By Chris Rossini
We're always told that the U.S. government spreads "freedom and democracy" around the world. It's not true, but propaganda is never about truth. The fact that the U.S. has created mass death, destruction, migration and chaos always seems to play second fiddle to the "freedom and democracy" slogan.
Before worrying about other countries, do we even have freedom here?
Democracy is less of a concern because there is nothing special about mob rule. We're supposed to be a Constitutional Republic anyway, and not a democracy. The history of democracies is pitiful. America's Founders knew that.
But freedom is important, so let's talk about that.
The Dalai Lama said something pertinent here. He said: "It's far more useful to be aware of a single shortcoming in ourselves than to be aware of 1,000 in someone else."
So what's the deal? Is the country that talks about "spreading freedom" around the world even free itself?
Well, we have the largest government in the history of mankind. And since the great economist Ludwig von Mises pointed out that "government is the negation of liberty," it's not a good thing that we have such a sprawling octopus for a government.
Yesterday 311 pages of regulations were added into the Federal Register. The day before, there were 507 pages added, and 575 the day before that. Every day the government squeezes American life like an anaconda squeezes its prey.
Businesses and corporations have largely given up, and have taken their ventures offshore. Who can blame them? In America, there are regulations on who you can hire, and how you can fire them. Are they too old or young, straight or gay, black or white?
There are ridiculous notions that companies need to provide "healthcare" and "access" to this, that, and the other thing.
Then there are licenses, and competitors that get in bed with government to get subsidies, monopoly privileges, and special treatment. It seems like you need a license for everything! Finally, these practices have reached the grand-slam stage. Government now forces people to purchase services provided by private companies. What a setup!
All of those regulations that are added every day make being an employer in the U.S. too much to handle. So off to greener pastures they go. There are 195 other nations in the world, many with governments that will welcome your business with open arms.
It used to be that "the business of America is business." Now it's "the business of America is government".
It's all government....all the time.
THIS is what the U.S. is trying to force on the rest of the world? All government, all the time?
Then there's the 24/7 war propaganda.
Go to a sports game, and you listen to the troops sing (now several times during a game). Television is filled with the same stuff. The Pentagon has the largest "advertising" budget on the planet!
Speaking about the planet. Government tries to convince people to waste their time and energy "recycling," while the same exact government is the single largest polluter on Earth!
Military empires are horrible for the environment. They're pollution machines that are running around the clock. You knew that though, right?
THIS is what the U.S. government is trying to force on the rest of the world?
Let's talk about democracy in America, just for the laughs.
Smartly, most Americans don't vote because they've figured it out. But for those that do vote, they're given a choice of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.
Donald Trump speaks in generalities. He feeds on emotions. The most detail that you'll get from him is that America has to be "smart," "strong," and "tough".
Meanwhile Hillary Clinton, who has more baggage than probably anyone in the entire country, has not given a single press conference in over 6 months!
So there's one candidate who fires people up emotionally saying literally nothing, while the other candidate hides from the press, and hopes to sneak in somehow under the radar.
To top it off, these two candidates are the most unfavorable ever!
THIS is what we're trying to force on the rest of the world?
Ron Paul has it right. You lead the global stage by example, not by military arms. America was once a land of liberty far greater than it is today. It has become a land of government.
We should be striving for liberty here, and no foreign entanglements abroad. Hopefully, other nations will seek to emulate us. Perhaps they won't, and that's their business, not ours.
Right now, not only does America set a bottom-of-the-barrel example, but it simultaneously turns other nations into chaotic wastelands.
Ideas must change in order to revive the dying "land of the free".
Can libertarianism heal the world? Libertarian activist, author, presidential candidate Mary Ruwart has written on this theme for more than two decades. What does she make of the current state of libertarianism? Where are we heading and where should we be heading? Is the non-aggression principle overtaken by events?
By Ron Paul
It's always encouraging to see younger individuals work hard to further the ideas of liberty. We're all different with our own unique talents, and it's great to see young men and women use those talents to spread the message of voluntaryism and non-aggression. I recently joined a young man named Elijah Johnson to talk about why liberty so important and why the threats against it are not limited to the U.S. alone. I also talk about why "democratic socialism" is not the solution at all. You can listen at the link:
By Chris Rossini
Following the latest tragedy in Orlando, we're once again watching the political class jabber about non-solutions. More power for themselves? Of course. Less liberty for us? They seem incapable of thinking otherwise. But actual and real solutions? No way.
Aside from advocating policies that have created this mess, the usual response is to point fingers at whoever the current president happens to be, and say "He's not keeping us safe." This argument, of course, leaves the world of logic and grants powers to an individual that he can never have in this world.
The President Himself Cannot Keep You Safe
It's a shame that something so obvious has to be pointed out, but unless the president is your personal bodyguard, he's not going to "keep you safe". Even then, you better hope he knows what he's doing.
The last time that I checked, the president isn't a bodyguard for anyone. Quite the opposite. He has his own bodyguards that make sure that he is safe...and they have lots of guns.
Americans have been conditioned into believing that every president is like some omnipotent superhero. Perhaps it's time to look at reality. At most, the president can take care of himself and his family, and protect them from danger. He is, after all, a human being.
The Police Can Only Do So Much
Americans have also been conditioned (starting in government's elementary schools) that the police are there to keep you safe. This is only slightly true. For sure, there are many good police officers out there that are doing the right things. However, just like the president himself, they are limited in what they can do.
It's not like you're able to hire the police privately to make sure you're safe. The way it's setup today, the police are tasked with protecting everyone in a certain geographic area. An impossibility to say the least.
Today, only the really rich have the ability to hire private security firms that take of them exclusively.
As every mass shooting has proven, you're really on your own when the tragic crimes take place. Criminals don't choose locations where the police are on the premises. Once the police show up on the scene, the damage has been done. Until the police show up, you're on your own.
You can't blame the police for this. They can't be everywhere, and their task of literally "keeping everyone safe" is impossible. With that reality, they must show up after most crimes are committed.
So if the president himself can't possibly keep you safe, and the police are very limited in what they can do, where does that leave the average person?
For the average person (i.e., everyone that doesn't have private security or a bodyguard) it's of utmost importance to have the freedom to defend yourself.
It should go without saying, and it's now painfully obvious, that criminals will always be armed in some way.
Banning firearms, or making them against the law only makes it easier on the criminals. We shouldn't want that. Part of being a criminal is that you break the law. If guns are banned, it provides an opportunity for criminals to get an edge. That's backwards. Criminals should not have the edge.
After all, drugs are banned, right? How easy is it to get drugs? They're everywhere. Government can't even keep drugs out of prisons!!
Creating laws that forbid the average person from being able to defend themselves creates the very soft targets that criminals are looking for. Take Orlando as an example. It was against the law to have a firearm in the nightclub. The law basically made the club a "gun-free zone". As a result, no one was able to shoot back. The shooter was able to reload several times.
The goal of any president, and of all Americans, should be to remove as many soft targets as is humanly possible. A criminal must be deterred by the thought that someone around him might be armed and might take him out before he's able to fire the first shot.
You never see criminals storm into police stations. Why do you think that is? Could it be the fear that they may get shot right away? Criminals should have that same exact fear in as many places as possible. And since police can't possibly be everywhere, individuals must never be forbidden from arming themselves.
So a president can help to "keep us safe" by advocating the removal of all government violations of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That Amendment was put there for a reason.
What else can a president do?
Leave other countries alone
As Ron Paul so astutely pointed out to Rudy Giuliani in front of a national audience, terrorists seek to do Americans harm because of America's military interventions in their countries.
There are 196 countries in the world. Why is it that terrorists look to do harm to the few western nations that have invaded them? Why not the rest?
Once again, there are 196 countries. Please let that sink in.
Terrorism is desperation and a form of revenge. Those who choose such a despondent path are not going to defeat the mighty U.S. military. So they resort to terrorism as a way of inflicting great damage, knowing full well that they're going to end up dead themselves as a result.
We Americans do not need this. We don't need people seeking revenge against our country. We should be petitioning our government to stop swatting at hornets nests in other parts of the world.
Instead, we Americans have not only not petitioned the government in such a way, but we've also acquiesced to being placed under a surveillance state. We've lost so many liberties since 9/11. We now have a government that monitors our every move...whether it be financial transactions, phone calls and locations, emails, bank accounts, license plates, cell phones....and on and on.
We've already discussed how government cannot be everywhere at all times. So surveillance of every detail of our lives can't change that fact. It only rips away our privacy, individuality, and dignity.
Do we have the mightiest military in the world? Sure. Then they should be protecting this nation only, and preventing any outside nations from invading.
There is great news! There isn't a country in the world that is even pondering the thought of invading America.
It's time for a foreign policy of non-intervention and peace. As Americans, we should be able to live in peace without fear that our government created the conditions for foreign individuals to seek revenge against us.
We can have a president that truly can "keep us safe". A change of ideas and policies are all that stand in the way.
Why, since the early 1970's, have wage-earners' income been so stagnant? Is it that labor is less valued in society? Some sinister plot? Or is it something else...something so obvious...?
By Chris Rossini
The usual knee-jerk reactions of Republicans and Democrats are now being aired after the tragedy in Orlando. Democrats are angling to attack the 2nd Amendment, and Republicans are angling for a further escalation of war. All this despite yet another example of a "gun-free zone" mass-shooting, and an America that deals with blowback as a result of its military interventions in the Middle East. Both ideas have already contributed to the creation of this mess. But if there's one thing that government is expert at, it's in continuing policies that fail.
While the two parties continue to argue over how government will make the situation worse, the great Judge Napolitano asks the non-superficial questions about the Orlando shooter.
1.) Why didn't the FBI place Mateen under surveillance after interviewing him twice for suspicious terror links?
2.) Why was Mateen able to continue working as a security guard with the security firm G4S after making statements about his wanting to kill people?
Watch the Judge below:
As Ron Paul has stated on many occasions: "I'm convinced that you never have to give up liberties to be safe. I think you're less safe when you give up your liberties."
You can be sure that both left and right are going to attack liberties somehow as a result of this tragedy.
Such schemes can never be the solution to our problems.
It seems everyone with a political agenda is rushing to use the attack in Orlando to further that agenda. What is really behind the shooting? Will we ever know?
By Ron Paul
If neoconservatives and progressives truly understood fascism, they would stop using the word as a smear term. That is because both groups, along with most political figures and commentators, embrace fascist ideas and policies.
Fascism’s distinguishing characteristic is a “mixed economy.” Unlike socialists and communists who seek to abolish private business, fascists are content to let business remain in private hands. Instead, fascists use regulations, mandates, and taxes to control business and run (and ruin) the economy. A fascist system, then, is one where private businesses serve politicians and bureaucrats instead of consumers. Does the modern American economy not fit the definition of fascism?
Fascism benefits big businesses that can afford the cost of complying with government regulations, unlike their smaller competitors. Big businesses, which have more political influence then entrepreneurs or small businesses, also significantly benefit from government subsidies. In order to maintain their power, big businesses finance the “deep state” — the network of lobbyists, journalists, think tanks, bureaucrats, and congressional staffers who work behind the scenes to shape government policy.
Obamacare is an example of fascism that is often mislabeled as socialism. Obamacare did not create a government-run “single payer" system as would exist under socialism. Instead, Obamacare extended government control over health care via mandates, regulations, and subsidies. The most infamous part of Obamacare — the individual mandate — forces individuals to purchase a product from a private industry.
Modern America’s militaristic foreign policy aimed at policing and perfecting the world is another example of fascism that enjoys strong bipartisan support. Both right-wing neocons and left-wing humanitarian interventionists claim our supposedly noble goals justify any and all actions taken by the US government. Thus, these supposed human rights champions defend preemptive war, torture, and presidential kill lists.
Many politicians supporting a militaristic foreign policy are more concerned with spreading largesse to the military-industrial complex than with spreading democracy. This is why some supposed free-market conservatives sound like Paul Krugman on steroids when discussing the economic benefits of military spending. Similarly, some anti-war progressives will support large military budgets if some of the money is spent in their states or congressional districts.
Mass surveillance and limits on personal freedom are additional hallmarks of fascist regimes. While there is a movement to “reform” the police state, few want to abolish mass surveillance, civil asset forfeiture, police militarization, and other police-state policies adopted in the name of the wars on terror and drugs. The federal government has even used force to stop people from selling raw milk! Attempts by progressives to silence political opponents are more examples of how many supposedly anti-fascist Americans are embracing fascist policies.
The growth of the welfare-warfare state has been accompanied by an increase in presidential power. This centralization of power, and the support it receives from the political class, is one more indication of the fascistic nature of our current regime. Of course, many in Congress will fight to rein in the executive branch, as long as the occupant of the White House is of the opposing party. Even the fiercest opponents of excessive presidential power instantaneously become lap dogs when their party wins the White House.
For all their alleged anti-fascism, today’s neoconned conservatives and progressives both support the use of force to reshape society and the world. This is the defining characteristic not just of fascists, but also of authoritarians. The true anti-fascists are those who reject the initiation of force. The true path to real free markets, peace, and individual liberty starts with rejecting the bipartisan authoritarianism in favor of the non-aggression principle.
The real friends of peace in the US Congress are sadly few and far between, but North Carolina Republican Walter Jones, Jr. is definitely one of them. The neocons threw everything they could at him by way of a primary challenger, but he won with a huge margin. Find out what he is doing about the "28 Pages" and Obama's endless wars in the Middle East in this Liberty Report interview with Rep. Jones.
So-called "Democratic Socialism" is really the old and tired ideas of Socialism, with a different wrapper. Ron Paul takes apart a few of its many myths, as well as the other discredited set of ideas known as Keynesianism. Enjoy today's Myth-Busters!