Comment: Edicts

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Reporting to LaRouche Site (see in situ)

Edicts

"the 13, 14, & 15th amendments were forced upon the Southern States"

Here is a confusion of perceptions as to what I see and what my words inspire you to see. Note the meaning of the words you wrote above and now compare the meanings of the words you write here:

"And I answer, describe to a blind person the color of blue. Perhaps voluntary competition is hard to understand because one has not been exposed to it. Or perhaps one has been exposed to it but does not recognize it. i.e. a child can see colors, unlike a blind person, but does not know that the colors have names, or perhaps that they are even colors. How can one understand something they do not recognize?"

By comparison from one moment, one place, one thought, one action, one event, one measure, with another moment, another place, another thought, another action, another event, or another bag of potato chips on the same shelf at Walmart priced half-off compared to the same bag of potato chips right next to it, on the same shelf.

Compare a place that accepts returns for any reason, no questions asked, immediately, to a place where you have to stand in line, spend hours, to be given the runaround, and find out that you have to lie, threaten, and be violent to get a counterfeit product returned.

So competition is natural, it is waking up one morning with a mom forcing you to go to school, and another day waking up with a mom letting you sleep and not forcing you off to school.

Blind kids are all natural except the seeing, unless there is some other unnatural condition of life not on the discussion table, or altering the condition of life of the child.

A child forced to near death working all the time without sufficient rest would find a day at school to be a vacation.

Competition is, or it is not competition.

Here:

"the 13, 14, & 15th amendments were forced upon the Southern States"

Which force is being accurately identified and if anyone in the south, any person, is not volunteering, then it isn't voluntary government, and then there is no competition in that case. In the case of many States, from the first day the Constitution was fraudulently enforced, worked toward secession. Many people on a list, comprising a State, worked toward secession as a means of opting out of what rapidly became a working despotism or Legal Crime Cabal.

The Whiskey Rebellion squashed so fatal a spirit as what, exactly?

So, no, decidedly no, demonstrably no, The People no longer had competition in the market of Constitutionally Limited Governments once The Criminals hiding behind their false Constitutionally Limited Government took over.

What were the Alien and Sedition Acts?

They were one too many edicts of crime made legal enforced by one too many successive dictators running the dictatorship according to at least two people: James Madison and Thomas Jefferson (Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions were in response to The Alien and Sedition Acts), and that wasn't half the trouble, the second Dictator in Chief set about to punishing people who speak against the Dictatorship, only a minor problem, compared to the often resort to highway, and seaway, robbery known as TAXES.

The Southern population, not just the employees hired to run the State governments, were up in arms for a long time, working to end the enforced slavery of NON-competitive highway and seaway robbery then called (falsely) taxation. What was that Dirty Compromise?

A. The dictators take over, we walk, and we stop paying our Union dues.

B. The dictators take over, and they enslave everyone, kill all competition, and enforce debt payments without question, even questioning the law is against the law for the victims, the targets, the slaves to allow such questions into their brains, but of course, the same laws do not apply to the dictators - of course - a routine by now, by then, by now, some things never change?

They were changed in between 1776 and 1787, in fact, in demonstrable fact, and demonstrated clearly with Shays's Rebellion.

If you want to be a slave, tan yourself and go south, or indenture yourself and go north, or fight back in Massachusetts, and if you fail to retake control of government from the criminals, then go to Vermont.

Look at the map.

http://www.theomahaproject.org/module_display.php?mod_id=126...

Vermont would have had a strategically difficult time joining a Canadian Union or becoming an independent State without joining any Union of Sovereign States. It is a long State, it could be chewed up into pieces one small piece at a time, attacked from two sides all along the East and West, so the concept of not returning the runaway slaves (Daniel Shays among them) back to Massachusetts State was a significant precedent.

That was under The Articles of Confederation. Enie, menie, miny, moe, which is the better State where I should go?

What are Fugitive Slave Laws for, exactly?

Who needs Fugitive Slave Laws if you have the power to make everyone pay any debt including the debts that are run up in the process of making everyone pay any debt - without question?

What was The Constitution? That was the monopoly Tax power.

What was the Whiskey Rebellion? That was the first Federal Reserve enforcement act, by any other name, it is the destruction of monetary competition.

What were the Alien and Sedition Acts? That was the "without question" qualifier.

What were the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, or The Declaration of Independence, or The Bill of Rights, or the speeches made by Henry, Mason, and unlearned countless other Democratic Federated Republicans who were falsely called Anti-Federalists since the "Federalists" were the Neo-Cons and the Communists of the day, speaking one thing to gain power, doing the opposite once in power.

The Civil War, and what a name that is, was made to happen, it was designed to happen, it was a design feature of The Dirty Compromise.

Slaves made legal.

Any objections, slaves?

"Now see, I fail to see the path back as chess moves. I suppose though that that is what Ron Paul was doing by bringing the troops home to save money so as to continue the welfare program until folks could learn to be self sufficient while at the same time balancing the budget. I don’t know if I would like to see a work project like FDR’s though. Do you like that idea?."

Ron Paul set the bar really high, and it could be possible that someone else gains as much power (currency) as Ron Paul, but not likely, and his intentions, well spoken intentions, were chess moves, step by step, back to voluntary government - which is a Democratic Federated Republican form, so yes, I like the idea, and as Ron Paul said, these hard choices are going to be real, even if we don't want to make them before making them is even more costly.

We could all wake up at once and stop all the legal crime, and start back into that animated contest of freedom all at once, one fine morning, but if Ron Paul can't even get the step by grueling step method done, what is left for there to be in the cards?

A miracle?

A lot of teachers teaching and teachers learning and students learning and students teaching to move more rapidly toward that tipping point when the snow ball of liberty begins to hit critical mass?

Why not?

"I don’t know if I would like to see a work project like FDR’s though. Do you like that idea?."

No, that is not the Ron Paul method, as I understand the Ron Paul method to be such that any monkey business of that type would be limited to a State level planned economy and not something done at a genuine (not false) Federal level.

I think a State run with that the LaRouche type of Planned Economy (forced by making the subject pay an involuntary tax) could appear to be competitive at first, in one State, inside a Republic, but soon the hidden costs would become very apparent to anyone in a competitive State where people are freer to employ their own power to make more power instead of having their power stolen and then used to steal more with some of the power stolen to then be used to make more power according to a dictatorial power, even a so called benevolent dictator.

The dictators will lose in any straight up competition of government whereby the resort to lies, threats, and violence upon the innocent is checked by such a thing as Trial by Jury or Declaration of Independence stuff, Shays's Rebellion Stuff, and that precedent set in Athens Tennessee.

You there, you in government, yes you, you work for us people who actually produce things, any questions, ask away, but if you don't do the job your hired to do, no amount of questions will make me pay you another dime, so here are your waling papers, and here is your competitor, get out, and don't come back until you can compete in the free market of voluntary government.

Adios, and I hear that McDonald's is hiring.

"Ron Paul spoke of his end goal: Keeping the profit of your labor. I do not know LaRouche’s end goals. I have not looked. Have you?"

No, and I'm not that interested in looking, I am guessing that LaRouche is just another Might makes Right Dictator that sounds a whole lot like a benevolent dictator, but once in an office where competition is against the law, well, what is the routine?

Ron Paul may have shut it down, returned it back to a Republic, and so, it stands to reason, he was not picked as the next President by those who do the counting.

The spiritual angle works here too, I think, no one knows the schedule, so why wait, ever, for doing good things? What is needed is a clear path, no?

Doesn't that mean that we have to create one since the paths most of the people are on is a false one?

Joe