A Politically Incorrect Saturday

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Sat, 05 Oct 2002 12:00:00 GMT
From birdman's quotes:
"A racist is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal." -- Peter Brimelow
You clearly haven't thought the slavery reparation issue thru very well. Each Negro costs society $1,000,000 before they die. For 50 years they are either on welfare or in prison at $20,000 per year. This does not consider direct costs of the crime that they commit. If each Negro were given $100,000 as they stepped off the boat in Africa, it would be cheap at 10 times the price. It would take only five years for society to recover the $100,000 from reduced crime and welfare. In addition we could sell each of them food at $10 per day. In 30 years, we would have our $100,000 back. By then they could reacquire their Black culture and provide for their own support. They used to sing those Negro Spirituals in the jungle and were quite happy there. -- Donald E Pauly

Liberty is a song written and performed by Four Shillings Short about political prisoners in the U.S. The page contains a picture of a demonstration against the School of the Assassins (er... Americas), some text, and a link to a 3.6 meg MP3 file containing the song. From the song:

I thought that I was living in
The land of liberty.
How blind my eyes, I paid the price,
But I'm wiser for the day
That they took me to the jail.
And they would not catch my eye,
For they knew that I was innocent
Of any real crime.
Dona nobis pacem.

Murray N. Rothbard at The Luwig von Mises Institute - For a New Liberty - Rothbard's classic, online as HTML or a 6.5Mb PDF. Remarkably, I haven't read this yet. [smith2004]

John Lopez at Strike the Root - The Choice - Liberty or The State? I choose liberty. How about you? [sierra]

I am determined to smash the State. I want to see the very concept of government consigned to the history books. There is no compromise: The State cannot coexist with liberty. This has become in my mind The Choice: life or death. Freedom or slavery. Liberty or the State.

It is truly that blunt, that vicious. There can be no compromise between life and death. And what can the State offer us except death? Can it offer us life, or only the removal of its own threat of death? Think about the history of government, about what its basic authority rests upon. It is the authority of the whip, the persuasion of the sword. It is the choice between pain and death. It is "might makes right," only fancied up. This is what virtually all of human history has been. Even the brightest moments have only been a brief break in the clouds.

This is no accident--it is only political authority reasserting its natural state. A government is itself aggression, naked force. How could it indeed be otherwise? What rational person would listen to those poltroons who infest any given political office? Would you listen to some random lunatic who purported to tell you how high your fence could be, or what colors you were forbidden to paint your own house? Yet, the zoning board says these very things, and is obeyed. The zoning board is not obeyed because it is right, but because it is feared.

Patrick K. Kroupa - Addiction is a hole in your soul - from Dana Beal's Million Marijuana March newsletter. I copied, reformatted, and titled it. I like it primarily for this paragraph: [cures-not-wars]

To cop a line from Jung, addiction is a hole in your soul, where the connection to God is missing. This is pretty much exactly correct. And I'd say you would be in a good space if you can establish or re-establish your personal conduit into all this; but I'm not exactly sure even that is necessary.

The Georgia Guidestones - most unusual... [cures-not-wars]

They are these granite stones, 19 feet tall, standing in Georgia, aligned in conjunction with the heavens, and erected under mysterious circumstances, and;


from the stones....
  1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000* in perpetual balance with nature.
  2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity.
  3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
  4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason.
  5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
  6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
  7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
  8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
  9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite.
  10. Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature - Leave room for nature.

Paul Hein at anti-state.com - They're Afraid of Us - our government masters, that is. And rightly so. If we one day just stopped obeying their orders, they would be helpless to do anything about it. [anti-state]

And, of course, we outnumber them. Everything they use against us we produce. Government produces nothing, and interferes in myriad ways with those who are productive. Government would simply fall apart without pencils and paper, computers and automobiles -- and we produce all of those things. We could simply stop. And we could, gently, disobey.

Ron Paul at LewRockwell.com - Violating the Constitution With an Illegal War - why it's really bad news that Congress is giving away to GW and the commU.N.ists it's exclusive right to declare war. [lew]

The last time Congress declared war was on December 11, 1941, against Germany in response to its formal declaration of war against the United States. This was accomplished with wording that took less than one-third of a page, without any nitpicking arguments over precise language, yet it was a clear declaration of who the enemy was and what had to be done. And in three-and-a-half years, this was accomplished. A similar resolve came from the declaration of war against Japan three days earlier. Likewise, a clear-cut victory was achieved against Japan.


History will eventually show that if we launch this attack the real victims will be the innocent Iraqi civilians who despise Saddam Hussein and are terrified of the coming bombs that will destroy their cities.


An up or down vote on declaring war against Iraq would not pass the Congress, and the President has no intention of asking for it. This is unfortunate, because if the process were carried out in a constitutional fashion, the American people and the U.S. Congress would vote "No" on assuming responsibility for this war.

Alan Bock at antiwar.com - A Hunger For War Criticism? - a report on a sold-out forum in San Francisco at which Harper's magazine editor Lewis Lapham spoke. [lew]

Lewis Lapham, ever the provocateur, asserted that the elites around Bush had to view the attack, as destructive and harmful as it was, as something of a blessing. As he put it in his book and paraphrased it that evening, a year ago "we were looking at a man so obviously in the service of the plutocracy that he could have been mistaken for a lawn jockey in the parking lot of a Houston golf club ...On September 11, like Pinocchio brushed with the good fairy's wand on old Gepetto's shelf of toys, the wooden figure turned into flesh and blood. A great leader had been born, within a month compared (by David Broder in the Washington Post) to Abraham Lincoln" and Winston Churchill.

The attack was a blessing to the U.S. military, which despite the short-lived memory of success in the last Gulf War, has been casting about for an acceptable enemy since the Soviet Union died. Of course it's "an unknown enemy and an abstract noun" rather than a nation-state, but it will serve, and perhaps better than a concrete enemy. Like the war on drugs or the war on poverty, a war on terrorism can never be won but can be fought for decades and decades. It can offer justification for the enhanced secrecy and security the warhawks crave, and provide more reasons to grow the state.

Add comment Edit post Add post