Over the last 10 years, I have been building a regimen (augmented by ad hoc remedies) that has now evolved to the point where it has fixed my blood pressure. A few days ago, I decided to not renew my prescription on its last day, and instead, I started an enhanced version of my regimen at the same time – and it worked … fast! I started seeing results by the morning of the third day.
Previously, I had already fixed my arthritis, my back pain (from herniated disks), a hemorrhoid, high blood sugar, kidney stones, gum disease, sub-optimal psychology, irritable bowel syndrome, precancerous skin lesions, and respiratory illness.
The catalyst for this article was when I suddenly decided a few days ago to quit my blood pressure medicine after more than six years because I was tired of the shakedown. You may be familiar with this shakedown. It works like this: When your prescription expires, you need to find a doctor to give you permission to buy more. You know you need it, and it’s your body, and you buy it with the fruits of your own labor; but the doctor thinks it is his right to first make you sign away all your rights, pay him, visit him, give him your blood, and make promises to obey.
Try buying medicine without a doctor’s permission, or try competing with the doctor to provide medical services – you will go to jail, and yet, their advice hasn’t been very helpful to me, and has often been wrong. I guess that’s why they need protection from competition.
I pretty much don’t need them anymore, but did I really beat the cartel … given how Obamacare makes me pay them anyway?
During the shakedown, you may even have to become an actor and pretend that you will follow the doctor’s advice when you may already know better. You must also assert that you are a very happy and well adjusted person (which I always am) who respects the doctor and doesn’t think he is part of a cartel or that he is perpetrating a shakedown; otherwise, he could have you detained for days, drugged, and put on the no-fly list. BTW, the CDC is requesting the right to indefinitely detain you. The doctor could have the government take your kids and your right to keep and bear arms – just on his whim.
Just like the police, the politicians, and the rich and famous … doctors are above the law.
Calling it a shakedown by a cartel is thus an understatement. It is also cronyism, fascism, and tyranny.
Grandpa, after Rule of Market replaced Rule of Law, why didn’t some foreign power just take over? It seems like they could have just threated to nuke a city unless it accepted their rule, and when that first city chose to fight instead of surrendering, then the next city would see how they got nuked and would comply immediately.
You see Timmy, that used to work. In fact, that’s how Genghis Khan took over several cities, and that’s why several foreign powers did indeed try something like that.
Now, they all knew that the people were well armed and would resist, so they took a few years to prepare. The first foreign threat that emerged tried a direct assault in Maine and New Hampshire … kind of like Red Dawn I guess … They launched several EMPs and waited for folks to get out their equipment that had been shielded from EMP attack, and then they attacked with EMPs again. They also cut the power grid, which was easy to do because, although it was now shielded from EMP, it was still a centralized system that was about a year away from becoming decentralized like the Internet. Most folks figure that is why they attacked when they did instead of taking longer to prepare. They really thought that taking out the power grid would be a knockout punch, but they couldn’t have been more wrong.
Tens of thousands of individuals in that area had been preparing for such an event. Some had accurately foreseen the threat, but for most, that was just how they liked to spend their spare time and money. For example, they each had independent power generation, stealth technology, drones, and armor piercing bullets. Some even had directed energy weapons, ELF technology, and insect drones. The invaders simply did not understand the explosion of wealth and freedom under Rule Of Market.
The invaders were attacked in thousands of unique ways that they hadn’t anticipated because each patriot had his own ideas, so the centralized invasion force simply couldn’t adapt. Perhaps the most resourceful individual was a man known to history only as “Future Bob”. The invaders had been so on edge after several weeks of relentless surprises and setbacks that he was able to drive out an entire battalion with his creative use of ELF technology to beam speech directly into their heads in their native language while simultaneously attacking them with thousands of insect drones. Most of them killed each other in the chaos and fear that ensued.
This first invasion was over in about 6 weeks. They didn’t even fight long enough to find out about the payback on its way to their home land. Nor had they yet figured out how their defeat had greatly strengthened the underground resistance in their own capitol.
Before the full consequences of the first attack had unfolded, a second foreign power figured this first attack had created a unique opportunity. It thought it had learned from the mistakes of the first aggressor and that it would attack before the resistance had time to regroup, but like those first aggressors, they couldn’t have been more wrong.
Perhaps their biggest mistake was their assumption that under Rule of Market, those outside the battle zone had no obligation or incentive to intervene. They didn’t know that after six weeks, the first wave of about a million mobilized individuals had each independently traveled to the battle zone and had already been providing firepower, logistics, supplies, morale, intelligence, counterintelligence … and … it was a beautiful thing … They came from as far away as Alaska.
What about Hawaii? That state would have had more incentive to help out than anyone so that others would reciprocate later.
No, at that time Hawaii was too afraid of living under the Rule of Market, and so, under the leadership of governor Obama, they had petitioned to become part of China, but boy did they ever regret that decision … poor Obama … but that’s another story …
Both aggressors wanted to milk the region – like a colony – and did not want to destroy it, but after seeing how the patriots had taken out most of the leadership in the first invader’s home land by working with the underground resistance there, the second invaders escalated and used their heaviest conventional weapons. They even used nerve gas in some areas, which had little effect on the dispersed resistance. Needless to say, the payback included gas attacks in addition to snipers and more creative tactics. The second invasion also lasted about six weeks.
This second victory by the patriots gave pause to additional foreign powers, and during that pause, domestic resistance in those foreign lands grew exponentially. The Rule of Market was becoming an existential threat to governments everywhere.
It was about 18 months later when the most advanced foreign power threatened to nuke a city unless it came under their rule, but the city refused and prepared to retaliate … well … actually, this particular city had over one million subscribers to more than 30 protection agencies, and it was they who prepared to retaliate.
The foreign power was mostly bluffing because they didn’t want to kill the goose that laid the golden egg, but they knew they could not back down, so they detonated a tactical nuke that destroyed about 4 blocks in a low value part of the city. It just so happened that those blocks were adjacent to the neighborhood of Leroy and his guardians.
Some protection agencies had no ability to project force into the foreign nation, so they compensated by covering all of the domestic obligations of the more advanced agencies. Also, there were several billionaires in the city who had their own methods of dealing with threats. Then there were the other agencies and individuals who wanted to help so that no foreign government could gain a foothold in the land.
The foreign capitol had to fend off no less than 23 independent efforts, but they were expecting most of them. They defended against a hypersonic ballistic missile, several supersonic cruise missiles, and several cyber attacks. They knew that no one was willing to perform a suicide HALO mission in retaliation, after all, they had only attacked the poorest and least populated blocks in the city, but what they didn’t count on was the huge publicity opportunity. Two billionaires pooled their efforts to send in Leroy’s guardians, who were known as heroes throughout the land. One would provide the weapon, and the other would provide the cyber attack that would cover their insertion and extraction.
Leroy’s guardians were little more than a neighborhood watch … of former navy seals, airborne rangers, and marines. They had to set up three small generators in an equilateral triangle whose center was the emperor’s palace. The HALO insertion was flawless and undetected. One hour later, the emperor’s palace, and the emperor, were vaporized as he was addressing a crowd of hundreds of thousands while hundreds of millions watched on TV.
The emperor’s intelligence agencies never dreamed that three poor unskilled black men could have done it. Nor could they have believed that the perpetrators of such an operation would have left for home in a little fishing boat – with local help!
As predicted, the publicity was worth billions. It was a profitable operation.
Curiously though, the United Nations and most foreign leaders began claiming the patriots were the aggressors, and that such power in the hands of individuals was a global threat. That was the catalyst that caused the majority of patriots to break out of their normalcy bias and realize that foreign governments were indirectly controlled by the globalists, who for generations had been committed to one world government, one world currency, one world religion, no armed citizens, total control of individuals, and total dependence on government.
The window of opportunity was closing for the globalist end game. Some say the globalists had captured a real alien and were able to make limited use of the technology in his scout ship and used real footage of him – all against his will.
The Pope and other Jesuits, along with thousands of other globalist shills, had been preparing the world for an alien visitation for years. The world believed that the alien and his people were giving the earth the knowledge of a more advanced – a more global – government, currency, and spirituality – where there was no potential for some crazy citizen to harm others. They promised additional gifts of technology once we had “progressed” to the point where no crazy citizen would have the freedom to use that technology to hurt anyone.
But grandpa! The alien agenda was the globalist agenda!
Yes, that was pretty obvious to the patriots too because we had a free press, but the rest of the world only had propaganda, except for the growing underground resistance, who got unfiltered Internet.
It was about three years after the palace had been vaporized when the putative “aliens” said that the Rule of Market was a reactionary resurgence of the failed flawed fatal policies of the past, and that because their technology could fall into the hands of patriots who were unregulated in their uses of it, that they could never trust the earth with the kinds of advanced alien technologies that would end hunger, sickness, climate change, and provide free energy for all.
Naturally, this propaganda made about half of the people of the world want to kill the patriots.
The “aliens” gave the patriots an ultimatum, and of course, the patriots said the aliens were not real and farted in their general direction.
As punishment, the “aliens” used a beam from space that could vaporize a city block. They destroyed several blocks in each of the most “dangerous” cities. Of course, there was no crime in those cities, but they were the hotbeds of technical innovation, and they had individual citizens who owned nukes and other super weapons.
But grandpa, humans had such satellite weapons by then.
Ah, but the world didn’t know about such secret weapons programs yet. The patriots had just gotten word to the underground at the same time the globalists had begun their attack, so word had not spread far enough yet to make the world suspicious.
The “aliens” were so nice that they would warn the patriots 4 hours before each attack. That was expected to result in much chaos and death, and thus greatly embarrass the patriots and cause them to kill more of each other than the attack itself, but the aliens didn’t seem to know that everyone had bugout plans, which had become a cultural fetish. Half had already bugged out anyway, and the rest were gone within the 4 hours.
The “aliens” kept assuming that such a flawless bugout was a fluke each time.
Needless to say, the patriots would not surrender and thus the globalists had to escalate.
Next, the globalists introduced a hostile “alien” race, who said the humans were too dangerous and also just too stupid and ungrateful, and must be wiped out. They also began to use pretty much the same kind of beam from space to attacked cities in multiple countries, but the “good aliens” said that we were worth saving and defeated the bad aliens in a spectacular light show in the sky. Then the good aliens said that we humans needed to deal with those cowboy Rule of Market patriots before another hostile alien race came along.
Grandpa, who would believe that was aliens instead of the globalists?
Everyone believed it, and they wanted to kill the patriots more than ever. Everyone was being played by the globalists, who had manipulated billions into demanding the alien agenda, which was actually the globalist agenda, and demanding the death of any who opposed that agenda. Before that, even most patriots didn’t understand that players don’t have to give orders to make billions carry out their agenda.
So, how did you all survive?
Years of independent efforts had converged to destroy the satellite weapon, but that wasn’t what really ended the globalists. Not even close. No one even knew we had destroyed it, and they were only days away from sending up another one, and they had nukes, nerve gas, conventional weapons, and billions ready to march.
So, how did you do it?!
Well, most of the world leaders were just front men for the globalists at the top. So, some of the more savvy patriots had been identifying the top globalists since as far back as 1970, and they had formed what are known as zero squads.
A zero squad is a cell of three individuals known only to each other who have selected a top globalist whom they will sacrifice their lives to take out if necessary – if such globalists ever tried to perpetrate their end game.
So, what happened?!
They were supplemented by many new zero squads of both patriot and underground resistance forces, which ensured that every top globalist was covered two or three times over. Still, a few got away, but their front men knew that if their masters were not safe, then they weren’t either, so they told us the “good aliens” had just left and said they would be back in 100 years to check our progress.
On 8/15/16, Obama’s CDC claimed the authority to expand the police state with a new regulation that grants it the right to indefinitely detain any individual or group (even a city) based on subjective, aritrary, and ambiguous reasons and with no plausible way of preventing the usual bias and corruption. Of course, such an atrocity would be unethical and unconstitutional even if it were objective, well defined, and impartial.
As of this writing, the regulation is not in force yet and is in the form of a proposed regulation. One can read the whole proposed regulation at: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/08/15/2016-18103/control-of-communicable-diseases#h-21
The following excerpt is the section on “Apprehension”, which speaks for itself:
Under section 361(d)(1) of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 264(d)(1)), HHS/CDC may promulgate regulations that provide for the apprehension and examination of any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a quarantinable communicable disease in a qualifying stage. In addition, HHS/CDC must reasonably believe that the individual is moving or about to move between states or constitutes a probable source of infection to others who may be moving between states. Thus, HHS/CDC believes that it is important to define for the public what is meant by the term “apprehension.” Apprehension means the temporary taking into custody of an individual or group for purposes of determining whether quarantine, isolation, or conditional release is warranted.
Although each instance is unique, an apprehension will typically occur at the request of a state or local health department or in other time-sensitive situations, such as at a U.S. port of entry, where it is necessary for HHS/CDC to take immediate action to protect public health. The factors that may give rise to an apprehension are discussed in detail in the preamble section discussing the definition of “reasonably believed to be infected, as applied to an individual.” When an apprehension occurs, the individual is not free to leave or discontinue his/her discussion with an HHS/CDC public health or quarantine officer. In some cases, an apprehension may last from twenty minutes to one to two hours if, for instance, based on a public health assessment, HHS/CDC is able to quickly rule out the presence of a quarantinable communicable disease. In certain circumstances, the individual may remain apprehended pending confirmation that he or she is not infected or not reasonably believed to be infected with a quarantinable communicable disease. If it is necessary to issue the individual a Federal order for quarantine, isolation, or conditional release, the individual will remain apprehended pending the service of the written order. The factors that may give rise to an order for quarantine, isolation, or conditional release are discussed in detail in the preamble section discussing the definition of “reasonably believed to be infected, as applied to an individual.” Based on past experience, HHS/CDC believes that a written Federal order may be served to an individual within 24-48 hours of an apprehension. These timeframes are merely offered as guidance and HHS/CDC believes that the facts and circumstances of each case will dictate the expected length of an apprehension. Generally, however, HHS/CDC does not expect that the typical public health apprehension will last longer than 72 hours. It is not HHS/CDC’s intent through this definition to allow for extended apprehensions absent the issuance of a Federal order for quarantine, isolation, or conditional release. HHS/CDC requests public comment concerning the expected apprehension period (no longer than 72 hours), and whether there are any public concerns with the absence of a specific maximum apprehension period in the regulation.
This atrocity by the CDC can be used to educate the people on why the Second Amendment exists.
History began with the Rule of Man, which is where those who make the law are not accountable to those under the law, and those who make the law are above the law. The law is thus likely to be inefficient, subjective, arbitrary, and applied unequally. Government under the Rule of Man is illegitimate because people only support it under duress, and no competing law is allowed. Government under the Rule of Man is also a monopoly on the right to initiate force or fraud within a geographical boundary.
A great leap forward from the Rule of Man was the Rule of Law, which is where those who make the law are accountable to those under the law, and no man is above the law. Unfortunately, government under the Rule of Law is still not legitimate because most people support it only under duress, and no competing law is allowed. Like under the Rule of Man, government under the Rule of Law has always been a monopoly on the right to initiate force or fraud within a given geographical boundary. These remaining drawbacks with the Rule of Law are harmful in their own right, but they are also the seeds of its inevitable regression back to the Rule of Man – unless we evolve further.
The next great leap forward will be the Rule of Market, which is where the law is a product like any other. An individual could produce his own law, or choose one of the products produced by others, or choose no such product at all. The market would be the judge. Government under the Rule of Market would allow competition, and few, if any, would purchase law that claimed the right to initiate force or fraud against them.
In the Rule of Market, the law is voluntary – just like any other product. In fact, everything is voluntary. Even money is just a product like any other.
How Rule of Market Works
It will be necessary to look at some everyday examples to understand the Rule of Market because, although it is quite simple, it is quite difficult to understand given a lifetime of conditioning by television and government schools and universities. Such conditioning promotes a single groupthink while squashing the imagination, independent thought, and critical thinking skills that would allow one to escape the groupthink.
We will look at two everyday examples. In the first example, you will have discovered that you entered into an unfair contract. In the second example, you will observe how the Rule of Market deals with gang violence and how tragedy is eventually overcome with hope and unlimited potential.
In both examples it should be clear that Rule of Market is simply individual freedom, which has always been more compatible with human nature, and which unlocks the healthy potential of self-interest, competition, and reputation, whose benefits are further magnified by today’s tools, such as the Internet, cameras, and guns.
Breaking an Unfair Contract
Eventually, under the Rule of Market one could be confident about entering into any kind of agreement without being cheated or tricked, but to see how such harmony would have evolved, it will be necessary to go back to an earlier point.
Suppose you voluntarily entered into a contract with another party because, although they had a mediocre reputation, they offered terms that were just too good to pass up, which they had to do to compete with those who had better reputations. Then you discovered you were tricked, and so you decided it was in your best interests to only fulfill the part of your contractual obligation you felt was fair. You would then be wise to make your case on the Internet for two reasons. The first reason is because in the future, other parties (the market) would look at your reputation and decide on what terms (if any) they would be willing to enter into any given type of contract with you. The other reason is because the other party will be making its case on the Internet as well, and the claims by the other party could hurt your reputation if you allow them to go unchallenged.
You would be wise to hire an advocate to help you produce your side of the story. The role of such an advocate would be similar to the purpose of a lawyer today.
You would want to maintain an online presentation that explains how your principles would guide you to react in certain scenarios and how you are defining your terms. You could think of your statement of principles as your law. One purpose of such a presentation would be to let potential partners know what kind of agreements you might find acceptable as well as what to expect once you entered an agreement. Another purpose would be to make it harder for anyone else to misrepresent you, and yet another purpose would be a guide for your children. Your statement of principles is another place where you could hire an advocate to help you produce it.
You would want to hire one or more reputation rating companies to publish an evaluation of your side of the story. Let’s refer to such companies as Reputation Bureaus. Such a role would be similar to the purpose of a credit rating agency. Each reputation bureau would decide whether your actions were consistent with the expectations you created with your statement of principles. They would decide the extent to which your actions were justified given the objective facts of the case, and they would decide the extent to which your actions were justified given the ambient culture. They would also be evaluating your side according to their well publicized rules, which could be thought of as their “law”. Then they would adjust your reputation score accordingly, and of course, the weight of their decision would depend on their own reputation. Every reputation bureau would have an independent rating for you.
You would want to pay more to choose a reputation bureau with the best reputation, which is one that understands it cannot afford to ever appear biased or to have cheated in any way. Otherwise, its rating would carry far less weight with others. Its reputation would also depend on its law being fair and unambiguous.
Note that if your statement of principles and your contract used common components found in other statements and other contracts, then evaluation would be easier and thus cheaper. On the other hand, if you are like me and insist on a custom statement of principles, then you should expect to pay more.
Suppose the reputation bureaus you hired decided that your actions were consistent with your stated values and were thus expected, and that overall your actions were mostly justified both objectively and given the ambient culture. Also, your actions were mostly acceptable under their law. Therefore, given a potential future contract, the other party would probably just look at your reputation score and decide that they would be willing to contract with you (in spite of your having broken a previous contract), but that party might for a slightly higher interest rate (or slightly more collateral) to reduce its risk.
We chose your case because it was a tipping point. Your reputation bureaus each decided that to some extent the other party had intentionally tried to trick you, and that their behavior was part of a pattern, and thus they dinged the other party’s reputation considerably. The other party knew this was the likely decision and thus hired their usual reputation bureau who they could depend on to give them a good rating. However, a few years of propping up the bad behavior of such companies had also cost their reputation bureau some of its reputation.
Just as the other party’s reputation had been propped up, their reputation bureau’s reputation had been propped up by other dishonest reputation bureaus. Over time the dishonest companies and reputation bureaus had learned they could only depend on each other to maintain their reputations, and thus they were vulnerable to sudden crash – like a stock market bubble that had gotten too out of sync with reality.
Your case precipitated a cascade over the next few months where the other party and all of its cronies lost most of their reputation with the honest reputation bureaus and thus lost most of their business so suddenly that they had to liquidate their assets, which were bought up and put to better use by their honest competitors.
The people called it creative destruction.
Given just the one example about breaking an unfair contract, it should be clear how one would finally be free to pursue one’s dreams while simultaneously choosing to act more responsibly – all because one would value one’s reputation even more than one values one’s credit rating today, but the full benefit of the Rule of Market goes so much deeper than that. It could apply in any conceivable day-to-day scenario, and thus one’s reputation would be more important in every conceivable scenario.
When every person in every scenario is finally free to pursue their dreams while having a powerful incentive to act more responsibly, then the result can only be more peace, safety, productivity, innovation, wealth, and happiness. The advent of the Rule of Market would be the dawn of a new renaissance like nothing we have ever seen before – a never ending Golden Age beyond anything in history.
Unfortunately, we are no longer moving forward. We are now moving backwards towards the Rule of Man. For example, Obama claims the power to spy on anyone, to indefinitely detain anyone, and even to assassinate anyone without due process, without accountability, and without transparency, and he has already exercised all of these powers.
We are moving back to the Rule of Man because governments are absolutely terrified of the Rule of Market because it is becoming clear to the people that the primary purpose of government is to force a majority to give their time, to give the fruits of their labor, and to even give their lives and their children for a goal they would not find worthy of such sacrifice … such as wars, pyramids, cronyism, propaganda, censorship, reeducation camps, false flags, genocide, slavery, redistribution of honest wealth, and disarming the people.
The End of Violence
Next, let’s explore how violence would be virtually nonexistent in a society built on the Rule of Market. First, we would have to go back to a point before the initiation of force and fraud had become almost non-existent to find out why such behavior had become so rare.
Suppose a society had adopted the Rule of Market not quite three years ago, and some people still did not value their reputation. In this case Leroy’s daughter Jada had dated a young thug, Jamal, who thought his gang membership protected him from the Rule of Market.
After Jada decided to end the relationship, Jamal decided to break into the family’s home at night and make her leave with him. He brought his four badest gangstas with him and they all had Glocks.
Before the advent of the Rule of Market, the gang’s strategy would have worked, but under the Rule of Market, families had changed. Most people understood that every family was responsible for its own safety and completely free to provide that safety. Most people also understood that everyone’s future had become unlimited, and perhaps most importantly, most people understood that everyone had become free to do the right thing.
Leroy and his neighborhood guardians always did the right thing, and their individual reputations reflected that; whereas, Jamal and his gang, the last gang in their neighborhood, often initiated force or fraud, and their reputations reflected that.
Jamal did not understand that under the Rule of Market, most people, including Jada, had developed hope and a sense of self-esteem. She would not come back to him like other girls had done before. She had thought she could change him, but she now understood that she could not.
Jamal shot the door several times and it would not budge. The gang then had to expended about 90 rounds before they were finally able to kick it in. This only took 50 seconds, but they were pretty mad at this point because they had first encountered a door like this just two weeks before, although in that case no one had been home and they had been in no particular hurry. The only thing Jamal and his gang had learned from that experience was to wear hearing protection when shooting a door. Jamal did not learn how lucky he was that no one had been home.
Leroy and his neighborhood guardians had known that Jamal and his gang were likely to try this. It was their MO. That is why Leroy, at great personal risk to himself, had tried one last time earlier that day to explain to Jamal and his gang why they should disband like the other gangs.
Leroy tried to convey the hope that had spread through the community, and through the whole damn country. He tried to explain how they were living the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King’s dream. They were free at last! But the gang followed the Reverend Dr. Al Harpton Varakan Jackson, who preached how the country owed them and had abandoned them.
Leroy explained how Jada wasn’t like girls around there used to be and how Jada was proud and full of hope, but that just made Jamal more determined to take her.
Those 50 seconds bought by the reinforced door were sufficient for Leroy and his man inside and the two guardians nearby to take up their positions. One of them was so nervous that he suddenly laughed out loud when he remembered how they used to say, “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.”
As they kicked the door in, Leroy had a chance to yell “stop or we’ll shoot”. Jamal and his gang took that as a challenge because they were wearing class II body armor that had stopped 9mm rounds before. They did not understand that their body armor would not stop a 5.56mm 62 grain round. Hence, they didn’t give Leroy time to say anything else.
Leroy had been very careful not to disrespect anyone in the gang earlier that day – even when they tested him, which they interpreted as a sign of weakness, but they let him go without harm. He didn’t dare tell them about the two snipers watching over him, or they would have reacted in a way that would have cost them their lives. When Leroy got home, he cried for a long time.
When Jamal heard Leroy release the charging handle on his AR-15 somewhere deep in the house, he did not understand that someone was truly willing, let alone able, to stand up to him. No one had done that before, and besides, he had his gang with him, and they had body armor.
The gang each had only two or three rounds left because they had never needed spare magazines before. They randomly fired all of their remaining rounds in about three seconds – hitting nothing. No one was within 30 feet of them.
Three seconds later they were all on the ground dying, and the guardians came to them at great personal risk, and tried to help. The adrenaline would not yet let them feel the emotional weight of the tragedy before them – the lost potential of these young men – what they could have been – until a dying gang member whispered, “I could have been a doctor.”
In just a few seconds, all of the guardians had begun sobbing uncontrollably, and the whole neighborhood came out and sobbed with them.
The guardians hired the best reputation bureau they could afford. They even sold some possessions and borrowed some money to do it. It was that important.
The company’s name was The Soul of Humanity because its law was based on The Soul of Humanity. It was physically based in Austin, Texas.
The guardians had not been able to afford the video surveillance that would have exonerated them more quickly and more thoroughly, but given the relative reputations of the survivors and the deceased, and given the testimony of witnesses and the reputations of those witnesses, the reputation of the guardians had actually increased. Nevertheless, they had killed, and there was no video, so they would be on a kind of probation for a about three years.
The story became a national story, and the The Soul Of Humanity gave them each a one year advertising contract worth fifty times the fee they had paid. That was more than the going rate, but that fact only added to the good will and new business received by the company.
One month later a sniper killed the Reverend Dr. Al Harpton Varakan Jackson, and no one cared enough to investigate. In his arrogance, the Reverend had refused to pay money to “the man” to buy insurance to investigate any initiations of force or fraud against him. Even his personal body guards lacked the will to do anything about it, nor did they have the skills to do anything about it.
Gang activity in that first year had skyrocketed before being fought down to its original level. Then it fell to 20% of its original level during the second and third year. but with the story of Leroy and his guardians, gang activity in the forth year dropped to 1% of its original level.
It would not be accurate to say that the gangs simply dissolved, instead, most transformed from thugs into guardians. Those who were once takers had become makers.
Who will build the ROADS!?
The advent of The Rule of Market was widely understood and anticipated, and yet, some people had still been apoplectic with shrieks of “Who will build the ROADS!?” In a nutshell, the answer was, “The same people who build them now.” After all, how did we get the cars that drove on those roads, or computers or smart phones, and our houses, and the roads in front of our houses … ? Of course, what such alarmists had really meant was, “For each new road, who would force dozens or even thousands of people to give up a piece of their land?” The alarmist minority needn’t have been so apoplectic because it worked out exactly as most people expected.
The third such incident under the Rule of Market was the Springfield Bypass. It would raise the value of all property directly along its route, so everyone along the route wanted it and were thus willing to pay for it; whereas, some of those owning businesses along competing roads might lose some business and thus were not willing to pay for any of the bypass, so they didn’t. However, there was one individual land owner along the ideal route, Mr. Schittstein, who would also benefit from the new road but who was holding out as a way of extorting the others to give him money.
In the first such incident, the holdout, Mr. Freeman, had good reason to believe that he would lose a small amount of business, so his neighbors compensated him. However, in the second such incident, the holdout, Ms. Princess, would have actually benefitted, but the people had decided to pay her anyway because she had not been excessively greedy. Furthermore, the reputation bureaus did not yet have sufficient precedent to ding the reputation of Ms. Princess. The example of Ms. Princess emboldened Mr. Schittstein to insist on too much money. He asked for 95% of the cost to route around his property safely, so his neighbors called his bluff and built the road around his property. They felt the 5% extra cost was, as one neighbor put it, “Totally worth it.” The result was known locally as, “Schittstein’s Curve,” which, his neighbor’s learned, gave Schittstein an odd satisfaction.
Occasionally, the folks along the Springfield Bypass would offer to pay to replace the bypass with a route through Mr. Schittstein’s property, but no matter what they offered, he always held out for more. He had understood that even with the best of safety precautions, this was to be the first such bypass, and thus someday, some oversight might cause someone to get hurt if the road were forced to go around his property, but he had been unmoved, and his reputation did not suffer for it given the early stages of the Rule of Market. Subsequent extortion was dampened, fortunately!, as the reputation bureaus rapidly adapted.
Although it would have been immoral to go back and judge Mr. Schittstein by rules that did not exist at the time, needless to say, Mr. Schittstein was the kind of person whose reputation would plummet in the future if he did not learn to treat others as he would like them to treat him, but whereas, most people learned such lessons very quickly under the Rule of Market, Mr. Schittstein did not. Eventually his wife left him as his reputation continued to plummet until, one day, tragedy struck …
There had never been an injury on the Springfield bypass, but Schittstein’s neighbors, the Goodmans, had relatives coming in from out of town to show off their new baby. They were tired and had let their teenage daughter drive the last little bit. Her inexperience combined with Schittstein’s Curve had banged them up pretty good, and in an improbable confluence of events, it had cost them the life of their newborn infant …
It was virtually impossible to get away with violence under the Rule of Market, but the Goodmans were not thinking clearly when they forced entry into Mr. Schittstein’s house, where they proceeded to beat Mr. Schittstein to death as he continued to display a total lack of remorse to the end.
The reputation bureaus, had plenty of precedent by this time, and the relative reputations of the Goodmans vs. Schittstein combined with the video footage from multiple sources was such that the verdict from every bureau was, in the vernacular, “Schittstein had it coming.”
Just three years later, the amazing golden age brought by the Rule of Market had produced the kind of wealth and innovation that would have saved the Goodman’s baby, but such wealth and technology was never needed in another such case because in the 75 years since, there has not been another Schittstein under the Rule of Market.
Next, read Rule of Market vs. The World.
The intent of an armed citizenry and of the right of the people to keep and bear arms is not sufficiently clear and protected in the Second Amendment, and thus a deeply entrenched culture has evolved where the government feels it has the right to disarm us, spy on us, indefinitely detain us, and even assassinate us. As a proportionate solution to such extreme and such deeply entrenched culture, and as a solution to the lack of clarity and protection in the Second Amendment, I therefore propose a new Freedom Amendment:
The Armed Citizenry Amendment
The right of the states and of the people to form militias shall not be infringed.
The right of the people to keep and bear any individual arms, such as those borne by any individual serving any branch of the government authorized in this Constitution, shall not be infringed.
The combined number of armed persons serving any branch of the government authorized in this Constitution shall never exceed one tenth of one percent of the people.
The government authorized in this Constitution shall never declare martial law. The states shall never declare martial law.
Persons serving any branch of government authorized in this Constitution shall never fire on the states or the people. Given any individual who, while serving any branch of the government authorized in this Constitution, has fired upon the states or the people, the right of the states and of the people to terminate the life of that individual and the life of the individual who gave him that order, shall not be infringed.
In a nutshell, the federal government might still develop and purchase military technology, but the actual defender of the states and the people, would be the states and the people – not the federal government.
Progressives are correct. The purpose of government is to implement good ideas. What progressives don’t understand is that big government is a bad idea. Therefore …
The purpose of government … is to prevent the creation of big government.
That is exactly what America did in 1776.
Progressives don’t understand that the best way for people to get along with each other is to mind their own business.
Progressives don’t understand that their ideas can only be implemented by force; whereas, libertarian ideas can only be implemented voluntarily.
Progressives don’t understand that progress doesn’t come from government. Progressive don’t understand that they are therefore holding back progress. Likewise, progressives don’t understand that they are holding back economic recovery.
Progressives don’t understand that they are less open minded than young earth creationists because they rarely have to defend their ideas.
Progressives don’t understand that libertarians and the Tea Party are more liberal than liberals.
Progressives don’t understand that they are motivated by a desire to conform. Progressives don’t understand that they are motivated by hate. Progressives don’t understand that their desire to control those they hate makes them useful to those Elites who want to control us.
Progressives don’t understand that all actions are performed by individuals, and that no action has ever been performed by a group. Progressives don’t understand that America is the least racist country in the world. Progressives don’t understand that they have destroyed the black community through government dependence, which is the new slavery.
Progressives don’t understand that they commit atrocities to the full extent that their power allows. Progressives don’t understand that they are – more than anything else – fascists.
Although Progressives control the media, academia, government, and organized religion, the Internet is helping Americans relearn that …
The purpose of government is to prevent the creation of big government.
In America, the party who cares most about freedom is the Libertarian Party – by far, but of the Democrats and Republicans, which voters care more about freedom?
As we can see from this comprehensive measure of freedom in each of the 50 states, all of the 27 most free states are red states (Republican leaning states).
Another revealing measure is the reaction to the government recording all of your phone calls and emails.
Clearly, Republican voters care more about freedom than Democrats.
New World Order conspiracy theorists cite an article by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. entitled “The Future of Socialism” in the May-June 1947 issue of Partisan Review. I learned about it from the 1983 interview of Congressman Larry McDonald who’s plane, KAL-007, was shot down four months later …
The gist of New World Order conspiracies is not nearly as crazy as it sounds. There is a lot of very interesting evidence. So, I looked for this article to see if it was really the smoking gun it was purported to be.
Given the interest in this article by New World Order conspiracy theorists, it seemed very strange that I could not find its contents anywhere on the Internet, which made it even more strange that I found one copy of that issue of Partisan Review for sale on the Internet (for $8.00). Stranger still is how it is not as incriminating as I expected, and how it frequently advocates freedom and even advocates libertarianism, which are the opposite of the New World Order theory.
The images below are some low resolution versions of the photos I made of the actual periodical after I received it. It is incriminating, but no more so than similar materials written today that are too sophisticated to openly admit unpopular or unethical motives. Lest someone miss the true gist of what he is saying, I will summarize and analyze.
Schlesinger correctly claimed that communism, fascism, and pure socialism did not work and led to tyranny, so he prescribed a democratic socialism with a very strong role for government but with libertarianism and no cronyism, which is unsustainable because it is an oxymoron. I don’t think his mistake is an honest one because his mention of libertarianism and frequent mention of freedom were just claims devoid of ideas; whereas, all of his actual ideas were more totalitarian than libertarian. Consider that elsewhere, his sloppy ridicule of an armed citizenry sounded a lot like Michael Moore.
Schlesinger also correctly observed how both the business community and the workers would always cave in to pretty much any demands from government or from anyone else who tried to rule them. This led him to promote the concept of an elite class of rulers who would prevent a less savory class of rulers from filling the power vacuum created by the cowardice and apathy of the business community and the workers. Therefore, this elite class of rulers must be willing and able to use overwhelming force to maintain their rule – for the good of the people, and for future generations – of course.
The mainstream media and politicians have nothing but praise for Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., so his ideas were thus consistent with those that created the world we live in today, and our world is notable for the rise of government and the devolution of the people.
A progressive once asked me one of their most effective (and most dishonest) questions, which has thrown everyone off his game whenever I have seen it used,
In a free market, who would save a dying child from a poor family?
The most honest and most effective answer, in the context of the question, is …
In a free market … the child wouldn’t be dying …
How has our culture forgotten this wonderful truth … that in a free market, the family would be wealthier, the community would be wealthier, and the technology would be better and cheaper.
Government is not the solution.
Government is the problem.
Government dependency has failed.
The path forward is the free market.
In a free market, more people would be willing and able to help him.
In a free market, the child is not only more likely to survive … but is also more likely to thrive.
What you’re really asking is, “What can we expect for a dying child if we move towards more government dependency vs. moving forward to a free market?”
In a free market, competition without the burden of government maximizes quality, efficiency, and innovation – not just in the medical field, but in every field. In a free market, the people are thus safer and healthier, happier and wealthier, more productive and more empowered.
A cure would be very profitable if the inventor were allowed to profit from it, and thus the inventor could start a new company, so we should be seeing more and more new companies in a free-market, but we don’t because we don’t have a free market. We have heavy government intervention, and thus we see fewer and bigger pharmaceutical companies.
Not every company has a drug to treat (but not cure) a given disease, so why wouldn’t those companies release a cure both to profit and to hurt their competitor? The only possible reason is government intervention.
The problem is that government intervention exists to thwart competition. Of course, that is not how intervention is sold to the people, so the people demand more intervention. The solution to government is not “more government”. Government is a problem masquerading as its own cure.
Given free-markets, who would save a dying child?
Given free-markets, the child wouldn’t be dying.
Anyone who has kids and who loves their kids would choose the free market over government intervention
Those I’ve seen answer this question all failed because effective defenders of the free market are not allowed in the mainstream media. This is a self reinforcing strategy of the MSM. Consider that it is very difficult to become an effective supporter of the free market when we are inundated 24/7 with an inaccurate world view. The reality is that we do not live in a free market, big government has failed, and government is the tool by which elites manage innovation.
Only by thinking for ourselves, can we discover reality.
Freedom is the Promise of Reality.
Government soldiers forced their way into house after house in Boston because there was a chance that a 19 year old US citizen might be hiding in one of them. (He wasn’t.)
The people were not allowed to leave their homes – except for those who were forced to leave their homes at gun point and were then patted down. I have seen no evidence yet of a warrant, but of course, a Constitutional warrant must state a specific place to be searched, so there could be no Constitutional warrant in the instance of a house to house search.
As far as I know, this has never been done in America before.
I wonder if the soldiers in the video have thought about how when they are out violating our homes, there is no one guarding their own homes? Are they sociopaths who don’t even care about their own families?
Given the limited audio, some may claim that it is not what it appears, so let’s listen to some testimony from the citizens themselves.
These witnesses were ordinary people who thus have faith in government and who did not know that their rights were being violated. Now let’s hear from a witness who understood what was happening.
Everything you saw in these videos was unconstitutional, but this is not what anyone saw in the mainstream media. Instead, the mainstream media showed us the nice soldier bringing milk to the children, or the man who said he felt safe because the government was searching his home.
This unprecedented violation of the Constitution by Obama’s DHS not only failed to find the 19 year old US citizen, but it actually prevented his discovery. It was only after the government allowed people to leave their homes again that a citizen found him hiding in his boat.
This unprecedented violation of the Constitution did not find the 19 year old US citizen, but it achieved its more important goal, which was to set the precedent that government soldiers can come into your home without a warrant whenever they want and the mainstream media will cover for them.
This unprecedented violation of the Constitution did not find the 19 year old US citizen, and it also failed to achieve its most important goal, which was to provoke armed conflict with the American people. The US Government was hoping that one (and preferably more than one) citizen in this all white neighborhood would defend the Bill of Rights with AR-15s and high capacity magazines. The government’s goal to provoke armed conflict with the American people finally became 100% clear a few weeks earlier when Obama’s DHS began practicing shooting white children.
We know the DHS wanted to create this whole scenario because they called this man and his brother at home and told them they were coming. The brothers predictably fled in an unprepared manner, thus creating the opportunity for the government to react – like we saw in the videos.
If the Obama administration is capable of what we now know, then it is capable of anything.