Tag Archives: New Deal

State vs. National Citizenship—the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 must be Repealed—Time to Bite the Bullet, Folks!

Donald Trump has won a lot of national support for his position that “anchor babies” are not U.S. Citizens.  https://www.yahoo.com/politics/birthright-citizenship-where-the-2016-127093585661.html

Despite their appetite for socialism and socialist engineering of U.S. Demography, I think it is fair to say that few if any the Radical Republican Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment ever dreamt of or envisioned a situation where millions of “huddled masses” and “wretched refuse ” types of people would come to America just to have babies to enroll in schools and obtain other welfare entitlements. 

No, the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to create a national standard for citizenship and civil rights, and to abolish the notion that the States of the United States were equivalent to the “States” who obtain membership in the United Nations.  

State citizenship was the weakest point of Cousin Abraham’s Northern policy during the War:  while many Radical Republicans wanted to call Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis, and every other Confederate Officer and Politician, a “traitor”, these charges simply would not stick for one single reason.  From 1776-1868, the individual states were the ones which established and determined citizenship, and so Lee was right to think of himself as a Virginian (about a 10th or 12th generation Virginian, in fact) by both the doctrines of ius solis and ius sanguinis.  Jefferson Davis might have been born in Kentucky, but he was a “naturalized” Mississippian.  Pierre Gustave Toutant-Beauregard was a 6th or 7th generation Louisianian, like Lee, either by ius solis or ius sanguinis

So Lee and Beauregard were unquestionably citizens of their own home states, and NOT of the United States.  They might have been employed in the armies of the United States, or, like Davis, also officers of the United States Government in its legislative (Senate) and Executive Branches (where Davis was Secretary of War).

But by every pre-War understanding, the Confederate leaders were not CAPABLE of betraying a Country WHICH NEVER EXISTED.  Like the States they belonged to, the Confederate Leaders could resign from the service of the Union, but in no legal or moral sense could they be called “traitors” to it, because (at least before 1868) the UNION WAS NOT A SINGLE SOVEREIGNTY.  Yes, indeed, quite simply, there WAS no such thing as “United States citizenship” prior to the Fourteenth Amendment—just a very generalized “American” citizenship which dependent on the collaboration and contribution of the ratifying states.  And that is why “Birth of a Nation” (by D.W. Griffith) was so correctly named: a collection of closely cooperating and allied free nation-states (small Jeffersonian Democracies) went to war with each other in 1861, and they were, afterwards, at gunpoint, forced into one single new country.

This was the debate that framed Barack Hussein Obama’s Presidency—so long as he could convince (fool?) a majority of the people into believing he was born in Hawaii, he was eligible, under the ius solis doctrine of the 14th Amendment, to be President.  But if a ius sanguinis standard should be applied, Obama’s rather famous Kenyan father stood as an absolute obstacle to his eligibility.  So as Dinesh D’Souza had shown in his brilliant movie Obama 2016, Obama’s goal as President was absolutely to abolish both the identity and nature of American society and culture.  Now the 44th President effects this transformation largely through emotionally manipulative lies and psychological manipulation, rather than democratic process or law.

But, indeed, the language of the Fourteenth Amendment’s “citizenship” clause is clear enough in making “soil” more important than “blood,” and has been consistently applied by the Supreme Court for over a hundred years to mean that literally anyone born in the United States, for any reason, automatically is an American Citizen.  This is obviously a disaster for the Country and many have written about it, including the mad Texan elf of Clearwater, Florida, Robert M. Hurt, Jr.:

Trump Is Right: Anchor Babies Do Not Rightfully Become US Citizens

http://bobhurt.blogspot.com/2015/08/trump-is-right-anchor-babies-do-not.html

What Hurt proposes is essentially changing the law by reinterpreting the law, and this often does not work so well—and could in fact be described as the source of much of modern America’s woes—allowing the Supreme Court to say that night is day and day is night is getting old, 62 years after Earl Warren became Chief Justice, 113 after Oliver Wendell Holmes brought Massachusetts “progressivism” to the Court, paving the way for the New Deal for whose eventual triumph (through popularity over constitutional rigor) Holmes might be considered a kind of Prophet….

Among Holmes’ most famous pronouncements is that, “an experiment, as all life is an experiment” (Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616, 630 (1919)).  Allowing, or even encouraging, population replacement—the “Browning of America”—is among the left’s favorite long-term social goals and experiments, and (admittedly) all of us who oppose the Browning of America are classified by Salon.com, the Huffington Post, and the New York Times, among others, as vile racist reactionaries. 

But I can live with that.  As far as the way out, though, as far as how White America can preserve itself, I don’t think that verbal games such as Robert M. Hurt, Jr., Donald John Trump, and many others will work.  

No, I always prefer dealing with issues directly and in taking a “full-frontal” approach.  The Fourteenth Amendment resulted from a massive war of Centralization of Power.  The only politician in MY LIFETIME who ever addressed the problem directly was San Diego Mayor and later California Governor and Senator Pete Wilson: who directly advocated repeal of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment during the 1980s.  He is almost totally forgotten now, but when I was in Law School, I remember thinking his approach was sound.  Repeal of the Citizenship Clause would be clear statement that unlimited immigration and population replacement via “anchor babies” is and ought to be intolerable.

People don’t realize it, but prior to the War of 1861-65 between the North and the South, MANY NORTHERN STATES if not most of them, DENIED CITIZENSHIP of any kind to blacks.  (the last state to have such a law was Oregon, which literally made it simply illegal to “be a negro” in the State of Oregon— to enter the state at all, under any pretext, was cause for imprisonment, fine, and immediate removal to the state lines upon release.

While “the Underground Railroad” was very famous, you might ask yourself, “if Abolitionist sentiment was so strong in the North, (a) why was the underground railroad “underground” and (b) why did it end up in Canada?  The answer is that since Northern States had enacted “no black citizenship” laws, being “free” in most places meant nothing. 

The way history is taught and discussed in modern America, it’s not always quite clear, but Chief Justice Roger Taney, in Scott v. Sanford was actually adopting a MERGER of both the Northern and Southern positions in his (plurality against Freedom for Slaves by Crossing State Lines) decision in 1857 (every Justice on the Court rendered a Separate opinion in that case). 

Justice Taney said that no negro could ever be a citizen of the United States.  So he was ALREADY (by usurpation) establishing a Federal rather than a state standard of citizenship—THAT IS WHY THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT WAS ENACTED—the whole War Between the States and 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution can be considered an effort to Overrule the “Dred Scott” ruling— but what many people forget is that Taney had already taken the critical first step by attempting to impose NORTHERN standards of Citizenship NATIONWIDE— ironically, this ruling (if it had been allowed to stand) might well, would almost certainly, have had the bizarre effect of “outlawing” or depriving tens of thousands of free (and many slaveholding) blacks in Louisiana of their citizenship, professional licenses, and right to vote. 

So the real problem was Taney’s (1857, pre-War) judicial “stealth” transition from allowing STATES to determine Citizenship to his rather clumsy attempt to impose a NATIONWIDE standard for citizenship.  The Fourteenth Amendment was the “Radical Republican” answer to this. 

Ironic, isn’t it?, that when properly understood, the Fourteenth Amendment was just as oppressive to the Northern States as to the Southern States.  Northern States could no longer ban black people. (Although the remarkable State of Oregon did not repeal it’s African-exclusionary laws until 1926, and only ratified the Fifteenth Amendment until the centennial of that State’s admission to the Union in 1959)(Oregon’s 1844, pre-state, pre-war position on slavery was that all blacks, free or slave, should be whipped and lashed twice a year until they left the territory).

Former California Governor Pete Wilson, by contrast with both Roger Taney and Donald Trump, understood that and would have returned to the individual states the power to determine citizenship by repeal of the “birth clause” of the Fourteenth Amendment.  One can easily imagine, almost too easily, how permitting the states to determine citizenship would be nearly equivalent to allowing secession—because Hawaii, for example, could pass a law decreeing that no “Howlees” (i.e. Anglo-Saxon or other European Whites) could ever be citizens of Hawaii—and so effectively dissolve the ties between that improperly annexed Island State and the rest of “the Union.”  (Hawaii currently has the most radical and politically “real” and active secessionist movement in the USA).

Even if the States COULD determine citizenship, the balance of the 14th Amendment still protected everyone “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States with regard to Civil Rights…. so even if there were no “national standard for citizenship” there could still be a “national standard for civil rights.”
 

Time to Abolish FDR’s “New Deal” Thanksgiving? (Only Hallmark Cards and Turkey Farmers would really object)

Originally Published on: Nov 25, 2011 @ 0:59

In the August 1942 Paramount movie, “Holiday Inn”, Bing Crosby’s character Jim is at his absolute low point of the year at Thanksgiving.  I completely concur.  Not even Irving Berlin could write a memorable song about this holiday, and now that I think about it, I know of no Thanksgiving songs at all—I suppose no one can really sing when stuffed to the gills with Turkey.  Eucharistic hymns of Thanksgiving in Church, to be sure, are songs of Thanksgiving, but not AMERICAN (United States Holiday) Thanksgiving.

As it happens, in 1942, Thanksgiving had just been set by Franklin D. Roosevelt on its modern date by proclamation signed on November 26, 1941, a little over a week before Pearl Harbor (the attack on which Roosevelt may well have been planning and of whose imminent occurrence evidence now shows, at the very least, Roosevelt to have been perfectly well informed and aware).

So THIS YEAR 2o12 is the 71st Anniversary of the “New Deal” Thanksgiving, and I think it’s high time to wipe this wretched artificial off the Calendar entirely.  The general concept of Thanksgiving may go back to George Washington, the Continental Congress, and the Pilgrims in 1621 some historically esoteric and metaphysical senses, but the Pilgrim association itself is one of English treachery.  How few Americans on Thanksgiving Day recall King Philip’s (the Wampanoag Grand Sachem Metacom’s) War of 1675-1676) and the resulting Genocide of the Wampanoag Tribe celebrated in that First Fabled William Bradford Thanksgiving in 1621. The Wampanoag was the Nation of Squanto and Massasoit who did so much to facilitate English Colonization “New England.”  All other subsequent associations, and the very timing of the holiday, are an insult to deeper values, including not just 500 years of Native American subjugation and genocide but the subjugation and (near) genocide of the American South, and the progressive secularization of the United States from a Christian into a purely materialist and grotesquely indulgent and commercial nation, culture, and society.

It had been not until 1863, four days after the Gettysburg Address, when President Abraham Lincoln declared Thanksgiving to fall on the last Thursday of November, that the modern holiday was celebrated “nationally” (meaning, of course, in the Northern States).  With a few deviations, Lincoln’s precedent was followed annually by every subsequent president–until 1939. In 1939, Franklin D. Roosevelt departed from tradition by declaring November 23, the next to last Thursday that year, as Thanksgiving Day. Considerable controversy surrounded this deviation, and some Americans refused to honor Roosevelt’s declaration. For the next two years, Roosevelt repeated the unpopular proclamation, but on November 26, 1941, he admitted his mistake and signed a bill into law officially making the fourth Thursday in November the national holiday of Thanksgiving Day.  Supposedly, Roosevelt had considered making Thanksgiving earlier in November but this was “booed down.”

Once it’s all over, and the sales of Alka-Selzer and Gaviscon at the all-night pharmacies have gone sky high, and are guaranteed to remain there during the consumption of leftovers for the next week: someone else needs to second the motion and go on record as saying that of all our American Holidays, Thanksgiving is the absolute worst. Thanksgiving not only epitomizes but stands as a worldwide symbol of corruption, oppression, gluttonous commercialism, materialist secularism, arrogant conquest, and a general depravity of state of mind.  “Thanksgiving” as celebrated in this Country obscures our heritage and confuses our history, celebrates the absolute worst in the human soul, and was created in relationship and in lock-step with two key wars leading to the abolition of freedom and the constitution, and the coincidental economic centralization and falsification which took place during those wars, namely the War Between the States and World War II.  

Thanksgiving isn’t so bad for me.  I have a wonderful dinner with a wonderfully energetic young blonde overlooking the Pacific planned in Santa Monica, and next week I go to Hawaii.  

But I wonder what Thanksgiving is like this year for those several million Americans who were either  recently or earlier this year, or even last year, evicted from their homes.  I wonder how Thanksgiving is like this year for the millions more among those who are facing foreclosure and eviction who have no hope, no certainty that they will still be in their homes next year.  

It is time to get back to that “Old Time Religion” of Truth and Honesty and Virtue—and the Fourth Thursday of November Thanksgiving we have celebrated since 1941, or 1863, depending on which starting date you want to call “the beginning” is nothing but an accursed day of the Calendar.

Proclaimed and first set as a National Holiday by President Abraham Lincoln only fours days after the elegant but totally fraudulent, duplicitous rhetoric of the “Gettysburg Address”, meant to disguise his true Marxist purposes in going to war with the “better half” of the nation for the primary benefit of a few industrial oligarchs up north, and for the ultimate purpose of subverting the original American Constitution, Thanksgiving has become a source of degradation to three sets of “Native Americans”: those descended from the First Inhabitants of these Western Hemisphere Continents we call North and South America (aka “The Indians”) and those who fought to preserve the Constitution of 1787 against usurpation in 1861-65, and to all Traditional Christians who would celebrate Adventide as a proper time of fasting.  

I wonder how many people (black or white) in Richmond, Charleston, Columbia, Atlanta, Memphis, Natchez, Vicksburg, or Savannah were stuffed to the gills after great feasts on the final Thursday in November 1865-1875?  I wonder how many Americans (northern or southern) felt Thankful to live in America in November of 1876, when the sitting President, Ulysses S. Grant, had announced that the man who received the majority of the popular and electoral vote, Governor Samuel J. Tilden of New York, would never be allowed to enter the White House without a renewal of open warfare between the States.  

That same year, 1876, I wonder how many Sioux Lakota, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapaho warriors knew by late November 1876 that their victory over Presidential Aspirant George Armstrong Custer at Little Bighorn, June 24-25, 1876, had been turned into a rallying cry for the Republicans who needed a major distraction from the misery of post-“Civil War” Reconstruction America, and turned Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse into the scapegoats or major distraction for their own tyranny and failures back east.   Never did any victory have more devastating consequences for any race of people than the Battle of the Little Bighorn had for the Native Americans.  The remnant of that same coalition that defeated Custer was effectively wiped out within 15 years.  And what did November 1891, the first Thanksgiving after the Massacre at Wounded Knee, feel like in the Sioux Reservation in South Dakota, where the relatives of the murdered Sitting Bull and the descendants of Crazy horse were being either forcibly educated or trained for Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show?  

To my grandparents growing up in Louisiana and Texas, there was no “Thanksgiving” in the early 20th Century because it was the enemy’s holiday.   The current setting of the Federal Holiday of Thanksgiving was not set until 1941—just as certain “insiders” in the government may have been planning for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to force the United States into World War II.  

After eight years of the New Deal, in 1941, the Country was being reshaped, and Thanksgiving was part of its reshaping.  Thanksgiving chronically conflicts with and distracts from the beginning of Advent (almost always the final Sunday of November) and from St. Andrew’s Day, November 30—Saint Andrew being not only one of the 12 Apostles but the Patron Saint of Scotland, Greece, (the ancient “Second Rome” known as) Constantinople, Russia, and Romania among other places—and the Cross of Saint Andrew being the central element of the flags of Alabama, Florida, and the Confederate States of America.  

What’s worse than anything about Thanksgiving is the day after, “Black Friday”, the Macy’s day parade and the gunshot “sooner” start of the race to maximize the secularization and commercialism of the pre-Christmas Season.  Thanksgiving has become part of the Federal Government’s conspiracy to abolish religion in America; the Federal Holiday is thoroughly despicable as an attack and infringement St. Andrew’s Day and Adventide and so on the Christmas Season, the Scottish and Greek Heritage of Western Civilization, and the real meaning of all of these things.

To traditional Christians all over the world, the Season of Advent is a “Little Lent” as my mother called it—the second longest “purple time” at Church in the entire year.  How many people remember to buy Advent Calendars or to keep the solemnity of Mary’s time before giving birth?  No, the grotesque overeating of Thanksgiving followed by the mad orgiastic commercial rush to shop for Christmas presents is a creature of the past 70 years only, fed by Television and contributing to the general secularization of America.  It is a very sad thing.   To my mind, Thanksgiving as celebrated in the United States of America is an insult and a curse to all that is holy, whether one is a Native American of “First American” origins… a Native American of “Southern Anglo” origins, or a Christian with origins anywhere in the world.  Luckily, the personality of “Scrooge” will forever be associated with Christmas, but I say “BAH HUMBUG!” to Thanksgiving.  It is time to do away with Thanksgiving as invented by the 16th and 32nd Presidents (did you ever notice that the 32nd President was Twice as bad as the 16th, but continued all the same basis processes and policies?)???  

Obama, if legitimately he belongs in the “King List” at all, is the 44th President, but maybe by the time of the 48th President *(3 x 16), there will be a recovery in America, a REAL and GENUINE “NEW BIRTH OF FREEDOM” which will truthfully realize the promise of the RHETORIC of the Gettysburg Address by wiping out the centralized banks, income tax, and other institutional baggage of the 16th and restoring the Constitution of 1787, and the Bill of Rights.

Much like the Gettysburg Address, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments contain only noble sentiments, but have been misused and wrongly applied to destroy rather than guarantee Freedom and Equality.  I have often commented that the greatest irony of all is that the modern “Prison Planet” state of existence in America owes its origins to the 13th Amendment, wherein “slavery and involuntary servitude” are abolished “except as a punishment for crime.”  They started building prisons during the war of 1861-1865, and the “criminal justice industry” has been growing by leaps and bounds ever since.  I say to the American People: “let’s tear down the prison walls.”  

But even worse than the perversion of the 13th Amendment and most pernicious of all of these perversions is the use that has been made of the 14th Amendment: turn the quest for equality of a perpetual war of all against all in the United States, guaranteeing that equality will only ever be achieved once we are all perfectly enslaved……  

This is one of those points where I think the “right” meets the “left”—Thanksgiving is a testimonial to the corruption of all that is good.  I want to thank Dr. John Hoopes of the Department of Anthropology at the University of Kansas (“ku.edu”) a co-author of papers on the Early Classic Period in the Maya Lowlands from our Harvard Graduate Seminar Days with Gordon R. Willey for pointing out to me how close my position is to that of the “AdBusters” group which sponsored “Occupy Wall-Street” (which I confess I have mostly just been ignoring).   They call it “Buy Nothing Day” and it’s been going on for 20 years (originally organized in Mexico City and Vancouver, two of my favorite places):

http://www.adbusters.org/campaigns/bnd

The Thanksgiving of 2009, after I had just lost my two primary residences, homes in Texas and California, within several months of each other, I spent in a seaside suite in San Clemente overlooking the Pacific with my son Charlie and my assistant Peyton.  But not everyone has that kind of luck in life.  I am Thankful to say this and every day that I have led something of a charmed life.  And for that reason, and because it is customary, I always wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.  But “enough is enough”.  This custom has got to stop.    Thanksgiving is like a gigantic perversion of the Calendar year, a gigantic dead skunk in the road of life every year in the same place—it is way too late in the year to be a Harvest Celebration except in places like Southern Florida and Southern Texas where winter crops can be planted and harvested.  

I personally live to fight for “corny old values” like Truth, Justice, and the American Way, for Family, Home, and Freedom, and to add one Senator for the Bill of Rights and against Indefinite Detention, against the PATRIOT ACT, and against the use of United States Troops in this Country against its own citizens.  

I give Thanks for the Beauty of the Earth, for the Splendor of the Skies, and for the Love which from our Birth, over and around us lies.  

But I do not give thanks for the election, re-election or even the existence of Barack Hussein Obama or the 93 Senators who voted for the NDAA this time last year—almost all of them (of those up for re-election) were reelected, including California’s own despicable hypocrite Dianne Feinstein, and there are some new Senators who would surely vote the same easy “pro-administration” way.

I do not give thanks that we live in a corporate-communist country where the boundary between corporate entities and the government is blurred beyond recognition in the unconstitutional “phony money” Federal Reserve Credit-Note economy.

Florida Judiciary—A Copyrighted Survey for use in fighting Mortgage Foreclosure Corruption—What do you know about your Court System? How Hungry are the American People for Justice?

There is no such thing as the silent exercise of your right to speak freely and share your opinion about the world you live in—effective silent protest occurs only in dreams….  We all dream of a better world, but we must speak out loud and SHOUT to make it into a demand, to make it happen…. Dreaming is free, but if we dream of freedom….especially in this, post-New Deal, New Dark Age for America…. that will cost us—what I ask of you today is just a few minutes of your time…  It’s time to make our anger “Catch Fire”…..and that can only happen if we all speak our discontent loudly and often….until there real change happens…. Nothing about modern America is more deplorable than the state of the judiciary and the courts…..

The fabulous hit movie this Spring, the Hunger Games, was a clarion call to the American People to WAKE UP BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE—even if it already is  in some easy ways “too late”, because so much damage has already been done.  Suzanne Collins has showed us the bleak future that awaits all of us if we are calm, cool, and quiescent about the terrible corruption that has taken charge of the American Dream, of Democracy, of (the mere word and illusion of) Freedom, of the Financial Establishment, of the Government, of everything that ever was or could be important to us: our family, our homes, and our future.   My primary focus for the past twenty five years has been on the Judiciary, 21 of those past years specifically involved in projects in Florida.  So I invite you to help me, and several million other people, out here: GIVE US YOUR OPINIONS, WITH YOUR NAME, AND STAND UP AND BE COUNTED, AND READY TO TESTIFY IF WE ARE EVEN ALLOWED TO PUT ON THIS TESTIMONY (as we should be):

Florida: 06-06-2012 DECLARATION CONCERNING JUDICIAL HABITS

Rule 406 of the Federal Rules of Evidence allows specific evidence of habit and routine practice to be admitted in Court.

Carrie Luft is seeking to overturn a Final Judicial Decree which was upheld on appeal in Florida.  The only way to reopen the case is the prove judicial corruption.  Wrongful foreclosure and fraudulent claims to standing, after a case is final, can only be proved if the system itself is indictable, if there is demonstrable systematic fraud on the Court—if the system is “broken,” if the judges are either “bought and paid for” or coerced into thinking in conformity with the Banks’ position.  All of these things have to be proved as a conspiracy to defraud and impose uniform outcomes on foreclosure cases.  It is a ONE THEORY, ONE SHOT, deal, although everyone who has been a victim can and could try (and I wish they would).
To prove this systemic corruption, which many people suspect, we need to gather EVERYONE who has been a victim together in one place, and that place is going to be reserved and formed through the complaint we are preparing in Carrie’s case.  If we fail, Carrie has no chance to regain her home, but I have already taken a blood oath that I will never stop until I have figured out a way to restore judicial integrity and moral honor to the judicial system in which I quite literally started my legal career, and of which I once dreamed of being an integral part.  Carrie is the first person I know who has accepted the challenge of doing everything that is necessary to try to take on the system.  Carrie literally has only this one option: prove that the system if “fixed”, broken, and corrupt.  I ask you, everyone who receives this survey:
IF YOU HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE WITH THE COURTS OF FLORIDA AT ALL, PLEASE COMPLETE THIS SURVEY, SIGN IT, SCAN IT and either E-MAIL IT BACK TO THIS ADDRESS: lincoln_for_california@rocketmail.com OR RETURN IT BY REGULAR MAIL TO
Peyton Yates Freiman, Tierra Limpia Trust/ Deo Vindice Foundation at:
603 Elmwood Place, #6 
Austin, Texas 78705
And if you have further or additional direct or circumstantial evidence of judicial corruption in Florida, how it is done and how does it, please write a letter about that as well.  We are looking to prove habits and routine practices of Judges according to Rule 406 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.  

06-06-2012 DECLARATION CONCERNING JUDICIAL HABITS

If you have any experience at all with the Florida Judicial System, especially if you have any experience with any mortgage or foreclosure related incidents, we need your opinion here…. Copyright to the survey itself, and to all material received will belong to Tierra Limpia Trust/Deo Vindice Foundation, Charles Edward Lincoln, III, Founder & President, Peyton Yates Freiman Trustee.

Please return all hard copies to:

Peyton Yates Freiman 603 Elmwood Place, Suite 6, Austin, Texas 78705.

If there were no minimum wage in the United States, how low would wages go?

Revisiting a topic I’ve discussed on this blog before, there was a new article on UK Yahoo, much to my surprise:

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/should-we-scrap-the-minimum-wage.html

If there were no minimum wage in the United States, how low would wages go?  Would inflation come to an end?  How far might price deflation go?   Would outsourcing of American jobs stop immediately?  Would the power of labor unions increase or decrease (assuming freedom of contract and freedom to strike were preserved as a matter of constitutional right)?  Would anyone ever bother to immigrate illegally into the United States again? 

According to Wikipedia, “Many countries, such as NorwaySwedenFinlandDenmarkSwitzerlandGermanyAustriaItaly, and Cyprus have no minimum wage laws, but rely on employer groups and trade unions to set minimum earnings through collective bargaining.”  Is it coincidental that these are some of the countries with the highest standards of living in the world?  Higher than the standard in the United States?

The minimum wage was instituted in the United States as a matter of Federal Law in 1938, five years into Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal.  Richard M. Nixon tried to impose “wage and price controls” as an antidote to inflation in 1971-72.  Nixon’s program was an unmitigated disaster and has not been repeated, but because of the mythology that the minimum wage guarantees a “living wage”, the Federal Minimum Wage is updated every few years.  It is an absurdity that one of the causes of inflation is automatically adjusted upwards to inflation.

My position is that government regulations such as the minimum wage stoke inflationary fires and provide no real security to anyone.  If elected to the United States Senate, I would propose a repeal of the Federal Minimum Wage and add a statutory clarification that any state-imposed minimum wage would constitute an unconstitutional infringement on the rights and obligations of contract, an infringement on Freedom of Association and Freedom of Speech, and a taking of liberty without due process of law.  

Let’s try to bring America in line with the most prosperous nations of Europe—ABOLISH THE MINIMUM WAGE!  MAKE AMERICA COMPETITIVE AGAIN!  Require EXCELLENCE in PRODUCTIVITY before automatic rewards.  

Oh, by the way, adjusted for inflation and currency, the average worker’s wages in Austria, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Finland, at least (countries with which I have some familiarity and have studied recently) have higher EFFECTIVE wages and lower rates of inflation than the United States of America.  Finland supposedly has the finest education system in the world.  America’s public educational system is a nightmare failure and should probably be abolished all together as one of the first and principal failures of governmental compulsory “welfare” laws.

“A year from now, ten, they’ll swing back to the belief that they can make people better. And I do not hold to that.” Eugenics and Bioengineering as forms of State Sponsored Welfare DO NOT make people better…..a debate with Bob Hurt of Clearwater, Florida….

Von: Bob Hurt <bob@bobhurt.com>
An: Charles Lincoln <charles.lincoln@rocketmail.com>; Lawsters <lawsters@googlegroups.com>
Gesendet: 14:06 Samstag, 19.Mai 2012
Betreff: Re: [Lawmen 4733] Eugenics is NOT A Reason to Revise the 13th Amendment
Charles:Thank you for responding.  That was the first intelligen comment I have received on the topic, so I appreciate it.
Bob, like I said—I respect you a great deal, we’ve done some great things/seminars together and I hope we’ll do more in the future—I consider you a friend, if terribly blind on this point….

First, I don’t believe you understand IQ tests, for you you did, you would know that in the past 100 years they have evolved to become absolutely the best predictor of the ability to evaluate relative importances, solve problems, and achieve academic excellence.  
What I see and understand about IQ tests is that they are a circular argument, a Catch-22, a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Certain specialists designed IQ Tests, persuaded other specialists to rely on them, and since these specialists rely on them, the USE them, and discriminate among people according to such tests.  ALL Standardized tests work EXACTLY the same way: SAT, MCAT, GRE, LSAT, etc.—yes, even the Multistate Bar Exam and the Multistate Ethics exam—CLASSICAL EDUCATION IN THE US HAS BEEN REPLACED BY TEACHING TEST-TAKING SKILLS.  I think it is disgraceful, and that all standardized tests need to be thrown in the garbage—“the rubbish pit of history” to use one K. Marx’ catchy phrase….
You seem loathe to admit that, but for the protection and support of government and society, the stupid would perish or become slaves, as they have down through the millennia, not because of race, but because of cognitive ability.
No, I am NOT “loathe to admit” anything—but I read the record differently: GOVERNMENT and SOCIETY decide who is stupid, and for those who really can’t adapt—natural selection works MUCH more fairly than “Government Protection and Support.”  In fact–what I LOATHE is that very phrase: “Government Protection and Support.”  I don’t know whether you’ve seen the movie “The Hunger Games” yet—but if not you (and everybody else) really should.  
“The Hunger Games” is a story set in and about the aftermath of a revolution in North America of the future in which “the people rose up against the Government that fed them, loved them, protected them….” and were punished severely as a result.  LOOK AT THE WAY Southerners have been degraded and caricatured as stupid ignorant oafs since 1865.  The Post-War Southerners did JUST FINE for many years without government Protection and Support—in fact, they did fine IN THE FACE OF government oppression and intentional discrimination—arguably, they did better than they’ve done WITH such protection and support.  Likewise, all of Latin America and Africa were “undeveloped” by U.S. and European Colonialism which sought to protect these “poor pathetic people” from themselves—i.e. since they couldn’t organize multi-national companies and international banks on their own.  The people of District 12 grew strong through quiet resistance and isolation within Panem (the name of the “North American Union” in the “Hunger Games” were “protected and supported” by a totalitarian regime which existed by squeezing everything they could out of the people and leaving them with nothing).  
Third, you seemed to have missed the point that we of competence have become slaves to the incompetent, through welfare, minimum wages, crime, and associated infrastructure costs which we must pay.  That has happened largely because of flaws in the constitutions, gnawing guilt and political correctness, and suffrage for the stupid, incompetent, and irresponsible.
BOB—YOU seem to miss the point that it is precisely a paternalistic attitude like yours—whereby some people THINK they are stronger or better than others, that breeds this kind of stupidity in Welfare—we have to stop thinking that WE KNOW better or can make OTHER people better—we have to learn to live by the adage “Let it be.”  NO ONE has the right to make decisions for anyone else, except by agreement.  We do not have the right to classify people in LEGAL terms, deprive them of rights, based on our OPINIONS of them.  We have the right to live our own lives and not be bothered with anyone else UNLESS WE WISH TO BE—and this, I think is the biggest single reason I feel I have to argue for you.  You are SO much like Madison Grant and the “Progressives” of Theodore Roosevelt’s Age—like Oliver Wendell Holmes on the Supreme Court writing in favor of sterilization of imbeciles in the 1920s—THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO GAVE RISE TO THE CURRENT WELFARE STATE—even though the “gnawing guilt and political correctness” elements are basically a 1960s Herbert Marcuse—Frankfurt School of Social Though addition which the Elite Find EVEN more useful—precisely because it gives them the right to call people who are NOT politically correct or do not feel the guilt “stupid, inferior.”  Southern Whites are stupid hicks but racists everywhere have lower IQs than non-racists, didn’t you know that?  Patriotic Constitutionalists are the stupidest people of all because they just don’t understand the Marxist progression of history which will PROTECT AND SUPPORT all people everywhere…. Can’t you see that?  Christians are stupid compared with Atheists, Conservative Republicans have less education than Liberal Democrats—all of this is part of the competitive instinct of humans, inherited through evolutionary competition, as E.O. Wilson has described so well in “The Social Conquest of Earth”
Fourth, you have erred in your assessment of slavery in ancient times.  The foreign survivors of successful wars always became slaves for life, although laws provided ways to win freedom, typically by demonstrations of deserving freedom.
I have certainly NOT erred in my assessment of slavery in ancient times—I said it was not based on inherited characteristics, so that Angles enslaved in one war did not give rise to any presumption that “Angles” would be slaves forever.
Fifth, you seem not to grok the outcome of a system such as what I propose.  
I do not “grok” it because I would BLOCK it with every bone in my body, every fibre in my muscles, every neuron in my brain.

  • And, we can refer to masters/slaves by different terms to mollify the leftist liberals seeking political correctness in place of substance.  We could call it the Ward system and the participants caregivers/wards.  How’s that?
    You forget that I perfectly see the system of involuntary servitude you propose because I OPPOSE THE VERY NOTION OF WELFARE and that ANY person should ever be WARD to another as a matter of birth, “intelligence” or class.  If our parents develop alzheimers WE should take care of them—they should not become “Wards of the State”—our children are helpless at birth but even LESS should we allow THEM to become WARDS OF THE STATE—but ultimately, your system (based on early 20th Century Eugenic Theories) LEADS INEXORABLY to the wardship of all children and RIGHT BACK TO THE BRAVE NEW WORLD.  This has NOTHING to do with Political Correctness—it has EVERYTHING to do with restoring MEANINGFUL FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL—and protecting MY Second Amendment Right to Shoot anyone in the head who thinks they are smarter than me if that means they think they can take me for a WARD….by the way…
  • Government or private parties could encourage the stupid to undergo voluntary permanent sterilization, just by offering money.  The ranks of the stupid would diminish dramatically from that clever negotiation, repeated in communities all over the nation.  And from the viewpoint of the economy, it would dramatically reduce the burden on taxpayers.  That bit of eugenics does not hurt anyone. 
  • Again, Bob—this is just beyond repugnant to me—it is Progressivism and New Deal/Great Society Socialism run amok—that is why it is, in essence NAZIISM at its worst….. Taxes like the Income Tax ONLY exist because people are WILLING to have OTHERS make socially important decisions for them—I say, to HELL WITH THAT—Everyone makes their own decisions and lives or dies by them…. that’s freedom….
  • Government should outlaw procreation of the stupid because such procreation is such a tort against the innocent baby that it becomes a crime against the person and society as the child grows into adulthood and resorts to crime and welfare abuse to subsist.  This really is a legal matter and a matter of right.  A baby has a right to grow into a well-functioning adult, and parents have the responsibility to make that possible.
  • If this is really what you want—I will have to fight you if you ever come to power—which I guess means we’ll never have to fight—but “outlaw the procreation of the stupid?”  This is EXACTLY what Oliver Wendell Holmes was advocating, along with Madison Grant and others, in the first 3rd of the 20th century—YOU have no right to say who should procreate and neither do I, and neither did Oliver Wendell Holmes or Madison Grant or either of the Presidents Roosevelt.  I think this is just loathsome—and I wonder about it–because I think of your niece—I can’t remember her name—in your own family there are examples of what can be called less than brilliant breeding, are there not?  You would not begrudge your own flesh and blood the right to procreate as she sees fit, would you?
  • Families of means, including middle class families, could typically afford to house, feed, and clothe the stupid, so long as those stupid did not procreate children the caregivers did not want.  Many if not most homes have extra bedrooms to accommodate live-in Wards who could become loved, respected members of the family, perform services for the family, and submit to the discipline of the head of the household.  Most so-called slaves prior to the 1860’s were really NOT slaves in the sense of wearing chains, getting horsewhipped and served only gruel to eat, and suffering untreated diseases and illnesses. Nor would modern Wards suffer such abuse.  The spirit of love would blossom in most families with one or more live-in Wards.  This alone would keep many Wards out of crime, malnutrition, prison, drug abuse, and general dereliction.
  • You are saying something very different in this paragraph and I have no wish to disagree that “charity is our first obligation” and civilized people and as Christians, and that such charity, if enshrined as a real cultural norm, would go a long way towards solving all these problems. 

Churches could start playing a big role in the administration of the Ward system, which they should have all along.

Again, this is something I have no intention of arguing about—but it is irrelevant to your contentions regarding the 13th Amendment….or “the belief that they can make people better…AND I DO NOT HOLD TO THAT.”  

As for eugenics, it is nothing more than family planning on a larger scale, and it is perfectly ethical.  In fact NOT to engage in eugenics plans and programs is the height of hyocrisy and disrespect toward the members of future civilizations.  If you want me to explain it to you in detail, let me know.  Meanwhile, ponder the adage “It takes seven generations to create a gentleman.”  It does not happen by accident.
You seem determined to prove Captain Malcolm Reynolds of the Good Ship Serenity correct when he said:

So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. 'Cause as sure as I know anything I know this: They will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground, swept clean. A year from now, ten, they'll swing back to the belief that they can make people... better. And I do not hold to that.

Bob

 

On 05/18/2012 10:49 PM, Charles Lincoln wrote:

My Dear Bob Hurt:
Your recidivism in your support of Eugenics is just appalling.   You know I feel that way.  Why do you keep coming back to this topic?
Eugenics is the most outrageous of all infringements on the fundamental rights of humanity, whether we believe that those rights originate from the State of Nature or God’s Endowment.  The Ancient Latin Legal classification of slavery was a contractual arrangement both socially approved and lawful but contra natura.
It is particularly appalling that you frame it (with a great deal of intellectual honesty and analytical integrity—for which at least you deserve due credit) in terms of a repeal of the 13th Amendment, and that you start off with a comparison to seat belts.  You may recall—my war against Seatbelt laws and the police abuse such laws invite is at the root of everything that made me into a FORMERLY licensed lawyer, as well as a FORMER Republican (President of Tulane College Republicans 1976-78).  
I believe in freedom and liberty and I wouldn’t trust ANY HUMAN BEING to determine my fitness or yours to live and breathe.  I think I am basically as conservative as anyone could possibly be, but I do not consider Naziism genuinely conservative, even though I can admire and sympathize with some of the traditionalist, historical identity and heritage aspects of the Fascist movements in 20th Century Europe and Latin America.  
To me, the ideology of the Founders in 1770-1792 (Boston Massacre of 1770 through Washington’s First Term as President under the Constitution of 1787 and the adoption of the Bill of Rights) and of John Randolph of Roanoke, Andrew Jackson, Roger Taney, John Caldwell Calhoun, John C. Breckenridge, Jefferson Davis, Judah P. Benjamin, and the all Founders of the Confederate States of America represent real, genuine, honest and truly American “Classical Liberal” conservatism.  AND NONE of them would ever have tolerated Eugenics—because it is an interference with the fundamental rights of individuals and families.
And that brings up an interesting point—you are advocating REPEAL or REVISION of the 13th Amendment in order to implement Eugenics?
Now, I just said I deeply admire and support the memory of the founders of the Confederate States of America, and the Southern Partisans who preceded them, but Slavery and Freedom are, by definition, incompatible lifestyles.  The 13th Amendment was adopted without the popular support of the 40% of the Nation who had no real vote in 1865, and yet today it is one of the least controversial provisions of the Constitution, and I think it needs to stay that way, and be enforced for every person.
I agree that the citizenship questions created by emancipation and left unresolved as of today are a threat to a homogeneous society in which freedom can flourish, but I totally disagree that slavery on any pretext, including the criminal laws of the United States, or Eugenics through anything as totally malleable and manipulable as IQ scores, could or should be allowed to exist.  In my opinion, segregation of the races might be a better path to restoration of true freedom and dignity for all, as well as a more natural path to foster divergent evolutionary paths which could, in the long run, compete my old Harvard neighbor and Museum of Comparative Zoology Professor E.O. Wilson has recently described the sociobiological origins of racial separation and competition (http://www.vdare.com/articles/e-o-wilson-nationalist, review of “The Social Conquest of the Earth.”)
Black Slavery was, in so many ways, America’s “original sin”—every student of the Bible knows that “original sin” is that in which we all share, as human beings, from which none of us can ever completely escape except through Salvation.  Original Sin is “sin” because it embodies and reflects everything that we need, everything that we want, naturally, and yet it is wrong.  People WANT to live free of care, fear, labor and all kinds of responsibility, which they would like to dump on someone else’s broader shoulders.  The Africans were naturally strong and by selective breeding in slavery they were made stronger.  Was this a good or desirable result for the White People?  For the White Race as a whole?  As an evolutionary experiment?  No, it was not. It was in fact a disaster—a continuing disaster.
But Bob—what you are suggesting is that we use IQ tests, one of the results of the “Original Sin” of Slavery having been to artificially import and then depress the intelligence of the Africans and other groups by educational intent, and then solidify that back into history by restoring IQ as a substitute for skin color in the restoration of slavery.
This is, I think, wrong in every possible way.  I do not believe that miscegenation is the road to happiness or a cure for the original sin of slavery, because I think that race-mixing destroys the natural diversity of the species—which I think is a GOOD and POSITIVE thing—even if it results in some people SEEMING dumber, less intelligent, or attractive to us than others.  We need to MAINTAIN the diversity of the world AND the freedom of each individual by securing individual and family autonomy, not slavery.
In the Ancient World (Rome & Greece), Slavery was almost always a temporary thing, by contract (arising from debt), and there were no permanent slave classes.  Slaves were often extraordinarily talented artists, cooks, musicians, actors/dancers, or even poets, and Slaves often tutored their masters’ children.  Even when Rome brought in captive armies or whole communities as slaves, these communities did not stay enslaved forever, from generation to generation. (I think of the comment about the Angles [Ancestors of the English] whose appearance was so beautiful on the Streets of Rome that Pope Gregory the I said, “non Angli see Angeli” and promptly dispatched as missionary the future Saint Augustine of Canterbury to preach to the Kentish Angles as well as the South and Eastern Saxons of Sussex and Essex—the point being that there was no pretense that the Angles would be a hereditary class of slaves forever).
But worst of all, I think your criteria for selecting a “slave” vs. a “free” class are more subject, and hence more unfair than even the Nazis could devise.  It is normally fairly clear, after all, who is Black or White, who is Jewish or Christian by birth or heritage.  
But in what I can only call an adoration of pseudo-science, you equate IQ and wealth with class and entitlement.  This, too, is appalling.  All IQ tests have been shown to be matters of learned behavior—“nurture not nature”, and so education would be the solution for that, except that compulsory education is itself a form of governmental interference with the absolute freedom into which all living beings and creatures are born.
I believe that people have to be free to make choices, good and bad, just like genetic mutations, some of which are beneficial, some of which are not, but most of which are simply neutral.
NO GROUP OF HUMANS has the God-like capacity or the God-like right to try to guide evolution or the “re-creation” of the human species.
I don’t know whether you ever saw the movie Serenity directed and produced by Joss Whedon (whose latest creation is the new Avengers), but Captain Malcolm Reynolds of the “Good ShipSerenity” (a “Firefly” Class Spaceship) engages in the following key monologue, after the discovery of what had really happened to the people of Miranda—who were poisoned by Government experiments in “behavioral improvement” based on similar pseudo-science:
This report is maybe twelve years
          old. Parliament buried it, and it
          stayed buried til River dug it up.
          This is what they feared she knew.
          And they were right to fear,
          'cause there's a universe of folk
          that are gonna know it too.
          (touches the cylinder)
          They're gonna see it. Somebody
          has to speak for these people.
          (everybody waits)
 (CONTINUING)           You all got on this boat for
          different reasons, but you all
          V0 come to the same place. So now
          I'm asking more of you than I have
          before. Maybe all. 'Cause as
          sure as I know anything I know
          this: They will try again. Maybe
          on another world, maybe on this
          very ground, swept clean. A year from now, ten, they'll swing back to the belief that they can make people... better. And I do not hold to that.

Charles Edward Lincoln, III

“Ich bin der Geist der stets verneint! Und das mit Recht.”

Deo Vindice/Tierra Limpia

Telephone: 512-968-2500
In case of emergency call Peyton Yates Freiman (Texas)
at 512-968-2666 or e-mail freimanthird@gmail.com


Matthew 10:34-39
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. . . . And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. . . .  

Von: Bob Hurt <bob@bobhurt.com>
An: Lawsters <lawsters@googlegroups.com>; Lawmen <lawmen@googlegroups.com>
Gesendet: 13:21 Freitag, 18.Mai 2012
Betreff: [Lawmen: 4733] A Reason to Revise the 13th Amendment

I welcome discussion of the questions and issues raised below, but please keep hateful or insulting rejoinders to yourself.
A Reason to Revise the 13th Amendment
Copyright © by Bob Hurt 18 May 2012. All rights reserved

Pesky Questions About Bozos

Does a society have the right to enact laws that effectively prevent members of the society from
  • becoming a financial burden on the rest of society?
  • endangering others in society?
  • infecting innocent babies with a condition of lifelong obtuseness, brutishness, torpidity, and lack of intelligence?
How and why has the USA changed in average intelligence since its beginning?
Does any right of a society or civilization justify limiting the lower boundary of intelligence for parenting, such as through eugenics programs?
This commentary addresses those questions and might provide insights for the sincere truth-seeker.

Law and Likelihood of Harming Others

Consider the legislative enactments regulating business practices, highway traffic, and human relations. Take for example seatbelt laws. Government requires people to buckle themselves in because:
  • People often cause car crashes through negligence, incompetence, judgment error, or equipment failure;
  • The violence of car crashes often maim or kill people in and out of the car;
  • Such terrible loss causes families to suffer from reduced of earning power and enjoyment of life, and becoming a burden on society;
Thus, modern civilizations prohibit human actions likely to endanger selves. others, and society.

Qualities and Uses of Intelligence in Civilization

According to Wikipedia’s IQ article, IQ has high heritability, intgelligence highly correlates to SAT scores, and people with IQ of 70 to 90 will likely engage in criminal behavior. Lynn and Vanhanen’s books on IQ show the high correlation of national average IQ to gross national product. Therefore, means exist for society to determine the intelligence (g factor) and IQ of its members, and their corresponding value to society in terms of productivity, academic achievement, likely crimnality, burden on society, and the likelihood of low-intelligence parents procreating low-intelligence children.
One must have an IQ of at least 85 to graduate from high school. US IQ distributions from actual tests reveal that at least 75 million of its people have IQ below 85 and even more cannot graduate from high school because of behavior and health problems associated with low intelligence.
In the past 150 years the US has moved away from circumstances requiring massive numbers of low-intelligence people in its military and work forces. The military leaders of today desperately want recruits to have high school diplomas, and many manual labor jobs have moved to 3rd world countries as mechanization has modernized farms and factories. America needs people who can think, arrive at correct evaluations, and make correct decisions.

Hypocrisy of Ignoring the Gene Pool

Wouldn’t it make sense to reduce the need for protective laws, prisons, and welfare infrastructures legislating to elevate the quality of the gene pool?
I see the refusal to take such action as rank hypocrisy:
  • We demand laws regulating seatbelt usage, road, motor vehicle, and building construction, highway speed, driver licenses, professions like plumbing, dentistry, medicine, and lawyering, and many other areas of life, on the basis of likelihood of resultant injury. But,
  • We ignore the far higher likelihood of injury resulting from procreation by people of low intelligence.
How much sense does that make?
Hypocrisy aside, does it not seem unintelligent to refuse to discuss the reasons and means for reducing the percentage of grossly unintelligent people in future populations? Does it not seem even more stupid to refuse out of political correctness – the notion of feeling embarrassed that the topic might offend those of grossly low intelligence?
How about taking a poll of the stupid and ask them whether they enjoy feeling confused, frustrated, victimized, in trouble, and unable to learn, to figure things out, or to make prudent decisions? We might discover that they think they figure things out just fine, or that they hate the condition and would become smart if they could.
Well, aside from that, it could go without saying that the highly intelligent would find some tasks boring that the lowly intelligent would find gratifying. Likewise, tasks that would challenge and gratify the intelligent would frustrate and anger the unintelligent.
Many jobs exist that would suit the unintelligent. Thus, society’s needs for the unintelligent still exist, such as domestic servitude, and simple tasks for which employers cannot afford machines. But such tasks have an economic value nonetheless, and it makes no economic sense to force an employer to pay more than the value of them.

Intelligence Strata (Classes) in America

The existence of 75 million relatively unintelligent people in America and the lack of available jobs for such people poses a serious problem that has resulted in America’s prisons bursting at the seams.
America has entered an age where it handles unintelligent people as follows:
  • Puts them into the welfare system (they burden taxpayers); and
  • Suffers crimes at their hands (they burden their victims and then the criminal justice system).
Meanwhile, the very smart have advertised the American Dream’s cornucopia of goods and services which the unwealthy obtain through debt. The unwealthy, unlike the unintelligent, do have intelligence, but either don’t use it sufficiently to become wealthy, or actually don’t have quite enough intelligence to become wealthy. That is, wealth does not generally happen by accident except when inherited by someone who very likely has high intelligence, the offspring of someone intelligent enough to garner wealth.
So we have three major strata:
  • The highly intelligent wealthy (high class)
  • The somewhat intelligent or lazy unwealthy (middle class)
  • The unintelligent poor (low class)
In practice:
  • The high class has managed to make the middle class into voluntary servants through glitzy ads and debt.
  • Many of the high and middle class employ the low class for domestic servants.
  • Some, but not that many, of the middle and high classes provide the low class with food, clothing, and shelter as part of the domestic servitude arrangement.
  • The existence of many if not most of the low class have made the high and middle classes into their involuntary servants through crime, and taxation that pays for welfare abuse, health care, social workers, failed education efforts, and prisons.
  • Even though taxes on the high class do pay for the upkeep of the low class, the high class never notices it as a burden because of other tax benefits and shelters, but those taxes impose a severe burden on the middle class.

The 13th Amendment and Reverse Slavery

This makes it apparent that the 13th Amendment did not actually abolish involuntary servitude. In reality, it appears that Americans, through their misguided sense of fairness, justice, and altruism, have destroyed the effectiveness of community charity programs for the feckless, handing those to government, and converted the middle class into slaves of the low class AND the high class.
The upshot of this weird dilemma: Americans have upset the Law of the Survival of the Fittest with a system of legislated slavery of the middle class to the high class through usurious debt and to the low class through taxation. Victims of this system can only imagine that the high class engineered it intentionally. It does seem pretty slick when one ponders it. And that explanation clarifies the reason Government refuses to patrol the borders or impose some kind of check on the presently unrestrained procreation of children by unintelligent parents.
This dilemma and its causes constitute a wholly immoral, unethical perversion of civilization’s ideals. A society ought to engineer civilization for evolution toward some age of light and life, so to speak, where no crime, poverty, or war exists, and people can prosecute their ambitions without unduly burdening their fellows. That can never happen in an increasingly mechanized society in which 25% of the people haven’t the cognitive ability to graduate from high school, and will certainly resort largely to crime or welfare abuse to get by.
People of low intelligence make sense in a free society so long as others don’t become systematic slaves to them. The unintelligent must have a means of becoming gainfully, self-sufficiently, and happily employed, or the wards of those willing to care for and obtain economic benefits from them. The unintelligent simply cannot become and remain wards of the state without an economic justification. Liberty, after all, comes at the expense of commensurate responsibility.

Reverse Slavery Justifies 13th Amendment Revision

The foregoing discussion sheds new light on the 13th Amendment. That Amendment should stand, but ONLY for people with sufficient IQ and ambition to operate self-sufficiently. So, Congress ought to modify it a bit to that end.
Though many might feel loathe to admit it, involuntary servitude gave many benefits to many people, in spite of members of master and slave classes abusing one another.

Potential Benefits of 13th Amendment Revision

It provided sustenance, employment, and regulation for the servants and labor and other economic and personal benefits for the masters. Both sides benefited and to a large extent enjoyed the arrangement. And most of the servants, though slaves, escaped far worse conditions in their homelands.
But, involuntary servitude had serious deficiencies:
  • Incorrigible and violent slaves endangered the master and other slaves, and belonged in prison, not in a family or commercial enterprise.
  • Abusive or negligent masters hurt or deprived their slaves.
  • Many people became slaves who had the intelligence and raw ability become good, self-sufficient citizens, and should not have become involuntary servants.
Today we have a reverse-slavery system where the high and middle classes, who can care for themselves and become good citizens, have become involuntary servants to the low class who cannot care for themselves or become good citizens.
Society must reverse this situation while dramatically reducing the low class to a size that society actually needs for a smoothly functioning economy. That constitutes the supreme reason to outlaw production of bozos in America. Within 3 generations the averate intelligence of the nation will rise significantly, welfare will diminish so that neighborhoods can handle it without government interference, crime will drop dramatically, inner city ghettos will disappear, prison industries will shrink, and America will become monumentally more productive, more competitive than ever in the world economy.
And, Americans with good sense should demand a change to the 13th Amendment to impose a system of involuntary servitude on able-bodied people who, by their nature, cannot or will not care for themselves without hurting or burdening others.
Americans of good sense will otherwise remain slaves to the unintelligent of the land. And that just doesn’t make much sense, does it?
# # #
Bob Hurt
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, FL 33763-1925
(727) 669-5511   http://bobhurt.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Lawmen” group.
To post to this group, send email to lawmen@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lawmen+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen?hl=en.

Bob Hurt

2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, FL 33763-1925
(727) 669-5511   http://bobhurt.com

Forget the Imperial Presidency and refocus attention on the Subservient Congress: Did Congress Work for Five Years to Prepare the Way for Barack Obama to become President? Was it part of “W’s” Plan as well?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3aCfR8rmrw

My thanks to a dear old friend Barbara Anne K-H for sending this over to me from Alabama in the Heart of Dixie….  I had not seen or even heard of this legislative history before.  As of Friday, February 3, 2011, Judge Malihi’s decision in Georgia came down in favor of Obama as a natural born citizen.  Well, what a shock?   I had rather hoped he would knock Obama down but I am not the least bit surprised or overly disturbed that he didn’t, because Obama’s birthplace is not the problem: Obama’s philosophy and political agenda are the problems, and should be the primary focus of defining his status as a traitor.  I and many others “on the right” waste much too much ink, toil, time, and talent on the eligibility issue, but at least I gave up and moved on rather than doggedly chasing the dead dog around the tree one more time.  I hope that other versions of Judge Malihi’s decision will soon be available, but for the moment it’s good enough to read it in this slightly fuzzy PDF by scribd: 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/80417613/Farrar-Welden-Swensson-Powell-v-Obama-Judge-Malihi-Final-Decision-Georgia-Ballot-Challenge-2-3-2012

Focusing on birthplace eligibility is too narrow and almost silly to justify concluding that Obama is “evil” because he lied about his birthplace.  

Sidebar: I certainly wish I could lie about where I was born sometime—there’s nothing particularly glorious about having been born in Commerce, Texas (I’d have rather been born in someplace special with a really romantic name like “Waco” or “Lubbock” or “Groesbeck”, or even, just imagine it…..gasp “Fort Worth”; likewise my grandmother Helen always regretted having been born in Nachitoches out in the hinterland of French Louisiana which made her less than a full member of New Orleans society, but we all are what we are; even my grandfather, born in the beautiful Victorian city of Galveston, with its amazing beaches and incomparable sea breezes, resented not having been born in his grandfather’s homeland back in England; parents can be so inconsiderate—I often have occasion to ridicule my assistant Peyton’s birthplace being in Memphis….along with his two “triplet” brothers).  

So I stick to my guns: the whole “eligibility” debate is a major distraction and a terrible waste of patriot energies.  We who believe in the Constitution should be focusing strictly on Obama’s crimes against the people (and these are mostly economic and political crimes which his predecessors initiated, which the most extreme and staunch constitutionalists are largely ignoring because they are focusing on Obama’s status or lack thereof as a Natural Born Citizen).  The legal argument most often invoked by the Courts against eligibility cases is that “the people” have suffered no individualized or discrete injuries from any violation of the Natural Born Citizen clause occasioned by Obama’s election.  

The difference in Georgia and other states that are considering the eligibility issue right now is that PROSPECTIVE AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF are ALWAYS available against Governmental Officials, even when actions for damages or other punitive or corrective actions are barred by doctrines of “official” or “sovereign” immunity.  If Obama has perfected anything, it’s his own self-image as a sovereign (Kind of Reminds me of the King in the big palace portrayed in the movie version of the Jungle Book, but that’s another story…)

This above-referenced you-tube video makes some excellent points of which I was not aware about legislative history and purpose, and I highly recommend it: for five years before Barack Hussein Obama’s election, various members of Congress made repeated attempts to amend the Constitution of the United States to modify the Article II eligibility requirements.

The producer’s “blurb” goes as follows:

– MINI Documentary Illegal Obama “Propped Up” By Congress! If you never watch another video, watch this one, this proves the Democrats (and some Republicans) know Obama is not an American and is serving illegally and unconstitutionally and the efforts they made are recorded in the Congressional Record, attempting to change the Constitution so he could serve legally. EVERYONE that cares about and loves this Constitutional Republic absolutely MUST watch and forward this video!!!!!! This one must go viral. I won’t be surprised when the people of this country begin calling for an Impeachment. This guy and his croonies have been intentionally deceiving the American public and his friends in Congress have been propping him up.. Where are our elected representatives all been hiding?

http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=H3aCfR8rmrw
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3aCfR8rmrw>

I strongly suggest that we forget about Article II eligibility and hereby propose that we amend the Constitution to define “Natural Born Citizenship” for all three Branches of Government (Article I Legislative, Article II Executive, and Article III Judicial—as they do in Mexico, for instance) and actually to extend the requirements for Natural born citizenship as follows: 

“Only persons born within the territory of any of the United States of America, or any of its dependent territories, whose father and mother were both born in the United States, or to two parents also born in the United States who are temporarily living abroad, may serve in any office or capacity created by or under this Constitution, whether legislative, executive, or judicial, except for officers with no law-making, enforcement, or interpretive functions whatsoever.   No person shall be qualified to serve in any capacity whatsoever created by or under this Constitution who does not affirm by oath the primacy of individual rights to life, liberty, and property, above all other human rights.”

Disqualifying all but third generation citizens from Federal Office would have eliminated Barack Hussein Obama from the Senate, which would have prevented his elevation into the Presidency.  It would eliminate both Orly Taitz and Arnold Schwartzenegger from national politics, and would have, not so tragically, prevented early International Socialists (“New Dealers”) like Felix Frankfurter from sitting on the Supreme Court.  (Felix Frankfurter not only supported the New Deal and global integration, but also opposed the expansion of civil rights by incorporation of the Bill of Rights through the Fourteenth Amendment to the States).

It is Barack Hussein Obama’s belief in other rights and powers which makes him dangerous.  There is no more certain definition of a communist than one who does not or cannot affirm that the rights of each individual to life, liberty, and property are supreme and superior to all other human rights.  This maxim must be construed to include that the rights of life, liberty, and property of the individual are superior to the rights of the society to security, the rights of any individual to any particular AMOUNT of property or wealth or income or security, the right to free assistance of any kind from the government, the right to employment, or even the rights to food and medicine.  

I suppose it sounds harsh to say that the government should not be in the business of guaranteeing the right to food and medicine to any individual, but the cost in freedom of an increased augmentation of life or property by and through submission is, or ought to be, intolerable.

There is to my mind very little doubt that George W. Bush had the appointment of an African-American successor at the top of his agenda.  Why else did he have Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice as his successive Secretaries of State?  The Secretary of State is the most visible officer of the Executive Branch after the President.  So it is only reasonable to expect that Congress, during the entire term of George W. Bush, would likewise have been paving the road for the first African-American President who would only be elected because he totally supported and underwrote EVERYTHING that his predecessors were doing.  It is all just too much of a ritual and stage play.  The Republican parties commitment to affirmative action of “right thinking” African-Americans was clear at the very latest from the fiasco surrounding the appointment of Clarence Thomas to replace Thurgood Marshall in what can now only be called the “African American” seat on the U.S. Supreme Court.  Thomas himself paved the way for the acceptance of Obama in the sense that Thomas’ own marriage was interracial and therefore especially “Brave New Worldy” in that special “destroy real diversity by promoting homogenization” and “shake n’ bake” demographics.  

The New Deal: When Lawyers Became the Masters of our Destiny by Making Paper more valuable than Property

New Deal of Deception by Designation: “Security”                                  A Working Draft of Research in Progress © Charles Edward Lincoln Sunday October 23, 2011 

         The “New Deal” is the name given by political historians to the “recovery & relief” programs initiated during Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s first term as President (March 4, 1933-January 20, 1937).   While many of Roosevelt’s iconic “relief” programs, including the NRA, the WPA, and CCC were either struck down by the Supreme Court or repealed during World War II, the modern legacy of the New Deal includes some familiar names of the most powerful governmental agencies and programs.

The list of six most famous “New Deal” agencies which remain active today, still operating under their original names, includes (1) the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), (2) the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC), (3) the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), and (4) the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). By far the largest “New Deal” programs still in existence today are (5) the Social Security Administration (headed by the Independent “Commissioner of Social Security”) and (6) the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)—because these two “independent commissions” in essence control and define the modern economy.  All of these programs are tightly knit together in one single tapestry of centralization of economic “command and control”.

What each of these six programs had in common with the other was nothing less than the transformation of various areas of American life by redefining it, by altering the cultural and normative understandings of certain words, phrases, and standards of behavior and transforming the legal landscape, replacing the traditional Anglo-American common law with modern regulatory codes.  The trajectory of each program merits some attention and reflection here, from the most general program to the most specific and limited.

TVA: TEMPLATE FOR A CENTRALLY PLANNED FUTURE

         Most discrete and delineated territorially within the country, and yet most overwhelmingly powerful in regard to “cradle to grave” impact on the lives of those forming its target population, the TVA was the most comprehensive governmental regional reorganization and restructuring plan ever undertaken in world history, and remains the longest lived such plan (still operating up to the present day after almost eighty years as a major techno-economic and socio-cultural planning “corporation”).

Chartered by Congress during Roosevelt’s famous “First Hundred Days” (in May 1933), the TVA manifests, in essence, the ideal of the Centrally Planned Society: a region including parts of seven States in the Protestant Old South transformed and reshaped under the leadership of an ethnic Jew of Austro-Slovakian parentage named David Eli Lilienthal, trained at Harvard by fellow Austrian-born Jew Felix Frankfurter. Frankfurter was famous in teens and twenties as a socialist radical, paving the way for the New Deal by advocated “judicial restraint” in dealing with government misdeeds, including greater freedom for administrative agencies from judicial oversight…..  In practice, this meant that (as Roosevelt’s 1938 appointee to the Supreme Court as the third Jewish Supreme Court Justice to Replace Benjamin Cardozo) Frankfurter would generally uphold all executive branch actions, including those of administrative agencies and government corporations against all constitutional challenges so long as they did not “shock the conscience” (meaning of course, his own conscience).

After 20 years in government, establishing first the TVA and then the Atomic Energy Commission, Lilienthal worked for several years for the investment bank Lazard Freres, and in 1955, formed an engineering and consulting firm called Development and Resources Corporation (D&R) which took the TVA’s objectives worldwide: major centrally planned public power and public works projects. Lilienthal was able to leverage the financial backing of Lazard Freres to found his company. He hired former associates from the TVA to work with him at D&R.  D&R focused on overseas clients, including Post-Mossadegh/Early Shahist Iran, and similarly politically oriented “forced cultural evolution” or “regional development” projects to suppress regional dissent and thus support U.S. backed regimes or programs in Colombia, Venezuela, India, Southern Italy, Ghana, Nigeria, Morocco, and above all, South Vietnam.

Because of Lilienthal’s leadership, TVA is said to be the model which the State of Israel emulated in its reorganization and redesign of Palestine after 1947, and the Tennessee Valley Authority stands as the template for U.S. Overseas Development up through and including the reconstruction of Iraq after 2003—a nearly eighty year run.  Nothing quite like the TVA ever happened again inside the United States, however.

FHA: TO ABOLISH THE DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN CITIES AND URBAN AREAS

         After the TVA’s design to redefine 100% of the way of life in a general region, the next broadest program of the six surviving New Deal Programs has been the acquisition and maintenance of interests in housing.  Born of a depression wherein millions were displaced, providing housing for about forty years for tens of millions, the New Deal legacy in 2011 is a cloaked depression, or perhaps a planned “genocide” in which an astounding 30-50 million Americans are losing or have lost their homes acquired and maintained since the New Deal under the aegis of Federal Government Programs.

For its “constructive” part in the transformation, the Federal Housing Authority was a massive nationwide “lending” umbrella project to fund the mass construction of housing—it also could be called the “Suburban Genesis Authority” or “the Abolition of Urban-Rural Distinctions Authority.”  Just as the TVA transformed parts of the landscape from Virginia through Tennessee to Mississippi, the Federal Housing Authority played a decisive role in moving people out of the cities and off farms into the vast suburban wastelands which now occupy immense percentages of the most fertile farm land in the world and are increasingly marred by decay and degeneracy brought on by foreclosure and eviction—empty ruins being sold off through “Investment Visa EB-5” and “Green Card” sales to thousands of Arabic and Chinese foreign investors with interests hard to characterize or predict except with the wildest speculation.

The Federal Housing Authority was originally created by the National Housing Act of 1934, which was amended in 1938 (Roosevelt’s Second Term) to create the Federal National Mortgage Association “Fannie Mae”, which under Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon metamorphosized and split into “Ginny Mae” (Government National Mortgage Association”) and “Freddie Mac” (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Association) to “foster competition”, even though all three entities remained entirely government controlled and Freddie and Fannie are now [since their “renationalization” by executive fiat in September 2008] owned by the U.S. Treasury Department and controlled by FHFA (Federal Housing Finance Authority).

The Federal Housing Authority now exists within the Department of Housing and Urban Development.  “HUD” was established in 1965 among the first steps of Lyndon B. Johnson’s program called the “Great Society”, which was not coincidentally also the first major expansion of Government Centralization in the United States SINCE the “New Deal” (and also not coincidentally formed part of the same program as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965).  The Federal Housing Authority remains today the key government agency supervising the Banking Industry’s role in mortgage finance and securitization of home loans.

In short, the TVA was all about completely reconditioning and reworking technology, society and culture in one region considered particularly “backward” and in need of “development”.  And having done so without significant protest or expressions of pain, TVA, became the model for “foreign aid” for the development of “Third World” Countries, while the FHA was a more general program to restructure the urban and rural landscape by “stimulating” housing construction and lowering costs nationwide.  There are those who say that the housing foreclosure and eviction crisis brought on by Federal financial programs means that the time for a national TVA has finally come, and that the next “Third World Country” to be forceably re-engineered and developed is the U.S., except this time it will be a much more diverse consortium of Near Eastern and Chinese experts who will impose their own standards of “conscience” on our legal system and the interpretation of our constitution.

THE FOURTH BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT: INDEPENDENT COMMMISSIONS OR AGENCIES, INCLUDING THE SEC, SOCIAL SECURITY, IRS, AND FEDERAL RESERVE: UTTERLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL & CONTROLLED BY INDUSTRY INSIDERS

Regarding distinct onomastic pattern characterizes the list of six after the TVA “Corporation” and the sub-cabinet level FHA: two “Insurance Corporations” and two “Security Commissions”— (1) the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), (2) the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC), together with (5) the Social Security System and (6) the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

It is worth noting that in 1933 the United States Government owned no corporations whatsoever, at least not “outright”, although it had certainly chartered and funded some, including the great transcontinental railroads in the 19th century and many large banks after the creation of the Federal Reserve System in 1913, and regulated many others, especially after the enactment of the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890 and (never coincidentally, the establishment of the first “Independent Commission” namely) the Interstate Commerce Commission (“ICC”) in 1887.

With the aforementioned dominance of the great transcontinental railroads in the U.S. in the late 1800s, legislators in the several states established commissions to effectively supervise them. State legislators delegated power to unelected and “independent” commissions in the belief that “specialists” could more readily accumulate expert knowledge to regulate the railroads than the legislators could do on behalf of the people. However, when the U.S. Supreme Court in 1886 struck down an Illinois statute on railroad commerce involving neighboring states, the U.S. Congress intervened. Congress copied state “unelected industry specialist” approach and established the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) in 1887.  Congress authorized the ICC to issue orders regarding the rates set by the railroads and to enforce its orders in court.  The Constitutional authority for Independent Commissions under the United States Constitution of 1787, and as amended since then is, as the late Chief Justice Warren E. Burger once confided to me in 1993 in Palm Beach, Florida, “absolutely nil.”

However, no successful challenge to the existence of these “independent commissions” has ever been litigated through the courts.  For this reason, after the ICC, Congress established many more {independent} regulatory commissions in the early 1900s, to include the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Federal Power Commission (FPC), the Federal Elections Commission (FEC), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS: Headed by the “Commissioner of Internal Revenue”), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC—which took over from David Lilienthal’s Atomic Energy Commission or “AEC” mentioned above), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and of course, last but not least, the Social Security Administration (SSA: Headed by the “Commissioner of Social Security”).  More recently many “Independent Agencies” such as the Environmental Protection Agency have been created, always preserving, for whatever reason, the three letter monogram style of name.

These Commissions almost always work closely with Executive Branch Cabinet Officers and Administrative Bureaucracy whose officers CAN be fired by the President.  Officers of the Independent Commissions cannot be discharged by the Chief Executive nor, at least not without impeachment, by Congress, although they serve for limited terms.  In “Constitutional Law I” at the University of Chicago with Judge Richard Allen Posner, we spent a great deal of time on the unsuccessful constitutional challenges to the Independent Commissions over the past century.

In blatant defiance of any principles of separation-of-powers, the independent commissions/independent “executive” agencies all both have and exercise powers that functionally parallel all three branches of federal government as established by the Constitution. These Commissions/Agencies legislate by publication in the Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations when they adopt or enact their own regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency, for example, adopts or enacts regulations limiting pollution emissions by industry.

Independent agencies also carry out executive functions, such as when the Interstate Commerce Commission checks to ensure that trucks have proper safety features.  Finally, many officers of independent agencies act in judicial capacity in “administrative” courts when they hold hearings and issue fines for violations of their undemocratically decreed regulations. Their powers, however, are at least theoretically limited by Congress. Congress may alter, amend, or appeal legislation delegating authority to an agency. The president may remove the head of an agency “for cause” (but not for disagreement with policy or decisions).  Under the desperately deferential “Chevron” standard, the courts (also mostly theoretically) may (but only very occasionally do) declare agency action to be unconstitutional or outside the grant of authority from Congress.

While not officially described as an “Independent Commission”, the Federal Reserve is set up in exactly the same way as the others listed above, and for many of the same practical and political reasons, its de jure “independence” of the government means de facto dependence on the industry being regulated, namely in the Federal Reserve’s case, the banking industry. Like every other “Independent Agency,” the Federal Reserve is independent within government in that “its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.”  However, its authority derives from Congress and Congressional statutes and is subject to “congressional oversight.”  Additionally, the members of the Board of Governors, including its chairman and vice-chairman, are chosen by the President and confirmed by the advice and consent of the Senate. Congress and the President also exercises not insignificant political control over the Federal Reserve by appointing and setting the salaries of the system’s highest-level employees.

Thus the Federal Reserve Board is populated by Banking “Industry Insiders” and its chairman always hails from Wall Street in New York or at least La Salle Street in Chicago. Like the original ICC, the Federal Reserve epitomizes the government-and-corporate cooperation which is neither democratically controlled by the people through their elected officials for the public good nor permits any genuine “laissez-faire” free-market competition by the operation of any such primitive principles as supply and demand, never mind customer satisfaction with service.   “Independent Commissions” are quintessentially creatures of government “by the industry, of the industry, for the industry” allegedly being “regulated” in the public good.  “Independent Commissions”, in short, constitute a fraudulent and unconstitutional mixture of governmental authority and corporate (financial) power.

TRANSFORMING THE MEANING OF “SECURITY” FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY TO PUBLIC PROMISES