Foxtrot News Alert
Until further notice, Foxtrot News presents the following executive summary of global geopolitical and economic news:
A full-metal circle-jerk around the gaping maw of the abyss.
This planet has gone completely off the rails. If you don’t have a Plan B in place, well, tick tock.
Update July 4th, 2013 – I reread this post again and essentially nothing has changed. Oh sure, I could add details such as Syria, Snowden and the NSA, but the core of the 2010 post is untouched. Things have gotten worse and heads punch deeper into the sand.
Update – This post has gotten hits virtually every single day since it was posted. If you are reading this post, please consider commenting – I’d like to know what you think. And thank you for reading. – UR
Maybe it is the sullen windy day, but I am not feeling particularly independent or celebratory on this Fourth of July. I view with dismay and a sense of helplessness at the egregious behavior of the federal government and the open contempt of the very people and Constitution from which they draw their power. Or so it is written. Numerical superiority of citizens and Constitutional exhortations aside, we are not in charge, those we elect do not answer to us and clearly are above the laws they enact. This is not how it is supposed to be.
I am not sure that we can alter by so much as a few degrees the self-destructive course we are set on, so reversing it seems out of the question. Then the question one has to ask, reverse to what?
Rather than succumb to the hollow symbolic celebrations of a very real historical event, I highly recommend you read for yourself the text of the Declaration of Independence. Try to imagine yourself in the position of these men, read through the list of grievances cited and try to grasp to full meaning, the historically correct context, import and consequence of the these words. This is not an easy task in a world of CGI-assisted imaginations and reset buttons. Read more…
Posted without comment.
“Contemporary American culture is the most powerful in history, and the most destructive of competitor cultures… It stresses comfort and convenience—ease—and it generates pleasure for the masses… The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing.” —Lieutenant Colonel (ret.) Ralph Peters, U.S. Army
All indicators point downward, I tell you. On the lobotomy box the other night I stumbled on what seemed to be sock puppets standing behind rostrums and hypnotically intoning “The American People…the American People…the American People.”
Puzzled, I speculated that it might be a troupe of performing autistics, but soon understood that it it was a debate among Republican candidates for the presidency. Why use people, I wondered? We could do it as well in software. Computer graphics, small recorded vocabulary, narcotic rhythm. Easy.
I typed “consent of governed” (or something similar) into my browser search box the other day and came across this interesting post on mises.org – Consent of the Governed? by Robert Higgs. An extract:
I raise this question because, in regard to the so-called social contract, I have often had occasion to protest that I haven’t even seen the contract, much less been asked to consent to it. A valid contract requires voluntary offer, acceptance, and consideration. I’ve never received an offer from my rulers, so I certainly have not accepted one; and rather than consideration, I have received nothing but contempt from the rulers, who, notwithstanding the absence of any agreement, have indubitably threatened me with grave harm in the event that I fail to comply with their edicts.
What monumental effrontery these people exhibit! What gives them the right to rob me and push me around? It certainly is not my desire to be a sheep for them to shear or slaughter as they deem expedient for the attainment of their own ends.
Moreover, when we flesh out the idea of “consent of the governed” in realistic detail, the whole notion quickly becomes utterly preposterous. Just consider how it would work. A would-be ruler approaches you and offers a contract for your approval. Here, says he, is the deal.
I, the party of the first part (“the ruler”), promise:
(1) To stipulate how much of your money you will hand over to me, as well as how, when, and where the transfer will be made. You will have no effective say in the matter, aside from pleading for my mercy, and if you should fail to comply, my agents will punish you with fines, imprisonment, and (in the event of your persistent resistance) death.(2) To make thousands upon thousands of rules for you to obey without question, again on pain of punishment by my agents. You will have no effective say in determining the content of these rules, which will be so numerous, complex, and in many cases beyond comprehension that no human being could conceivably know about more than a handful of them, much less their specific character; yet if you should fail to comply with any of them, I will feel free to punish you to the extent of a law made by me and my confederates.
(3) To provide for your use, on terms stipulated by me and my agents, so-called public goods and services. Although you may actually place some value on a few of these goods and services, most will have little or no value to you, and some you will find utterly abhorrent, and in no event will you as an individual have any effective say over the goods and services I provide, notwithstanding any economist’s cock-and-bull story to the effect that you “demand” all this stuff and value it at whatever amount of money I choose to expend for its provision.
(4) In the event of a dispute between us, judges beholden to me for their appointment and salaries will decide how to settle the dispute. You can expect to lose in these settlements, if your case is heard at all.
In exchange for the foregoing government “benefits,” you, the party of the second part (“the subject”), promise:
(5) To shut up, make no waves, obey all orders issued by the ruler and his agents, kowtow to them as if they were important, honorable people, and when they say “jump,” ask only “how high?”
Such a deal! Can we really imagine that any sane person would consent to it?
Yet the foregoing description of the true social contract into which individuals are said to have entered is much too abstract to capture the raw realities of being governed. In enumerating the actual details, no one has ever surpassed Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who wrote:
To be GOVERNED is to be kept in sight, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right, nor the wisdom, nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction, noted, registered, enrolled, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, trained, ransomed, exploited, monopolized, extorted, squeezed, mystified, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, despised, harassed, tracked, abused, clubbed, disarmed, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and, to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality. (P.-J. Proudhon, General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century, trans. John Beverley Robinson. London: Freedom Press, 1923, p. 294)
A foul mood has settled in over enough of America for it to be palpable. For all the good it will do us, there is a US presidential election in a little over nine months from now. With one asterisked exception, all are made men and women, promising but never delivering what we have been conditioned to think we want. People foolishly voting for the words “Hope and Change” were instead treated to the third term of George Bush.
What affects the Republic is a cancer and if left untreated it will surely kill the host. Cancers do not leave of their own volition. They must be removed by force or their environment made so toxic they die off. The environment that this particular cancer thrives on is literally flooded with apathy, willful ignorance and denial. Making the environment inhospitable to this cancer requires that the elements present in that environment that allow it to thrive must be reversed in polarity. That will be very difficult given that a significant portion of that environment gets some or all of its sustenance from the cancer itself and real change, even the very idea of real change, has been and will continue to be met with significant resistance.
This cancer is not new; it is an old cancer, well documented and capable of learning from its mistakes. What is different this time is that there are formidable defenses present in this particular host, defenses that have never been present in any prior host. Will those defenses be brought to bear on this insidious cancer that has eaten its way into the soul of the Republic, and if so, will it be in time to save it? From one perspective, it seems that the only barrier to activating these defenses is simply the will to do so.
Time is running out on the world-wide fiat currency Ponzi and I suppose it is only fitting that last straw be Italy. Time will tell.
If you do not currently have a suitable amount of your local currency on-hand (that is to say, NOT in your bank) to weather the shock waves of a sovereign default that cannot be swept under the “innovative financial instruments” rug, now would be a good time. There may be more “holidays” on the calendar than we are all currently aware of.
DISCLAIMER: This is not financial or investment advice. It is a blog post.
EDIT: I have no idea what is up with Remus. I suppose it is possible he really did move to Montana, but it is not likely.