Friday, January 19, 2007

Ron Paul for President

Republicans have John McCain a front runner for President whose mind seems more battered than his body. Liberal Rudy Guiliani talks like brain matter sloshing around in his head is spilling out. Chuck Hagel seems to talk like a populist but he also votes like a big government, corporate whore. Tom Coburn was impressive as a Congressman, but since moving to the Senate Tom has supported "stay the course" in Iraq and in September 2006 had nothing but praise for Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. Lying down with dogs has given Dr. Coburn fleas. Am I the only person who expects these guys to earn their pay?
Meanwhile, the Democrats have nothing but jokes running for the highest office in the land. Hillary and Obama seem to be the tops, but Senators haven't won that spot since JFK; just ask President (JFK) Kerry. And the big commentary here should be how terrible Illinois candidates have been. Obama beat a very nutty Alan Keyes, and before Durbin? was Carol Moseley Braun.
I have been watching Dr. Ron Paul since his run for President in 1988. I voted for him that year. As he has been writing his position papers since I talked with him, and his presentation has improved.
Lies about Congressman Paul are spread by Democrats and Republicans. He is a grassroots candidate in that his support more and more is from individuals around the country (over 96% in 06). I am very impressed that his supporters don't need "Talking Points."
He is the only man for the poor and working class and opposes monopolies. I do not know all his positions, but I assure you they are well thought out. I have seen him on many videos and he is often mentioned in articles by those who support freedom.
The praise I've been seeing in the last few days is tremendous. (Not by the corporate press, but by those who are in the know.) Here a blogger includes Aaron Russo's endorsement and has a link to Aaron's movie, a must see:
Steven Yates at has an article on Ron's exploration.
Tommy Thompson and Ms. Rice may have the support of Gods, but Ron Paul represents "The People" and "The Peoples Article" (Bill of Rights) and 2008 may just be the election where The People flex their muscles.
Once a week Ron gives a toll free short comment (changes by Monday) at:
Feel free to listen to his message and comment here.

Friday, January 12, 2007

The Road to Serfdom by F.A. Hayek

A bit too advanced for many, I will give a brief summary (synopsis) of each chapter.
Hayek examines how Germany devolved from believing in the liberty Mills wrote about in On Liberty to the sick fascist state of 1944. In so doing, he uncovers some disappointing truths that apply to politics and governments. That these horrors must have some connection to being human is a weight that presses uncomfortably on the modern soul.
This will let you reference a Nobel Prize winner who may have the same opinions as yourself. Coming of age before the Thatcher era, Hayek was influential in rolling back the socialist excesses of the British. Let's hope we can vote out the socialism that led Germany to its perversion. Or is it too late?

1 The Abandoned Road
Free enterprise did not fail, it wasn't tried. In attempts at a greater good, man has worsened his condition; Germany, Russia, Italy, and now England are examples.
This quote, "The attitude of the liberal (read that libertarian today) toward society is like that of a gardener who tends a plant and, in order to create the conditions most favorable to its growth, must know as much as possible about its structure and the way it functions." helps lead me to believe libertarians believe in all government minus failed government.
Hayek points out that for 200 years the freedom of England was spread around the world. Then 1870 to 1944 socialism spread from the East and it was perfected in England. British and American capitalism and freedom became uncool.
2 The Great Utopia
The attempt at making life heavenly through government has created hell instead.
Socialism was to be the equal distribution of wealth but it becomes Stalinism and some consider it worse than fascism. Hayek refutes that communism and fascism are opposites. They are brothers. Brothers of tyranny.
3 Individualism and Collectivism
The good intentions of socialist planning lead to tyrannical governance. Planning becomes central as opposed to laissez faire. This can also be contrasted with the libertarian little platoons where the individual is more important than the collective.
"Atomistic" competition with private property is contrasted with central direction and controlled monopolies. The idea of a middle ground (third way) is just a dream. (Havel wrote on this.)
Hayek quote - "Although competition can bear some admixture of regulation, it cannot be combined with planning to any extent we like without ceasing to operate as an effective guide to production. ...Or, to express it differently, planning and competition can be combined only by planning for competition but not by planning against competition."
The argument of this book is to remember it is against "the planning against competition - the planning which is to be substituted for competition." Today we see a real problem with oil. The monopoly plays with regulations and prices. (Perhaps prices are historically low, but compare it with cars or computers.)
4 The "Inevitability" of Planning
An interesting observation here is that Hayek does not believe in "economy of scale." Nor does he believe that economies of size necessitate a monopoly. What looks to be economy of scale is just an agreement for monopoly as opposed to competition. Screw the planning as it will fail and go with competition for the best results of low price, quality, and availability.
5 Planning and Democracy
The state cannot plan well for the individual. Common goals are not often the same ultimate goals. This is especially true of economic concerns. Socialism is only considered during economic chaos like the hyperinflation of Germany before Hitler.
Liberty is the ultimate end and the means of democracy should be used to achieve liberty.
Planning leads to dictatorship because it is effective at its goal by using suppression of freedom.
6 Planning and the Rule of Law
Governments are limited by the Rule of Law, no ex post facto laws and rich and poor must be treated the same. You can read about Rule by Law but Hayek claims the opposite of Rule of Law is Rule of Status. Advantage goes to the wealthy. Equal execution is more important than the content of the rule.
Central Europe proves that bad governments can detour around rights.
7 Economic Control and Totalitarianism
People hate political dictators but often want an economic dictator. Hayek concludes as the Hilaire Belloc quote, "The control of the production of wealth is the control of life itself."
Planning is no longer considered as productive as the free market but is considered a "more just and equitable distribution of wealth." Socialist offer freedom from economic care but in that they take the power of choice so real freedom is given up to the planners.
8 Who, Whom?
Once the planners take a little control it snowballs until they have full control. At a certain "tipping point" the "rulers" start controlling everything and everyone.
It was not Fascists but socialists who took children at young ages for indoctrination. Same with sports, games, and clubs. Distinguishing greetings and forms of address as well as organizing into "cells" for supervision of private life was all socialist. Uniforms and military party formation were started by socialists.
9 Security and Freedom
Although this chapter ends with the famous Franklin quote, it is out of context. Hayek is speaking of economic security and admits that, "...there can be no doubt that some minimum of food, shelter, and clothing, sufficient to preserve health and the capacity to work, can be assured to everybody." Beyond this "safety net" freedom is sacrificed when a minimum level of income is assured.
When the "planners" regulate activity and people are taught to command for government rather than make filthy profits, the poor are especially hurt and placed at a disadvantage.
10 Why the Worst Get on Top
Hayek gives three reasons:
1) Educated and intelligent have varied views and tastes. Lower moral and intellectual standards find a high degree of uniformity. A dictator will increase these numbers by converting others to his creed.
2) The docile and gullible will support the dictator. A ready-made system can be "drummed into" supporters.
and 3) Negatives of hate the enemy or envy those better off are used to bring unreserved allegiance of huge masses.
Minimize the power of man over man by decentralization. Separation of economic and political aims also gives individual freedom. Power in the individual cannot be complete power. Centralized power looks exactly like slavery.
A useful assistant in the totalitarian state must be prepared to break every moral rule he has known, must commit to the leader, have no ideals or ideas of right and wrong. "The only tastes which are satisfied are the taste for power as such and the pleasure of being obeyed and of being part of a well-functioning and immensely powerful machine to which everything else must give way."
Hayek continues, "...the readiness to do bad things becomes a path to promotion and power."
11 The End of Truth
Truth in politics and science must be collective in a totalitarian society. Only the individual can guide the growth of reason.
12 The Socialist Roots of Naziism
Hayek names some socialist philosophers from around the world other than Germany. Unlike Liberalism (libertarianism),and Democracy derived from individualism and limited government, the individual under socialism is the product of autocracy and militarism.
Begun in 1914, Germany's socialism fought against liberalism after the war. It was a fight against the "enemy" which united socialists and conservatives. Starting with the German Youth Movement, this philosophy spread to intellectuals by the late 20s. "Conservative Socialism" or "Religious Socialism" led to "National socialism."
Hayek was concerned (in 1944) that "conservative socialism" was becoming popular.
13 The Totalitarians in Our Midst
The Nazi horrors may make us overconfident that we could never do that. Yet we have socialists saying the same things Germans did in the 20s and don't see where these thoughts lead.
Monopolies are accepted by people who benefit from them and the rest stay silent. In fact, Britain's Labour party in favor of a planned society is leading the country down the wrong road.
14 Material Conditions and Ideal Ends
Maybe exceptions can be made in time of war but a planned system with destruction of wheat and coffee, the over control of patents, allows the idealist to destroy freedom and ultimately bring down the country.
Collectivism's destruction has been "both inevitable and undeniable." Restraints on selfishness we learn as individuals is unleashed when we become part of a collective. This collective is antimoral as the tolerant and independent individual is sacrificed.
15 The Prospects of International Order
A world federation will not work. Wealthy countries using machines will give dollars per man-hour an advantage over poorer nations. Countries with no "Rule of Law" will be disadvantaged. The "League of Nations" did not work so another federation is not likely to be of much benefit. But we should work against war independently.
16 Conclusion
Hayek explains this book was meant to tell of past mistakes and tell how to escape the troublesome path we appear to be traveling. (The Road to Serfdom) His last sentence is, "The guiding principle that a policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy remains as true today as it was in the nineteenth century."

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Charles Lindbergh Senior - "Why Is Your Country At War?"


"Why Is Your Country At War?" by Charles A. Lindbergh senior written in 1917. (published in July) It was banned (copies burned and the plates destroyed) and the pocket sized version I read was falling apart. On line here lacking the picture of his beautiful daughter and granddaughter.

An article from "American Opinion" (now "THE NEW AMERICAN" from the John Birch Society) gives their very similar view here.

I was impressed with C.A.'s (He was called C. A. and that is what I will use from now on to refer to senior.) quotes and will use them to aid my explanation.

A book you can get through inter-library loan is C.A.'s 1913 book, "Banking Currency and The Money Trust", 318 pages. It explains the Federal Reserve Act and the troubles it will bring. The 1917 book, "Why Is Your Country At War?" follows up on the Fed Reserve scam and shows war profiteering by quoting profits of record. (something like today's

C.A. wanted a book to tell the average voter what was going on in simple language. Perhaps not so simple to today's readers, but worth knowing about none the less because we see the same things happening today.


On page 70 he mentions we are working more hours for less.

Page 82 - C.A. quotes a Lincoln letter to Mr. Elkins of Illinois. He seems to have helped in making Lincoln a hero (is C.A. naive or political?) whose transformation into a God amazed H.L Mencken. Quote: " ...As a result of the war corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before in the midst of the war."

Quote from the Hazard Circular - a letter from an agent of the English money loaners:
"Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power and all chattel slavery abolished. This I and my European friends are in favor of, for slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers, while the European plan led by England, is that capital shall control labor and wages."
Employers will not have to pay for sickness or retirement.

Page 83 has a less "naive" C.A. quoting Jefferson on banking institutions being more dangerous than standing armies. This may be a slight misquote substituting "institutions" for "establishments" and a letter to John Tyler perhaps should be John Taylor, in a letter of May 28, 1816.
(dictionary of American quotes 1997: "Banking establishments are more danerous than standing armies" to John Taylor May 28,1816)

In a Jefferson letter to Monroe we have:
"We are completely saddled and bridled, and the bank is so firmly mounted on us that we must go where they ill guide."

From Jefferson writings:
"All eyes are opening to the rights of man. The general spread of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred ready to ride them legitimately by the grace of god."

C.A. gives us the Ruskin quote Americans should hear everyday the U.S. carries debt:
"National debts paying interest are simply the purchase of the rich of the power to tax the poor."

Starting in Chapter IV we see that there are EXPLOITERS taking from toilers who do the work of the country. He gets his statistics from a Wisconsin professor:
50 years previous - 98% owned greater than 95% of wealth
Now (1917) - 2% owned greater than 60% of wealth

We see a similar trend in this century. In a very practical book everyone should read, Your Bank is Ripping You Off, 1997, the author mentions the Federal Reserve Act and then mentions that the banking industry employs 2% of the population yet they own 31% of the nations wealth. (This author may also explain better than C.A. that the Fed's prime rate is theft from the borrower to the super rich. Of course every one gets burned when a country falls into debt and this scheme just adds to that humiliation. Debt to foreign nations saps credit to Americans.) This author also mentions the Glass-Steagall Act which came from an investigation of the Crash of 1929 and it stopped banks from corporate underwriting. Now Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan want more "freedom." This author correctly has the fortitude to disagree with these highly respected men.

On a world basis we are seeing that 2% owns half the wealth and what is different in this study is that if you have more debt than assets this gives zero wealth.

In a good book by a communist leaning fellow, James W. Loewen writes in Lies My Teacher Told Me, 2005, 1% own almost 40% of the wealth.

C.A. wasn't afraid to say we were tricked into war and wanted people to join the Non-Partisan Organization (League) to vote for economic reform (against the Federal Reserve) and against war.

He warned the Big Business owned press will call you a radical and obstructionist if you tell the truth.

He wrote neither of these parties which were, "...led and manipulated by an 'invisible government' is fit to manage the destinies of a great people...."

Called for bankers to be off the banking committee, predicted foreign loans would put the U.S. into the foreign war, and said special interests funded both parties.

C.A. mentions the "trick" they use to stay in power. By giving small amounts of stocks, bonds, and other interests to get small holders to vote for special priviledge the theft continues.

Patriotism is also used as a trick. C.A. writes, "Patriotism is worth nothng to the special interests except when it supports its system."

C.A. wrote don't be fooled, you must support "a true reform of our economic system."


Put transportation, mail, telephone and all natural monopolies under government control. (Not very libertarian)

Less military (war is unpatriotic) and more education - KNOWLEDGE is the key.

VOTE - or all the wealth will go to corporations. (We may be seeing this with another controlled depression that will sap the wealth of many Americans.)

ECONOMIC REFORM TO END WARS - (Kill the Fed. The wealthy may know all these facts. Author Gore Vidal, of the Kennedy clan, and their compound in Florida, outs the elites in Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace. (Insight from an insider?)

From C.A.: "Mankind is not reformed by punishment, and very seldom by force...." With a just economic system we can, "conquer the world and win the respect of all mankind."

He wanted, " equal opportunity for all and special privilege to none."

Greatest victory would be to get out of that system - meaning to stop the exploiters' stealing from consumers.


C.A. is saying, VOTE to make CHANGE which would be ECONOMIC REFORMS - END THE FEDERAL RESERVE which would stop the stealing by the elites and end unnecessary WAR.

Aside from these benefits, the respect of other nations is also needed today.

We still have UNDERLINGS doing the work of EXPLOITERS who benefit from the sweat of the TOILERS. Only the names have changed.


Site with Lindbergh book:

John Birch view:

More of the Hazard Circular in this article:

Your Bank Is Ripping You Off:

2% Owns half the Wealth:

Lies My Teacher Told Me

Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace: