And with fewer or at least capped Fed vote-buying benefits people will start showing up to Church and/or secular groups. Church & secular groups can care for people more pennywise than Fed Gov. Fed Gov will pay a crackhead to be a crackhead for life.

We're electing politicans to fill a spot and stop increasing tranny. The process of undoing your guy's centralizing will take careful step by step thought. But the tide of tranny WILL END and it starts here.

The ACA was cleverly veiled

The ACA was cleverly veiled corporatism for the Hospitals. They get money, you get the shaft. Obama is as much pro-big business as Romney, Bush, Clinton, etc were...

Southern Agrarian

Why 0% goal

Why in heaven's name should the FED have a goal of 0% inflation? The goal of any economy should be to reduce prices as much as possible every year. Not keep them eternally at the same level out of some strange devotion to the doctrine of Keynesian mad doctors!

Competing currencies and opting out of Social Security (what I like to call National Socialist Security) would be a huge relief in Europe. Then there would still be the issue of tax and distortion of the free market.

Please visit my site for more information about my libertarian book. Thanks!


I agree. End game free market banking system. Where savings determines interest rates... and no FED distortion. This may take 1 or 2 generations. Unwinding Keynesian mess.
Theres tons of debt in today's economy. Massive deflation would screw all the debt holders. Personally I don't and my family doesn't have debt but I know Most Americans do have large debt. Deflation would require more work to pay off loans. Enslaving these people to the banks and CC companies (more than "normal"). Lets say interest rate are forced down to 4% causing 3% inflation 1% effective rate. Maybe around 7% interest required to get 0% inflation/deflation. We just changed the effective rate from 1 to 7%. If we went total freemarket interest rates might jump to 25%. In the '80s under "conservative" control (not even close to freemarket banking) it hit 18%.
I think, the only moderation needed is time and not compromising goals or philosophy. I'm a radical for liberty but a conservative at implementation (relative to others). I know that good and evil exist and all systems will have both. Conservativism tells me, if everything stays the same, I know where life's "potholes" are and can avoid them. Systematic and quantitative changes in the correct direction of liberty maybe the only moderation.

Do you mean a "free" market banking...

system like that advocated by Alan Greenspan and Ayn Rand? Anyone who believes in the "free" market fantasy is a dupe. In the video below Alan Greenspan and his mentor Ayn Rand are exposed as free market frauds.


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