What will we say when the government announces that “for security reasons” it will begin conducting random checks of our homes? That we will be required by law to open our doors and stand aside while government agents do a walk-through, just to “be sure” and (of course) “to keep us safe”? 
It is a serious question, not (as I will be accused of purveying) exaggerated or paranoiac. After all, we are already told specifically that we have no legal expectation of privacy when we’re out in public and it’s been implicit for years now that we have very little left in the way of Fourth Amendment rights anywhere – even in our own homes. See, for example, the recent Indiana Supreme Court decision that a homeowner has no right to resist even an illegal, warrantless and probable cause-free entry by cops. A cop, possibly psychotic, without doubt armed and packing the state’s authority to administer lethal violence – can literally kick in your door, for absolutely no lawful reason whatsoever – and if the homeowner resists, it is the homeowner who is in violation of The Law. If, say, you are asleep in bed and are awakened suddenly by the sound of your door being kicked in and you – fearing for your life – grab the pistol you keep by your bed and shoot the unknown berserker, it’s you who will go to prison!
“We believe,” said these latter-day Roland Freislers, that “… a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.” (Italics added) “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.” 
And of course, we are told that we must Submit and Obey at airports. But that is hardly the end of it. As predicted, submission training is being expanded to bus stations and Interstates. The Department of Homeland Security is deploying its VIPR (Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response) squads of khaki-clad, sidearm-wearing, black shirted American SA all over this land for the sole purpose of further routinizing random, probable cause-free searches and, of course, assaults on what used to be regarded by most people as their inviolable personal space. Get people to accept crotch grabs and they will soon accept anything. The government knows this – which is precisely why the government is doing this. There is simply no rational reason, for example, to herd people leaving a train or bus into a gantlet of cops for a session of Submit and Obey. Yet this has been done – is being done – and will continue to be done. Because it acclimates people to the unreasonable, the unfair – the abusive. It is the whole point of the exercise, you see.
Now then. What will be the reaction when the goons in Washington announce that “terrorists” are finding refuge in “safe houses” – private homes? There could be a Manhattan Project in your next door neighbor’s basement – perhaps in your basement… .
Far-fetched? Paranoid? Really? More far-fetched than crotch-grabbing 7-year-old white kids on the theory that their parents might be secret A-Rabs who perhaps bleached their progeny and outfitted said child with radioactive Underoos? Or demanding that crippled 80-year-olds remove their Depends for similar reaso
ns? Or that because there might be a drunk driver out there on the roads, every single driver who happens to be on the road automatically forfeits his (former) Fourth Amendment rights? Or that is now illegal – in Indiana, at least – to resist an armed intrusion by a costumed thug into one’s own home?
It is not paranoid – and far from being far-fetched – to imagine where this will all inevitably lead. We – enough of us to give the illusion of consent, at least – have already conceded the principle. That “security” justifies almost anything. And probably, very soon, everything.
We shall see.
Me”a “sin4rm@i1
3e mainst:am me”a u*li0 m&y words &d phra7s in :.r*ng 3@ ha| be; s%ci5^lly chos;) 83er by 3e me”a or a source) to -s:p:s;t or “stort
3e ,ntexts to which 3ey a: ‘+ied] _4rt_@ely) 3e altern@e me”a oft; picks up 3o7 words (or phra7s) &d u7s 3em in 38r own :.r*ng)
wi3out due ,n6der@i1 4r 3e %r%tu@i1 of 3e “stor*1s &d -s:p:s;t@i1s]
Examp<s include}
}Rubber bul<ts}
3e image p:s;ted to 3e public is 1e of 9ce) rubber \lls b&ging into protesters) c:@ing s*nging (in 4r u7 in crowd ,ntrol] 3is is not @ all
3e ^7) 3ough 3ey a: g;erally c@egori0d as }<ss <3al}) if u7d ,r:ctly &d not aimed @ 3e head] @ -9mum) 3e7 should be ^l<d
rubber},@ed bul<ts] But ev; 3e u7 of }rubber} ^u7s "stor*1] Better -ght be }hard},@ed steel bul<ts}] I would also ob7r| 3@ wi3 ;ough
muzz< |locity (which 3e 5ring rif<s usually ha|) &d @ clo7 ;ough r&ge) just ~out &y m@erial c& be <3al] 3e best examp: adv&ced)
^u6ng all sorts of neg@i| :ac*1s in a hum&’s [e@hing system) eyes) skin) etc] Its }n1}st ,m>nly u7d &d }CS}gas} ,uld be u7d instead of }tear gas}) or %rh’s ev; better) }toxic CS gas}]
}7ttst oft; to characteri0 4rceful taking o|r of l&d oc{pied by o3er | 1e 7lf &d machine g_ into & _armed n8ghbor’s hou7 whi< 3ey we: 1 vac@i1) clai-ng ral protec*1 as a }7tt|m;t) wi3 3e im+ic@i1 (oft;
f:ely st@ed) 3@ 3e l&ds we: totally }_7tt: pro%r terms -ght be }l&d 3ie|s} or }l&d `~bers} or
}^r%t\ggers}]
}Terrorists}
Tech9^lly) in order to be a }terrorist}) 1e must pur.7ly c:@e or 7t ~out c:@ing terror in a .pul@i1] But 3e term has be,me totally
pros*tuted by go|rnm;ts) in”viduals &d org&iz@i1s u6ng 3e term to 38r own adv&tage) es%cially 6nce 2001] A go|rnm;t ag;cy c&
me:ly claim & in”vidual or `oup or org&iz@i1 is/a: terrorists] But }terrorism} is in 3e eyes of 3e beholder] Afgh&s likely would be
terrori0d by 9ght raids of 38r home by N@O sol”ers) but Westerners $n’t ^ll N@O a terrorist org&iz@i1] &o3er examp< -ght be 3@
Gaza &d 3e West B&k 7em to be sup.7dly loaded wi3 terrorists) whi< Israel '%ars to ha| n1e) ev; 3ough Israel has kil:
(: ‘propri@e characteriz@i1s such as sol”er) etc]
}Def;7}
3e U]S] -litary u7d to be 3e War De(rtm;t] Now it is 3e De(rtm;t of Def;7} ($D) ev; 3ough it c& be well}argued 3@ it should be >:
‘propri@ely *t|s as off;7 e]g] }@tacks 1 38r %op: neutral term -ght be u7d such as }:ac*|} or }in :ac*1 to}] 3e $D should be 3e $O) as should 3e Israeli IDF be 3e IOF]
}Smart}
U7d >: &d >: oft; as *me (s7s) such as in }smart bomb}] 3e de59*1 of smart inher;tly includes or assumes intellig;ce) but intellig;ce
c& 1ly be @tribut~< to &imals) es%cially hum&s (3ough 3e }smartness} is oft; ?es*1~st ^7s) 3e }smart} term is ‘+ied to &
object 3@ ,ntains a ,mputer in some 4rm] But ,mputers c¬ 3ink &d ar;’t intellig;t]]] 3ey a: 6m+y ,de}driv; machines] A }smart
bomb} is & im>ral @tribu*1 of 3e adjec*|] Why ar;’t all o3er bombs de5ned as }dumb bombs}] A }guided bomb} would be >: ,r:ct) @
<ast in 3e ,ntext 3@ 1e ,uld ?es*1 how well it was guided) whi: c<ar as }%aceful protesters}) insurg;ts gains clarity as }.orly armed ci*z; insurg;ts}) etc]
People crashing into your house at night…
Sounds like an engineering problem to me.
My 1/3rd a year to start was based on the property tax system used in cook county IL. Every three years there is a reassessment but only part of the county each year. It’s a way of managing a great number of residential housing units.
But you are correct, any existing system can be leveraged. Rental inspections, inspections for the sale of a home, etc and so forth all exist in one place or another in the country locally. Application of FRNs and the local governments will get the job done under federal rules to keep the cash flowing.
Some towns in the chicago area also have inspectors that come around and look at the outside and then send out fix-it-or-else letters. One town demanded that all homes with roofs older than X years had to replace them. Then there are the inspections for condo buildings. They stick to the common areas (fire systems, elevators, etc) but they could expand it.
The structure to build upon is in place already.
David J Webb asked, “Has anyone figured out the logistics of trying to search every home in America?”
F.Y.I. almost exactly as BrentP described, regular inclusive inspections by government already takes place in many homes in America today (one third?) only they go by the name “rental inspection”
The system is already in place, it only needs to be expanded.
Imho, the whole process is called incremental fascism, they just haven’t figured out a good enough excuse, er reason to be searching all houses, yet. As if they need reason to anyway.
Fight it and you only become homeless.
Agree. Though I think – I hope – that when they cross this line there will be resistance. A rental unit is after all, overtly the property of someone else while your home is at least implicitly your property. We’ll see, I guess…
Here in New Hampshire, I hope we’ll say this:
[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
Or just say, Article X!
Standing up to guns with paper?
Has anyone figured out the logistics of trying to search every home in America? Or putting everyone in jail?
The same rules that apply to you and me applu to the police down the road.
The consequences apply to the judges families too.
Most crooked cops end up in jail at some point in time.
I don’t know what happens to oath breakers in the justice department short term.
The problem is getting them there.
The rules are set up to protect everyone not just one group of people. These activities of a Nazi flavor will come back to haunt them down the road.
Same logistics of punishing people for ‘speeding’ when the speed limit is absurdly low. All enforcement is selective. The first people selected for these ‘inspections’ will be “bad people”. People whom the majority feels deserve it and will feel safer with it done. You know the type, the people who have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide. The same people who drive 70mph in a 55mph zone on an interstate but oppose any effort to raise the speed limit to 70mph. The ‘good people’ who never would be subjected to these state horrors and haven’t had a speeding ticket in 20 years despite routinely driving over the posted limit every day.
Most crooked cops, judges, political office holders, and so on NEVER spend any time in jail. They generally only end up in jail when they anger or get in the way of some of their fellow crooked government brethren. It’s just a tool to get them out of the way so someone else can enjoy more power.
Putting everyone in prison? No problem, make the whole nation a prison. It’s been effectively done many times throughout the world and history.
But let’s think about how there would be regular inclusive inspections. If I were in power and a warped sociopath that gets that kind of office I could effectively introduce a system of home inspections from the federal level. I would have a program set up where through local police, building, and health departments the selective (has to be the ‘bad people’ first to get everyone used to it) inspections would be carried out. There would be grants of newly created federal reserve notes that would serve to get all these local government agencies on board with the program. Over time this could be expanded to every residential property being inspected once every three years with other inspections as needed. It wouldn’t be all that difficult and not all that unlike other programs already in place.
The ‘good people’ might not even get inspections at all. We can trust their support of government activities, so the building department guy will show up every three years make a quick walk around the house and maybe tell them to fix something tiny every six years or so… won’t even go inside. Because these people have to be kept on board. Meanwhile, libertarian minded people, people who try to operate their own businesses, people who are essentially trying to or want to be outside the system to some degree… well they get the real inspections.
It’s a very manageable program when you think about it.
You know, if it really was just about safety they would already have home inspections annually! As well as monthly blood tests for cholesterol, drugs, and other shit deemed unsafe. All the fast food joints would be a thing of history. Fucking shit has nothing to do with safety and never has. Gibbs me a dolla!
In another autos forum years ago there was this guy who claimed to be a cop and I believe he was or at least could mimic the cop mindset well enough to pull it off. In any case he would always argue for the traffic stops, the checkpoints, the searches, etc. I would argue that all his reasoning applied to the home as well. He would insist it didn’t. I would ask why, he would respond because it’s a home. I would say it’s just property, same as the car. And that’s how it went. Well, in the last couple years more and more we are seeing the same reasoning applied on the roads being applied to homes.
Random BAC checks of people in their homes… because you never know when someone might get drunk and decide to mess with the water heater. Safety first ya know! 🙂
This book excerpt from They Thought They Were Free…sums it up nicely: http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html
Always thought to stem the tide & make things better for my family, prepared to stand on the wall defending “freedom”…now I’m wondering why bother?
Outstanding.
I have put the whole excerpt here: http://epautos.com/2011/11/19/they-thought-they-were-free/
Eric, I suspect that you know the answer to your question already simply based upon the response to all the other violations of our constitution and personal freedoms. But it is good that you raised the question, if for no other reason than to let people know what’s coming their way. This is all like a sequel to Germany in 1932. It was already too late then and it’s too late now
I’m still not absolutely convinced it’s too late. We have a tribal memory of freedom here that the Germans did not, and a history of rebellion they also did not share.
Are there enough people who’ve been awakened to form the ripples, that become a wave, that rushes the shore like a tidal wave when the water gets shallow?
And if we don’t make a stand here, then where? This isn’t just America, it’s a global problem.
We’re at the culmination of the latest attempt to establish world government. The psychopaths who crave this power aren’t satisfied until every last little thing is under their control–they won’t spare some insignificant country just because it’s out of the way. They can’t stand to see anything out of their clawing grasp.
But will it be worse here, due to the already-established control grid? Probably. But the backlash will be even stronger, because of our history…and because we’re armed. Others are not so fortunate.
I agree we’re Germany 1932; but I’m not certain the rest is inevitable. I will admit I’m certain enough that I’m at least getting out of Houston; where to, though?
Are you kidding me? Germany, no tribal memory of freedom? No spirit of rebellion? How about the revolutions of 1848? The French revolution which captured most of Germany? Dolfuss, the only European leader to give his life opposing Hitler (recall that Chamberlain was at this time making nice to Hitler, and refused to support a Prussian revolution in the name of “democracy.” He told a delegation of Junkers asking for British support by means of refusing Hitler any further accomodations that he supported only elected leaders like ‘Herr Hitler.)
Regarding Americans, I’m less sure of that tribal history. Our revolution was less a revolution than just about any other. Sure, we overthrew the British – but it was led and manipulated by a group intend on seizing power. Immediately afterwards, Hamilton’s bond deal ripped off the public, and particularly the veterans of the war, leading to Shay’s Rebellion. The whole thing seems to me to be so much posturing by a group, intent not on liberty, but on making themselves the masters. Sure, the people who supported it believed in freedom, the people who fought were convinced they were fighting for freedom…but tell me, how did it all work out? We revolted over a miniscule tax on tea and paper goods.
Very interesting counterpoint! Thanks Puzzled.
Another tick in the “we’re screwed” column.
I understand the psychopaths, I think; and I know what they want, and how they go about getting it.
What I DON’T understand is how common people give up their freedom so easily, without even recognizing it. Do they LIKE being enslaved?
Methyl, I don’t believe that the common man wants to be enslaved. He just doesn’t want to think. If you ever sat in front of a computer attempting to work out a complex programming issue or drafting a complicated CAD drawing, you’ve noticed that you’ll get hot and eventually, worn out. Why? You weren’t doing anything physical.
It’s far harder to use your brain than it is to dig a ditch. That’s why control systems programmers make a lot more money than ditch diggers. Being able to think critically is far more valuable a skill than being able to hump wheelbarrow loads of dirt up a ramp.
It’s just easier for most folks to let their “superiors” do the thinking for them, while they hump the wheelbarrow. So the psychopaths move in, take the positions of authority with minimal resistance and Boobus has no idea what happened or how. As long as the media, the schools and their peers tell them they’re free, they believe they must actually be free. If you’re already “free”, why would you be concerned about breaking the bonds you can’t even see?
I hate to be cynical (because I wish I didn’t have to be) but I’d modify your statement, ” the common man … just doesn’t want to think” to (in a great many cases) can’t think. Lacks the capacity to perform abstract reasoning, necessary to understand concepts and principles and extrapolate to the general from the particular. Just consider our Clover. He cannot be reasoned with. It is not possible to reach him. And he is probably more intelligent than the lower 30 percent of the Bell Curve.
yes. I think they do, at least in respect that they don’t want to think and don’t want to have responsibilities or obligations. They don’t want to be living in shacks doing hard labor and getting whipped but just go to work everyday, do what they are told and have a comfortable living.
They also seem to think that all the people they pass responsibility off too are bright, intelligent, good people. You know, suckers who will carry the burden of society for them. The problem is good people often don’t like carrying the burden and come to resent it. Evil people on the other hand love duping people, not doing the work and using the position to steal and worse. So they get evil people running things.
Eric, I used to believe that the “common man”, “Joe Sixpack” or whatever you want to call him couldn’t think either. Not any longer: most folks come equipped with the same brain we do (with a minority of exceptions, I’ll grant you). Family life, education and peer pressure are factors, but the actual cognitive organ is present and functional. Not thinking at a higher level is a choice, just like sitting on one’s butt in front of the TV, eating chips and cookies and turning into a diabetic blob is a choice. I won’t allow them the excuse of “not being able” to think. I believe you’re being too easy on them. Kind of like a guy with a full Mac roll around box and no disabilities “not being able” to change the air filter on his car.
BrentP, you seem to have nailed it “The problem is good people often don’t like carrying the burden and come to resent it.”
That’s how things used to be (pre civil war); the best and brightest (at least more often than now) were picked by their countrymen to go to the capitol and do as little of the people’s business with as little of the people’s money as possible. The landowners and successful business men would hold their noses and go do this for a few years, then come back home and go back to the productive enterprises they interupted to serve the public. I’ve been asked many times (being so shy and withdrawn about my beliefs as I am) why I don’t run for public office. My response is, I’m not sure I have that much love for my fellow countrymen.
Now we have this evil psychopath class that promotes its own kind at the expense of the rest of us running things. And Joe Sixpack doesn’t know and doesn’t want to know what’s happening or why. Is he capable of critical thought? Sure and he’s also capable memorizing long strings of data and lists of names; just ask him about NASCAR drivers or football stats. He can recite them like the alphabet. But ask him about Austrian Economics or why he thinks we have a fascist system now and you get a blank look. Not because he’s stupid, he’s just not interested.
I dunno, amigo….
The Bell Curve (and other pretty scientific measures of general intelligence) is pretty depressing. About half the population, according to these measures, has an IQ of 100 or less (Gamma machine minders, as Huxley described them). And there are millions of people out there with IQs significantly lower than 100 (Huxley’s Epsilon semi-morons). Only about 25 percent of the US population even has an undergraduate degree (not that this – as such – means you’re bright – but still).
But even worse are the technically intelligent – people capable of achieving an undergraduate (and even graduate) degree – who are not stupid in the conventional sense but nonetheless seem unable to think in terms of broad principles. I like Rand’s description: The “anti-conceptual mentality.” Case in point: I know a guy who is a civil engineer; he’s certainly not stupid in the way we would usually describe a stupid person. In his area of expertise, in fact, he is competent – and in normal conversation comes across as bright. But if you ask him why, for instance, it is wrong for me to threaten my next-door neighbor with violence unless he “helps” me to finance my kids’ education – but ok to vote to do exactly the same thing and have others do the dirty work for you – Blank Stare. He just doesn’t get it. “It’s different,” he’d say. Ok. How? No real answer. Just cliches about “democracy” and “the public good.” He cannot grasp that the essential involved is theft by violence. And I think he is typical of the American middle class.
Well Eric I would like to think that the IQ and standardized test results are incorrect or somehow biased. After all, most of these tests are administered by the public school system or the progeny thereof. But I will concede that point, because I am well aware of what conventional scientific research in the subject yields. And I moved out of rural Tidewater Virginia for a reason…..
But that still doesn’t explain your acquaintance with the CE degree that is functionally anti-conceptual. In order to be a CE (presumably doing things like laying out road right-of-ways, designing building foundations and using fairly complex applications on a PC) he has to understand simple logic: YES/NO, If/Then/Else statements and the like. So it must be a blatant refusal to accept the truth that drives his worldview, rather than a conceptual disability.
Let’s break this down and analyze it. We’ll call our specimen Mr. Clover. Here’s my case:
{IF} Mr. Clover comes to my house and takes my money at gunpoint to fund his childrens’ education {THEN} that is armed robbery. {ELSE} He pays for his own kids’ education = armed robbery NOT
{IF} Mr. Clover gathers with members of the community and votes to take my money under the implied threat of gun violence by hired enforcers to fund his childrens’ education {THEN} that is (still) armed robbery. {ELSE} He pays for his own kids’ education = armed robbery NOT
You can demonstrate the same example algebraically. The second statement would add variables in for the voting process, more people participating and armed gunmen, but once you cancel out each variable the end result is the same: armed men threatening us to pay for others’ educations (all of the collectivist arguments for the betterment of society notwithstanding).
My point rests on the fact that someone who can make it through algebra, trig (and presumably calculus) getting an engineering degree, cannot refute this logic. So I contend that his is a position of willful ignorance and denial rather than a mental defect that prevents understanding.
The defense rests. 😉
Man: “Would you sleep with me for $1,000,000?”
Woman (thinks about it): “Uh….yes.”
Man: “Would you sleep with me for $20?”
Woman (shocked and actually offended): “What? What kind of woman do you think I am?”
Man: “We’ve already established what type of woman you are…now we’re negotiating price.”
This is exactly how this country is, I believe. We have already (as Eric ended his story with) established that this government is a fascist, violent empire and that the people are willing to put up with it. Only questions remains is…to what degree.
Exactly (thanks, Pat).
One thing that Clovers just seem to be incapable of understanding is that precedents matter. That they become practice. If it is ok for government to take your rightful property by force in order to “help” Smith’s children, then why not Smith’s wife? His parents? Why shouldn’t Smith have a car like yours, or a home? Or the same medical care that you pay for? Etc.
The only way to stop this creeping “all against all” is for all of us (or enough of us) to understand and live by the principle that no one has the right to force anyone else to provide him with any material benefit, ever, for any reason. That using force against other people is always morally wrong, with the sole exception of self-defense.
But I fear there are just too many of …. them.
That is, Clovers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGMQZEIXBMs
“George Ought to Help”
It sums up the Clover mentality quite well and in doing so, shows its inherent evil.
Why do precedents matter? Suppose the government is debating whether or not to carry out abomination A. Opponents of that abomination will say “if we give the goverment the power to do A, it will then do B.” But the mere fact that Congress is debating A in the first place means it has already assumed the power to do A, doesn’t it? That the discussion is happening at all means the clovers already believe they have this power.
I find myself on a cusp right now, whether to accept that the American Experiment is a washout, or to nurse the feeble flame of hope in my mind that there is still something to save. It is hard to give up on a country I have loved my whole life.
The signs are bad, very bad, arguably beyond critical mass. And yet, I spend time on websites wherein people *are* fighting back in one way or another: self sufficiency/homesteading, survivalist blogs, urban (guerilla) gardening, raw milk activism, Tenth Amendment activism, increased home schooling … Ohio just became the 10th (?) state to reject Obamacare.
I detest generality. There are 315 million people in this country. They can’t all be — indeed, are not — sheeple. To assume so is to be guilty of the fallacy of composition, that is, assuming something true of part of the whole must also be true of the whole. After all, 100% of the population in this board are not sheeple. Okay, 95%; I forgot about our two Clovers.
More to the point, generalizing just gums you up and gets you nowhere. It wastes time and energy and by virtue of operating from a false premise, you achieve nothing. And if things are as bad as many believe, we haven’t the time or energy to waste. The trick though is discovering what the truth actually *is*. That’s where I’m having trouble. Are the signs of hope too little too late? Or are they signs, harbingers, that the people are stirring like an awakening dragon?
Mostly, I wonder if a lot of the presenting of evidence that the country is washed up is actually cherry picking: basing one’s truth on that part of the evidentiary whole that comports with what one was inclined to believe all along, anyway. A guy who believes all dogs are vicious is the guy who was bit when he was five. That is what worries me most, because there’s no clarity in it.
Damn, I’m not saying any of this well. I need some breakfast. I guess I’m trying to say that there is so very much at stake that it is vital to be very sure of one’s facts. We owe it to ourselves and our convictions to work as hard as we can to examine our cognitive-based conclusions and keep them separate from our very human tendency to err on the side of rage or despair or even goofy giddiness.
As for me, I’m in the position of Dagny Taggart in ‘Atlas’. Despite all that is happening, all that is breaking my heart, I can’t leave, at least not yet. I just can’t.
I agree, but there is also the human version of Gresham’s Law. While there are still probably millions of people in this country who understand and value liberty – there are also millions who do not. Probably a lot more – like Clover – who don’t care whether individual rights are subordinated to some “group” interest (as defined by them, of course), in the name of “security” (or “getting drunks off the road”)… if it “will save just one life” … and so on. These people are anti-liberty by nature. They are just too goddamn stupid to understand the implications of what they’re advocating. They do not understand that precedent inevitably becomes practice; that once you accept “x” you have also implicitly conceded “y” and “z,” too. They cannot be reasoned with because they are beyond (no, beneath) reason. They are what Rand called the anti-conceptual mentality. People-shaped things that are little better than animals. Arguably worse than animals, in fact. Because animals don’t represent such failed capacity.
Clovers are a sort of living abortion.
Eric, I believe it was either Will Grigg or Karen De Coster that coined a term to describe Clovers most aptly: anencephalic mouth-breathers.
Sounds like something Will Grigg would say. He’s such a gifted writer I refresh his page every day waiting for another missive–when he writes about the Stasi, it’s like reading an imprecatory psalm!
Good analysis, although I would describe them as an abomination.
Thanks, Henry!
Hey, what did you think of the Camaro story (just posted)?
Hi! Eric,
We started down this road when we acquiesced to drug tests(the young now accept this as normal). The consequences of that submission are apparent now.
In the mid eighties when the Railroad begin testing it’s engineers for drugs, an older friend of mine refused on principle to submit to the test and retired early from the railroad. I have since held him in the highest regard. There are too few like him, that is why we are in this mess today.
I will be passing your article around.
Thanks and Regards …………..AL
I just (yesterday) had this discussion with my buddy (the Miata guy). He is a member of the local volunteer FD. I’d like to participate but there is an obstacle I doubt I can get around: the mandatory pee test. Mind, this is an unpaid, volunteer fireman gig. And they insist that you submit to peeing in a cup like a felon. I told him: Under no circumstances other than my having given some reason to suspect me of being a hophead will I ever submit to such a thing as a condition of employment – let alone to volunteer my free time. Too bad for them, I guess. I think I’d be a pretty good volunteer fireman.
Unfortunately, too many people just sigh and submit. Which, as you say, is why we are where we are.
In my line of work you won’t find a single utility that will hire you without passing a drug screening. The difference is, I didn’t have to take this job. It was a condition of employment between me and my potential employer. Do I like it? No, not really. Is it necessary? Well, I’ve worked with some pretty unreliable screw-ups in the past that I know for a fact were coming to work stoned. This will make you feel better; that was in a nuclear power plant. Talking to them didn’t do any good, but one of two things happened when the power company I worked for implemented mandatory drug testing: a few of these folks quit really good jobs so they could smoke dope or do nose candy, and the others ostensibly quit smoking dope and the blow. Free will; it’s a bitch.
Now I am well aware that the war on drugs is a deadly farce that has cost millions their lives, libety and fortune at the same time enriching and empowering others that probably wouldn’t have made it in the free market (since prohibition leads to price gouging and obscene profits). But the fact is, if you make a contractual arrangement with your employer to pee in cup perodically, it’s no different than any other line item in a contract you are required to perform. So we either have the right to contract with each other or we don’t.
Most recently one of my acquaintances, who’s been unemployed here of late, went to the big city for a hiring session by Baker-Hughes. He arrived very early in the morning and people were already lined up waiting for a shot at these jobs. When the company rep. announced that there would be a breathalyzer test, followed by urinalysis and a hair follicle drug test, he said about half of the potential applicants got up and left. Hmmm. But that was better for the remaining applicants who had what their potential employer deems a superior product: a drug free body (or at least the balls to try to make it through the gaunlet if they weren’t “clean”).
As long as the employer requires it without government coercion, I still don’t like it, but that’s between the contracting parties. If it gets to the point that you can’t find a single employer that will hire you without it, you still have the freedom to start your own business. But once government steps in and makes everyone pee in a cup, then it’s definitely wrong: the USSA will have become total Prison-topia (vs. whatever percentage we’re at now).
Now it seems to me that we had this discussion about drug testing welfare / WIC / foodstamp recipients. I’ve heard it argued that this is an invasion of their privacy (I even have a letter from one of “my” senators, Comrade Claire McCaskill telling me just that). We wouldn’t want to piss off that voting block now would we? I would also argue that to be cop (or fill any other tax feeder position), one should be subject to not only pre-employment screening, but also frequent random urinalysis. If they want to handle “the evidence”, then we need a little evidence of our own that they’re not sampling the goods. Which brings me back to the point that doing away with the “war on drugs” eliminates many of these problems to begin with.
But I would also argue that “welfare” (as un-Constitutional as it is) would also be a contractual arrangement between the productive and the wannabe tax-feeder. If you want my “help” (i.e. money taken from me under the threat of a gunshot wound), then I should be able to require you to prove that you’re not blowing that money on drugs or even alcohol and cigarettes for that matter. The fact is that many of them are.
Of course the entire welfare system should be completely dismantled anyway and philanthropic functions should be soley retained in the private sector. Since drug testing for welfare recipients is a step in that direction (albeit the long way around) I have to support it.
But the local volunteer fire department? I dunno. I’ll bet when they can’t get enough people to volunteer who’ve voiced the concern that drug testing is what’s stopping them it will change. But look at it this way; if you’re cooking meth or growing dope, you probably want drug-free firemen. Otherwise, if you catch your place on fire with starting fluid or too many grow lights, the first responders might steal your stash. 😮
My issue with drug testing of individuals by businesses (and so on) as a matter of routine is that it’s degrading and of a piece with the “pre-crime” that is coming to characterize this country. Yes, it is different than government-enforced measures of this sort, which involve coercion. But given that so many (most?) employers now demand it, it amounts to the same thing. We’re also “free” to not fly, too.
The whole thing is despicable.
Yeah Eric, don’t get me wrong, I find it all despicable as well. But it’s like I tell one of the guys I work with (a Clover BTW) when he bitches about something the company is allegedly “doing to us”: show me where they’re wrong in the contract. Being a union shop (another concept I wholeheartedly disagree with, but that’s where the money was when I found this job) we actually have a written contract book that spells out everything for management and hourly people. It’s certainly not perfect, but it does eliminate a lot of personal bias on both sides of the fence.
And because of this contract, urinalysis included, I knew full well what I was doing when I signed on. Keep in mind that the last job I held before this one did not require drug testing, but paid only half the money with less benefits. I made a conscious decision to move, based on monetary (and other) considerations, understanding that I was compromising some of my liberty in the process.
Being an Anarcho-Capitalist leaning libertarian I am a firm believer in contracts: tell me what you want from me, I tell you what I want from you, we agree to terms, write it all down, live by it and everyone’s happy (most of the time). The problem is, from time to time, the contract is in the other party’s favor and then we don’t like it. When I point out that what my coworker wants is a contract violation and the company is within their rights to do what they’re doing, it pisses him off. I’m “not supporting the bargaining unit”, I’m a “company man”, etc. Never mind that we held a “democratic” meeting, voted on the contract and now have what we voted for. Nope: The company’s screwing us. Ya’ gotta love Cloveresque thinking.
Not so with airport security though. This is not a voluntarily consented contractual arrangement by two individuals or groups. Oh they say you agree to a contract when you buy the ticket, but I’ve never seen or signed one personally and don’t buy the implied contract bit for a second. The fact is, government mandates drive the porno-scanner / ball squeezing fiasco at the airports, not any recognizable free market contract. Sure, we’re still at liberty to charter a flight, like Ron Paul does, to avoid this whole security charade. It’s just that most of us can’t afford to.
Our problem, Eric, is that we know how things could be and should be. So we desire a form a liberty that scares the living shit out of many, if not most, of our fellow countrymen (especially those of the Clover mindset). From time to time I’ve pondered whether it would be better to blissfully go to the mall, buy things I don’t need, watch football on “satellite” and take the blue pill so to speak. But the fact is, I’m a red pill person. I go down the rabbit hole with a vengeance. I’ll ask hard questions and poke the dragon in its soft white underbelly. I can’t say I actually enjoy exposing the deeds of evil men to the light of truth, I just can’t seem to stop; it’s a compulsion. I think one of my coworkers summed it up for me as we chatted our way in from the parking lot the other morning. He told me “you’re too philosophical.” I responded that I just try to tell the truth. He said “Yeah, but you make me think too much and that doesn’t do me any good.” And so there goes most of America from what I can tell.
We haven’t had a constitution since the Civil War. When the five old women in black robes decide the government can seize private property to give to another private entity they demonstrate they have no regard for the Constitution. Remember it only takes five, not nine of these fools to decide what the Constitution says.
I am willing to bet they will give a thumbs up to Obama’s bastard child.
Hi Molon,
You’re right (unfortunately) and – I agree. ObamnyCare will be anointed “constitutional” by the dress-wearing tyrants because it amounts to a latter-day Enabling Act. If the federal government can force us to pay tribute to private insurance companies on the basis of “interstate commerce” than there is no aspect of our lives that the government may not intrude upon.
The water’s about to start boiling and the frog has perhaps one last chance to make a jump for it.
Actually I am certain that a frog would jump out of the pot long before it ever became hot enough to paralyze him. Only Boobus Americanus would buy the official line that he’s at a spa, this is a hot tub and everything’s fine…..
This is why the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare must be watched very closely. If the justices rule in favor of the individual mandate, and use the Commerce Clause as their reasoning, then ALL aspects of our lives will, not might, be subject to regulation by the government. Since under the twisted logic of our government elite all activity affects commerce, then all activity may and will be regulated.
You beat me to the punch – see today’s rant, just posted!
What can I say? Except, of course, that great minds think alike!
Thanks, Vince – and, ditto!
One big world sized company town. That’s the goal.
They will rule in favor of Obamacare. Why? The court does not stand up to these expansions of federal power, ever. Why? It expands the power of the court.
Excellent point. I doubt if the Founders intended the commerce (and general welfare clause) to be used as bolt cutters to unchain government. Their writings make it clear that they had something much more limited in mind. Sadly, we have now reached the point where we may be only a “decision” away from what could easily become America’s carte blance Enabling Act. The elitists are of two schools of thought: 1 The Constitution is a worthless scrap of paper. 2 If the Constitution is tortured and misinterpreted badly enough it can be used as a thin veneer of legality to justify almost any tyrannical undertaking. New governmental powers can always be “found” within the document as needed. If they can’t, then adopt the first school of thought.
I think that might be the straw that decides whether we move to the country–or OUT of this country.
The only thing keeping me here is family; it’s just so damn frustrating that I can’t make them SEE it! Especially considering my own parents left South Africa because of the communist threat there; they see it here now too, but they won’t talk about it. It’s heart-wrenching.
meth….don’t bother with moving “to the country”…we tried that three years ago. 1.5 hours from the closest interstate/Wal-mart…not much more country-fied than that.
In early October, a local deputy pulled a gun on the local “crazy” dude for visiting his friends house. The deputy thought he was “trespassing”…the sheriff said “it was good police work” & since anyone can be armed, he did good. And now two or three tazerings of “drunks” all in the past month…the local Clovers say they all deserved it, cuz the law is…always right.
Its funny cuz the day before I heard about the gun draw deal, I asked the family what they thought about going overseas. Now we are just accelerating our timeline before the full curtain drops.
Fuck it…leave this & the other “educated” landmass to the Clovers. We’ll watch from a beach somewhere making 10 pesos an hour, living life.
Clovers don’t want to hear what is coming, then let them live it, and learn it. I may come back to help rebuild when it is all over, but I ain’t gonna fight them on the way down any longer. It just isn’t worth it, nor is it salvageable IMNSHOoc.
Oh hell, really? I have some spots in Montana near where Chuck Baldwin moved picked out, and some others in Idaho.
But you’re telling me that country-folk are just as authoritarian and statist-retarded as their city counterparts?
Say it ain’t so.
You’re expatriating? That was my original plan. I thought I could do the intermediate step of being more self-sufficient and isolated…
Which country?
They are.
I also live in the Sticks. We have Clovers here,too. The key difference is they are fewer and more diffuse, so living here is still much freer; more like being in America 25 years ago. Not perfect, but much, much better than in an urbanized area. Still, I share the fatalism expressed by Boothe and Brent. It is just a question of time. America – by which I mean a somewhat free country – is gone for good I think. We are running on vapors. The Weimar Germany example is apt. In 1925, Berlin was a jumping place and probably lots of fun. You could sense (and see) the evil gathering, the rot of social decay and pervasive corruption. The moral drift – no, worse… the moral illiteracy. But it was still a place where you could walk the streets, go shopping, see a movie. It probably felt ok, if you didn’t listen to that little voice in your head…
America is not special, certainly no different. And the path we are headed down is exactly the same in all the areas that matter. But because people don’t see a cartoonish khaki Fuhrer strutting around – just soft-spoken men in business suits – they tell themselves it is different. That it can’t happen here. They are misinformed.
As Eric said, the best you can hope for in the USSA is to be in an area a few years behind the rest…but when the wheels fall off, even these places will catch up awful quick.
The same plus for rural living, lack of population, will become a negative when the hordes get hungry…
I can see the “news” reports now…”THE HAMLET OF GET_THE_HELL_OUTTA_DODGE HAS FOOD, WATER & SHELTER…National troops have moved in to secure the resources from the hoarders.”
Who here DOESN’T think this will be condoned and in fact cheered on by the Clovers?
I tried going Galt, now I’m planning to just get me & my family out; hopefully, before the final act of Weimar 2.0 concludes.
“Which country?”
Any place with “inefficient” government.
Any place that a current generation has already dealt with currency “crisis.”
Any place where people are happy to live today and are used to “roughing” it…as the Clover’s call, living life without luxuries or services that have become “rights.”
@Eric–I’m coming to the same conclusion. The Republic has been lost. “Republic” comes from the Latin res publica, “a thing of the people”. When the people don’t understand what it is, it’s lost.
And your point on not just moral decay, but absolute moral ignorance, is very well put…and wholly intentional on the part of the destroyers.
@JC Allen–I fear you are absolutely right. Agenda 21 is already in high gear here; they are destroying the family farm, “rewilding” all the useful land, putting wolves in the national parks to reduce deer populations…in the globalists’ minds, it’s their wilderness.
As far as target countries, I had the same thoughts. Argentina is very attractive but I’m not wealthy enough to buy in to Estancia Cafayate–Doug Casey’s Gulch. The rest of the country is too chaotic for my taste. Has anyone else read “Ferfal”‘s book on surviving economic collapse?
Chile is attractive, as is Costa Rica. Uruguay too, but it’s hella far from family. BTW Simon Black–“The Sovereign Man”–is starting a Gulch in Chile.
What worries me is that EVERY place is a target of the control-freak psychopath NWO. Those countries might be safer because they don’t have the massive control grid infrastructure–yet–the totally cashless society, the cameras and porcine cops on every corner, the digital medical records, etc etc.
I imagine–though I don’t know for a fact–that in Chile for example it would be possible to set up a small software company or a little computer repair business without a license…and if it’s cash, slip under the radar entirely. Here, it’s just about impossible anymore.
So JCAllen: would your advice be to skip the move to the country, and just pick a new country?
And Eric: you’re in the country, are you tempted to skip out too?
When we made our move to the country we took the opportunity to lighten our load and resolve virtually all our debt. A minor league “liberty-move”…
Any rural area will suck-less than any medium to large metro area FOR A TIME at least. Until the Eye of Saron gets focused on it and you because you live & act outside the 95% “normal” distribution.
Now I see it is time for a “major-league” move…I too have looked @ Casey’s play in Argentina, but being a working stiff I can’t run in those leagues. As to specifically, “Where to go?”…I can’t answer that but all the countries you listed are on our list.
We are currently developing our options before jumping…anything & everything from just traveling, to getting a j-o-b down there, to volunteer work allowing regular migration/window-shopping before setting up camp some place.
Again the only focus being to find a spot that will “suck-less” for as long as possible…in this un-free world.
@JC Allen:
Sounds like we’re in very similar siuations. I think Cafayate is only do-able if you’re living off investment income, and I’m pretty far from the ability to do that.
We’re debt-free except for the mortgage, and I think we could get rid of that if we sold our city house at a reasonable price…going on the “greater fool” theory of real estate, people still think inner Houston is a “good area”. I’ll feel a little guilty when they sign the check.
One thing I’ve explored with a like-minded friend is learning how to sail and buying a small boat; big enough to get around the Gulf. That buys a decent bug-out option, if you can beat the thieves to your boat. I don’t know how draconian the coast “guard” is yet, but once in international waters you should be good. From there, plenty of quiet coves to anchor and weigh your options.
OTOH–you have to make it to your boat, laden with supplies including roadblock-unfriendly things like your lead and silver supplies…and the tools that launch the lead. I don’t know how fast it will go bad; the rate has accelerated dramatically lately.
It’s impossible to plan out every scenario in advance, but we can and should:
1. Get our own heads straight, as necessary. There can be a lot of conflicting cobwebs in the brain, and it takes work to clear them out and arrive at a self-consistent philosophy.
2. Spread the word. When a critical mass of understanding is reached, things will change.
3. Be prepared for a situation in which we are called upon to record. That means carrying a recording device (cell phone, camera with video capability, etc.) and pulling it out and using it when necessary. AND, staring down any cop who tries to get us to delete a recording “voluntarily” to avoid further trouble. Carry a back-up audio recorder for when the cop confiscates and smashes the video recorder.
I won’t get into point 4, which is what to do when an illegitimate government thug goes completely over the line and it’s possible to get a tactical advantage over him/her. Let’s settle for “send a message to the rest.”
You can piss, moan, stomp your feet or shit your pants – it won’t change a thing. The USA is finished regarding Life (Quality), Liberty, the Persuit of Happiness or whatever truckload of manure your Political Leaders are crapping out of their mouths. It represents a fading memory of what a great Country used to be. Anyone in this Forum who is retired and living in the States OR working and not saving and investing all he can so he can get out when he Does retire should just be quiet – that is unless you like your Government bending you over and jamming it to you balls – deep without even a lick on the neck.
I’m inclined to agree with Doug.
Well apparently the 4th Amendment has been suspended right here in Missouri as well as Indiana. If you assert your rights and tell the local cops they can’t come into your home without a warrant, they yank you out the front door by the arm, slam you on the ground, knee you in the head and cuff you. They then proceed to go on a fishing expedition through your house, two hours later get a warrant and use what they found in the initial violation of your rights to particulary describe the persons and things they’re now “looking for”. I know, because this just happened to a friend of mine.
One of the things they accused him of was being “unemployed”. So what did they do, they took his tools and chainsaw (he cuts firewood for a living) because they might have been purchased with “drug money”. They also took his tax returns, the receipts for his personal property and all his paperwork. Guess what, none of that was on the manifest of items seized. That’s going to make it awfully hard for him to prove ownership of his property to say the least. Now they even want to bill him for the night he sat in jail!
If they can do this to him, they can do it to anyone. Now I’m sure Gil and Clover will say “well he must have done something or the cops wouldn’t have done this”. Actually no. But he has family members of questionable character, so he must be “just like them”, right? Wrong! He’s a hard worker, doesn’t do drugs and hardly drinks. I’d leave my wallet with him and I do let him have the run of my house and property.
So he has been roughed up, had his livelihood stolen and been locked in a cage because members of his family are allegedly dopers and the “authorities” want him to rat out his own family. Now that’s “America the Beautiful” if ever I’ve seen it. This is not what I went in the military to defend so many years ago. This not the government my ancestors tried to leave for me and my contemporaries. This is a de facto police state and the Cloverite mindset is the reason for it. I don’t wish this on anyone, but if it has to happen then the people like Clover, who support this usurpation of our rights, need to be on the top of the list of random in-home prostate checks.
Boothe, I don’t write a whole lot on this site mainly because I can’t keep up grammatically or with my intellect. I understand my limitations and do a bit daily to reduce them. Believe it or not I’m more physically skilled than mentally (even though the work I do seems otherwise). Anyhow, I know a few things about a few things. I work with some PhD dropouts and most people at my company have master’s degrees. We even have one guy who I’m pretty sure is a genius (Princeton grad) as well as a few Harvard grads. Anyways, I’ll get back to the point. I know E-roc can write and is smarter than the average bear, but what are your credentials?
I have really learned to discount degrees (and I have a couple decent ones myself) and go with what people actually say and do. There are way too many people out there with degrees who are really only good at one thing, school. They have no abilities outside of getting academic pieces of paper and working their way through institutions. Usually causing all sorts of harm along the way for those who have to do the real work.
Couldn’t have said it better myself! In my initial post I wanted to state it though. Back in my university days I installed a serp belt on a Saturn that a son and father (both mechanical engineers couldn’t figure out). Shit took me about a minute.
Almost everything I know, I did not learn in school! In fact, I had to unlearn much of what I learned in school, most notably the half-truths, omissions and outright lies presented about the history of this country.
College is – mostly – a racket. You spend four years (for a BA or BS) mostly taking courses that have nothing to do with your area of concentration, that are cursory – and forgotten as soon as the semester’s over. Probably the core useful material acquired in the course of a four-year program could be imparted in two years of study, perhaps less. But, that would be less profitable.
Most professions could be better learned via apprenticeships. But that would open the professions to smart, hard-working people without “degrees.” Can’t have that, either.
My wife is an editor. Now, to do that job well the main qualifications are good reading comprehension, the ability to spell correctly, an understanding of usage/grammar, meticulousness – and patience. It does not, however, require a lot of formal training. You’re either good with the written word – or, you’re not. Most who are had already mastered spelling/grammar by the end of elementary school. Four years of high school and four more years of college generally does not make such a person more functionally literate. My wife and I have discussed this and she agrees: Her four-year degree (William & Mary, incidentally) did not impart the skills she needs to do her job. She could have begun working in her current field without the degree, right out of high school – and been just as competent an editor. But because of the way our system works, she would never have even been given an interview, much less the job, without the degree – even if she could demonstrate competence in the necessary areas. You have to have that piece of paper and be anointed as a “graduate.”
Or, consider teaching (such as it is). Most people probably do not realize that one does not have to be an expert in a given area (English, history, etc.) to teach in government schools, all the way through the high school level. One merely needs an “education” degree. So, not only do we have teachers who are often less well-informed on the subjects they ostensibly teach about than some of their students – people with actual expertise/knowledge in their field are not “qualified” to teach in government schools. Einstein could not teach high school physics – unless he got “trained” and acquired his “education” degree.
Government schools are the Clover Patches of America.
Eric, even after Air Force tech training, one of the first things they tell you at your permanent base is forget the B.S. you learned in school; here’s how we actually do it! The same applies in many cases with tech training in industry. The schools get you the general theory of operation of systems and equipment or basic programming procedures, etc. Then you have to figure out what needs to be done for real in the field with the manuals, tools and test equipment you actually have on hand.
School is a nothing more than a foundation to build on. Actual experience and self education is what builds the structure on that foundation. That’s why you run into Ph.D.’s that can’t fix a screen door hinge or change the oil in their car. They’re hot-house flowers. Put them out in the wild and most will perish.
If you can wing it in the field, you’ll make a good tech. If you’re good at school and useless in the field, get out of my way and let me do the job. I’d rather do it right the first time, than have to do it over behind someone else. I don’t know how many times I’ve had a supervisor send me out “to take a look at what _______ did” and “see if you can get it to work”. Usually its behind someone that “just knows” how it’s done and you can’t show them a damned thing. I usually don’t even try anymore.
With respect to college; I spent a good portion of my youth on the William & Mary campus. I had the benefit of seeing “higher education” from the faculty and staff side early on in my life. There were a few really great minds there that helped me learn how to learn. Dr. J. T. Baldwin in particular; he would come to visit my folks and bring me college biology text books to read. I was about 12 years old. The condition was that I be able to answer his questions the next time he came to see us.
I still have all those books. My favorite is the hard cover “Nature Study” by Anna Botsford Comstock that he gave me. Needless to say I aced high school biology without the need to crack a book. This is one of the reasons I have such a low opinion of public schools; they cheat most of the students from the very start.
I also saw the infighting, back stabbing, vying for tenure and position, lying, misappropriation of funds and incompetents teaching nonsense from the inside at W&M. Dr. Baldwin was all about learning and teaching. The majority were all about power, position and money; a typical bureaucracy. I understood this as a kid; I had good parents that actually educated me, rather than just sending me off to child prison.
These were deciding factors for me in avoiding college. The people around me suggested that I should go in the military. I had a really great social studies / history teacher, I looked up to, that was a retired Army colonel. It seemed like the right thing, the “American” thing to do when I was 17. That’s why they sell it to you young. By the time you’re 30 or so most of us won’t buy the recruiters’ B.S. We also don’t brainwash as easily.
Uncle Sam’s Airplane Club was a great experience for me in many ways (not all good I assure you); but it was not remarkably different from college. You put a bunch of kids together in dorms, they’re going to party. You put a bunch of mediocre incompetents in charge and you get bureaucracy with the attendant infighting, drama, vying for position, graft and dishonesty. The only difference is in college you don’t usually get sent somewhere other people are actively trying to kill you. And in the military you may actually get useful experience you can apply in the real world when you get out.
But when all is said and done, bureaucracy is bureaucracy. You can paint it any color you like and hang a ribbon on it, but a turd remains a turd. It doesn’t matter if it’s a public turd or private sector turd, the internal characteristics remain the same. Bad people in charge make bad organizations, no matter what the intended purpose originally was for that organization.
This is why I believe the Anarcho-Capitalists have it right. It all comes down to the individual; the only thing we really have control over is our self. If each of us will control our thoughts and actions, take responsibility for them and consider the rights of others, the world can’t help but improve. It’s a shame so many Americans don’t get it and don’t want to. Individual responsibility: It’s a major reason Anarchy will never catch on with the masses.
Credentials? I don’ need no steenkin’ credentials! Actually I don’t have a degree just 34 successful years in my field: Military and industrial electronics and instrumentation & control. I don’t consider myself real bright, just a methodical root cause analyst and troubleshooter who grew up in the country with a house full of books. I’d say I’m moderately well read.
I spent 5 years traveling all over the country doing start-ups and service work on renewable energy systems, met a lot of nice people and saw most of the country. Once upon a time I was in the smoking lounge in the Minneapolis – St. Paul airport more or less eavedropping on a conversation this rather rotund lady was having with another smoker. They were discussing evironmental issues and she informed him that SHE was a JURIS DOCTOR!
Well the old boy, obviously disgusted with her arrogance, put out his cigarette and left.
I struck up a conversation with her. After a few minutes of verbal fencing, she asked “Are you a doctorate?” I replied “No ma’am I am not.” She then asked “What’s your degree in?” and I responded “I don’t have a degree.” She put her nose up and arrogantly asked “You don’t have a degree?”. I just looked at her and said “No ma’am, I have a brain. I don’t need a degree.” She stomped out her cigarette and left.
One of the engineers I worked with asked me what I meant by that when I related it to her. I told her it was the Wizard of Oz: The scarecrow didn’t have a brain, so the wizard gave him a degree.
Now don’t get me wrong, there’s certainly nothing wrong with having a degree (especially if it’s useful). I especially respect electrical engineers, because anyone who can get through wave theory deserves a certain amount of admiration. But when I read articles by degreed economists and historians that make statements like “take up a trade, my plumber makes more than I do”, I figure I made the right choice. Besides which, they haven’t figured out how to import electricity from China yet, so I’ll probably have a job for a few more years.
More far fetched than being charged with a crime for driving down the street in an unacceptably defined manor like with “statutory reckless driving”? More far fetched then soccer moms with kids in the car being arrested for not having their registration up to date? More far fetched than a motorcyclist having a gun pulled on him for speeding? More far fetched then cops beating women, old people, arresting school kids?
Shit, I bet if we tried hard enough we could already find examples that DHS has already done this.
Funny whenever I think about learning how to defend myself, I never think that it might be from a burglar or mugger, but rather from the cops and the government. That’s a sad testimony to the state of affairs.