Eight simple truths you need to know about 2012

 

 

by Simon Black

Date: January 3, 2012
Coyhaique, Northern Patagonia

Yesterday we discussed certain events that, in my view, are nearly mathematical certainties. Things like a restructuring of public pensions and Social Security in Europe and the US. Western governments blocking Internet and mobile networks. War. The US government being forced to issue debt in a foreign currency.

All of these events are underpinned by a simple premise:

1) Public and private debts included, most western nations are insolvent. Big time.

2) History shows that economic growth in such an environment is nearly impossible when such a large percentage of GDP must be allocated solely to interest. Most countries in this position either default or [hyper]inflate. Both have catastrophic consequences.

3) Continued political and monetary intervention in the economy is counterproductive. From ‘Cash for Clunkers’ to negative real interest rates, such intervention only serves to make the problems, and their impacts, much worse.

4) The combined ingredients of sovereign insolvency; a global financial system based on worthless paper currency; and consumptive, import-oriented, public entitlement economies have created conditions for an epic, long-term economic depression.

5) Deteriorating economic conditions drive social unrest. [In fact, there's a great paper by two European economists which defines an explicit correlation between government budget cuts and things like rising crime rates, riots, and even attempted revolution.]

6) Faced with a marauding population that threatens their own survival, governments will stop at nothing to maintain the status quo: their power, our expense. Again, history shows that police states, boogeyman enemies, a total loss of privacy, capital controls, higher taxes, etc. will all become the norm.

7) None of these delay tactics can prevent human and financial capital from eventually migrating to where they are treated best. This will ultimately force a complete system reset by starving the beast.

8) This is not the first time this has happened, and it won’t be the last. This time is NOT different. Our modern society is not a unique and special snowflake that can ward off the consequences that have plagued empires for millennia.

Everything from the way I invest to how I allocate my time and plan for the future is based on this view. It’s why I’m in Chile, why we purchased a 1,000+ acre farm, and why we plan on sharing it with like-minded people.

I may be a bit early, but I’d much rather be early than thinking through these implications while I’m packing my bags. After all, things can ‘feel’ quite normal for a long time. Changes take place gradually, then faster and faster, until the decay looks like an upside-down hockey stick.

The Roman Empire, for example, began its spectacular decline shortly after Augustus became de facto emperor in 27 BC. He was followed by a long series of dismal failures– Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, etc. But Rome muddled along for hundreds of years, wavering between growth and decay.

The changes were gradual. A little currency debasement here, a bit of excess spending there, and throw in plenty of assassinations and foreign wars for good measure.  Along the way, though, thinking people could see the writing on the wall… and many of Rome’s citizens set sail for greener pastures.

The gradual changes became more and more pronounced… and the more pronounced, the more people left. As Gibbon recounts in his seminal work, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, the city of Rome lost nearly 75% of its population in the Empire’s final 50-years in the 5th century.

History is full of other examples of once proud nations that, facing problems for decades (or even centuries), completely unwound in a matter of years. The Ottoman Empire. The Ming Dynasty. Feudal France. The Soviet Union.

Bottom line, when the real change comes, it comes very, very quickly.

Think about the pace of change these days. It’s quickening. Europe is a great case study for this– when concerns about Greece first surfaced, European leaders were able to contain the damage. There was disquiet, but it soon dissipated.

Fast forward to today. We can hardly go a single day without a major, market-rocking headline. And European politicians’ attempts to assuage the damage have a useful half life that can be measured in days… sometimes hours now.

Like the Ottomans, the Soviets, the Romans before them, Western civilization is entering the phase where its rate of decline will start looking like that upside-down hockey stick.

There is no crystal ball that can tell us exactly how/when it will all go down. It stands to reason that certain events (perhaps this year’s Presidential elections in the US, Russia, France, etc.) will be pivotal in the decline, but suffice it to say that time is not on our side given the pace of change.

Each of us has a finite amount of resources– time, energy, capital, etc. And I really want to encourage you to think clearly and deliberately about how you allocate those resources… e.g. you’re better off buying an ounce of gold than making a political campaign contribution.

2011 was a challenging year. 2012 will likely prove even more. But this isn’t anything to dread. It’s is an incredibly exciting time to be alive– change should be embraced, not feared.

Empires always run their course. Bubbles burst. But creative, thinking human beings always survive and thrive.

http://www.sovereignman.com/expat/eight-simple-truths-you-need-to-know-about-2012/

Never Surrender–A Resolution for 2012 And Beyond, by C.R.W.

SurvivalBlog.com

January 1, 2012 5:00 AM

“”Never give in, never give in, never; never; never; never – in nothing, great or small, large or petty – never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense”……..Winston Churchill, Oct 29, 1941

I do not know the author of the following article but he has a point. Surrender is not an option and this article make a good case for that position.

The Phases of Surrender
The first phase of surrender is failing to be armed, trained and committed to fight. We are prepared to surrender when we are unprepared to resist.

The second phase of surrender is failing to be alert. You must see trouble coming in order to have time to respond. The warning may be less than one second but it will be there and it must be recognized and acted upon immediately.

The Third phase of surrender is giving up your weapons.

The last phase of surrender is up to the monsters who have taken control of your life and perhaps the lives of your loved ones. The last phase of surrender is out of your hands.

Surrender during war
During the American Revolution 12,000 Colonists captured by the British died in captivity on prison ships, while only 8,000 died in battle. Had the 12,000 who surrendered continued to fight many would have survived and they could have done great damage to the British and likely shortened the war.

Civil War prisoners were treated so badly that some 50,000 died in captivity. More Americans have been killed by Americans than by any foreign army in any war. Six hundred eighteen thousand (618,000) Americans died in the Civil War.

As many as 18,000 captured American and Filipino prisoners died or were murdered at the hands of the Japanese during the six days of the “Bataan Death March.” Had most of these soldiers slipped into the jungle and fought as guerrillas they could have tied up elements of the Japanese Army for months or years and perhaps more of them would have survived the war.

Of the Americans who actually reached Japanese prison camps during the war, nearly 50,000 died in captivity. That is more than 10 percent of all the American military deaths in the entire war in both the Pacific and European theaters combined.

In addition to the 50,000 captured Americans who died in Japanese prison camps an additional 20,000 were murdered before reaching a prison camp. If those 70,000 Americans had continued to fight, they could have provided time for the United States to build and maneuver its forces, perhaps shortening the war and saving even more lives. Some of them would have likely survived the war. If they had all died in battle their fate would have been no worse.

During the early stages of the Battle of the Bulge American soldiers were massacred by the German troops who captured them.

During the Vietnam conflict many American Prisoners Of War were tortured daily for years by the Communist North Vietnamese. Many Americans died during the process. Only Officers (Aviators) held in North Vietnam were ever repatriated. Enlisted Americans captured in South Viet Nam were routinely tortured, mutilated and murdered by the Communists. As a combat soldier and knowing my fate should I be captured, I was committed to fighting to the death. I made specific plans to force the enemy to kill me rather than allow myself to be captured.

In recent years, American troops captured by Islamic terrorists groups have virtually all been tortured and murdered in gruesome fashion. If I were fighting in the Middle East, I would make a similar vow and plan to fight to the death. Under no circumstances would I allow myself to be captured by our Islamic enemies.

Death by Government
R.J. Rummel, who wrote the book, “Death by Government” states that prior to the 20th Century; 170 million civilians were murdered by their own governments. Historians tell us that during the 20th Century perhaps as many as 200 million civilians were murdered by their own governments.

Some of the Nations where the mass murder of civilians occurred during the 20th Century include Russia, Ukraine, Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, The Congo, Uganda, Armenia, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Nigeria, Laos, China, Cuba, Manchuria, Iraq, Iran, Biafra, Rwanda and many others. The slaughter of civilians by governments appears to be as common as not.

Most of these slaughters were only made possible by disarming the victims before killing them. Had these people resisted, their fate would have been no worse and perhaps better. Resistance is much more difficult after the government has already taken the means of resistance away from the people. Planned genocide has been the primary reason for weapon confiscation throughout history.

Jews and others who surrendered to the Nazis were murdered in slave labor camps by the millions. Had all the Jews in Europe resisted when the Nazis started rounding them up they could have made the Nazis pay an enormous price for the holocaust. The fact that Hitler confiscated guns in 1936 made resistance far less feasible.

Had the Jews in Germany resisted, the outcome may have been the same but the world would have learned about the holocaust years earlier and may have intervened. Most people would prefer to die fighting and trying to kill their oppressor, than be taken off to a death camp and starved to death or murdered in a gas chamber.

William Ayers, former leader of the Terrorist organization The Weather Underground, and close friend of Barack Obama, told his followers in the Weather Underground, “When we (Communist Revolutionaries) take over the United States, we will have to kill 25 million Americans.” He was referring to those who would never submit to a Communist takeover. Those who would refuse to deny and reject the Constitution would have to be murdered. If this sounds impossible, remember that Genocide by Government was the leading cause of death in the last Century.

Surrendering to Criminals
The Onion Field Murder in California was a wake up call to Law Enforcement Officers everywhere. On March 9, 1963, two Los Angeles Police Department officers were taken prisoner by two criminals. The Officers submitted to capture and gave up their weapons.
They were driven to an onion field outside of Bakersfield.

One Officer was murdered while the other Officer managed to escape in a hail of gunfire. The surviving Officer suffered serious psychological case, having been unable to save his partner. As a result of this incident, the LAPD policy became, “You will fight no matter how bad things are.” “You will never ever surrender your weapons or yourself to a criminal.”

Consider the Ogden, Utah record store murders. Read the book if you do not know the story. The manner in which the criminals murdered their young victims cannot be described here. Resistance might have been futile. Compliance was definitely and absolutely futile.

The courts in this country have ruled that the police have no legal obligation to protect anyone. Why do Law Enforcement Officials always tell civilians not to resist a criminal, while they tell their Officers to always resist and never surrender? Police administrators fear being sued by a civilian victim who gets hurt resisting. Furthermore, the police, like all government agencies derive their power by fostering dependence.

According to Professor John Lott’s study on the relationship between guns and crime, a victim who resists with a firearm is less likely to be hurt or killed than a victim who cooperates with his attacker. His book is titled “More Guns, Less Crime.”

The Doctor and his family in Connecticut complied and cooperated, meeting every demand of the home invasion robbers to whom they had surrendered. The Doctors wife and daughters were tortured, raped, doused with gasoline and burned alive. How did surrender and cooperation work out for them?

In another home invasion robbery, a kindly couple with 9 “adopted, special needs children,” surrendered to the robbers. The victims opened their safe and did not resist in any way. When the robbers where finished ransacking the home and terrifying the children, they shot both parents in the head several times before leaving. How did surrender and complete cooperation work out for them?

Handing over your life by surrendering to someone who is in the process of committing a violent crime against you is a form of suicide. Some survive but many do not. The monster gets to decide for you.

We have heard brutalized victims say, “The robber said that he would not hurt us if we cooperated.” Why would you believe anything that someone who is committing a crime against you says? He will be lying if he speaks. As we say in law enforcement, “If a criminal’s lips are moving while he is speaking, he is lying.” Criminals by definition are dishonest and should never be trusted or believed.

You have no doubt heard friends say, I would not resist a criminal, after all why would he kill me? This is stupid and naive. In law enforcement, we call these people “Victims by Choice” (VBC). There could be a long list of reasons why a criminal would kill you despite your cooperation.

You may be of a different race, thus a different tribe. Only members of his tribe are actually human in his mind. He may feel hatred toward you because you have more than he does. Gratification from being in a position of total power is reason enough for some.

Criminals are sometimes members of a Satanic Cult who worship death such as the “Night Stalker” in California. Eliminating a potential witness is often cited as a reason to kill a victim. Sometimes criminals simply enjoy causing suffering and death. There are people who are in fact, pure evil. I have heard criminals say, “I killed her just to watch her die.”

A victim who begs for mercy can give his attacker a tremendous feeling of power which many criminals seem to enjoy. You cannot expect mercy from someone who does not know what mercy is.

Resist!
We each have a duty to ourselves, our loved ones, our neighbors, our community, our city, our state and our country to resist criminals. Reasoning with a thug who believes that his failures are because of people just like you is not likely to be helpful. Pleading with a terrorist who has been taught from birth that his salvation depends on murdering people like you is a doomed plan. Resist!

Resist! His gun may not be real. After you are tied up it will not matter. His gun may not be loaded. After you are tied up it will not matter. He may not know how to operate his gun. After you are tied up it will not matter. Resist!

Statistically if you run and your assailant shoots at you he will miss. Statistically if you run and he shoots and hits you, you will not die. Bad guys shooting at the police miss 90 percent of the time. The odds are on your side. Better to die fighting in place than to be tied up, doused with gasoline and burned alive. There are things worse than death. Surrender to a criminal or a terrorist and you will learn what they are. Resist!

If you resist with a commitment to win you may well prevail, especially if you are armed and trained. If you lose it is still better to die fighting in place than to be taken prisoner and have your head cut off with a dull knife while your screams gurgle through your own blood as we have witnessed on numerous videos from the Middle East, brought to us by the “Islamic practitioners of peace.”
Some who have refused to surrender.

History is filled with brave people who refused to surrender. Some of these men and woman have won their battles despite what seemed to be insurmountable odds. Others have gone down fighting and avoided being tortured to death. Some fought to the death to help or save others. Many have fought to the death for an idea or a belief.

When General Santa Ana (also the President of Mexico at the time) ordered 180 “Texacans” to surrender the Alamo, Col. Travis answered with “a cannon shot and a rebel yell.” Eventually General Santa Ana was able to build his troop strength to ten thousand. The Mexicans then swarmed the defenders and killed them all.

The battle of the Alamo delayed the Mexican Army long enough for Sam Houston to build his Texacan Army, which met and defeated the Mexican Army and captured General Santa Ana. General Santa Ana traded Texas for his life and the sacrifices of the Alamo defenders changed history.

Frank Luke was a heroic aviator in WWI. Shot down and wounded he refused to surrender when confronted by a German patrol. He killed 4 German soldiers with his 1911 Pistol before being killed. Luke was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.

When his unit was pinned down by German Machine Guns and all of the Officers and non commissioned officers in his company were killed or wounded, Alvin York never considered surrendering. Instead, he attacked hundreds of German soldiers killing about 25 with his rifle and pistol and then captured 132 others by himself!

Most of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto (Poland) surrendered to the German Army. They were taken off to death camps and murdered. Between 400 and 1,000 Jews refused to surrender and armed with only a few pistols, revolvers and rifles, they held off the German Army for three months before dying in battle.

During the “Battle of the Bulge,” the 101st Airborne was surrounded by the German Army and ordered to surrender. Faced with overwhelming odds, the Commanding Officer of the 101st sent this reply to the Germans. “Nuts.” The Americans refused to surrender and they stopped the German advance. Most of the Americans troops survived.

On Sept 2, 2010, 40 armed criminals took over and robbed a train in India. Some of the robbers had guns, others used knives and clubs. When they began to disrobe an 18 year old girl for the purpose of gang raping her, one of the passengers decided to fight. He was a 35 year old retired Gurkha soldier. He drew his Khukasri knife and attacked the 40 robbers. He killed three of the robbers and wounded 8 more despite his being wounded in this 20 minute fight. The remaining criminals fled for their lives leaving their stolen loot and eleven comrades dead or wounded on the floor of the train. The eight wounded robbers were arrested.

How does one man defeat 40? How does he summon the courage to fight such odds? He utilized all of the Principles of Personal Defense: Alertness, Decisiveness, Aggressiveness, Speed, Coolness, Ruthlessness, and Surprise. He was skilled in the use of his weapon. Most importantly, He refused to be a victim and allow evil to triumph!

If this one inspirational soldier can defeat 40 opponents using his knife, it would seem that we should all be able to defeat a group of armed criminals by using our firearms if we are professionally trained as was this heroic Gurkha soldier.

Final thoughts
How will you respond if you are confronted by evil as some of us have been in the past and some of us will be in the future? If you have not decided ahead of time what you will do, you will likely do nothing. Those who fight back often win and survive. Those who surrender never win and often die a horrible death. Have you made your decision? Remember, no decision is a decision to do nothing.

PROOF Rigged Election – Watch the Vote 2012 – Iowa Caucus

Oath Keepers Launches National Effort to Recall and/or Remove Members of Congress Who Voted for NDAA Military Detention. Merry Christmas, U.S. Congress!

“There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights.”- Marine General Smedley Butler.

Oath Keepers has launched a national effort to recall (or remove by any other lawful means) all of the oath breaking members of Congress, in both the House and Senate, who voted for the National Defense Appropriations Act of 2012 (NDAA), which contains provisions that authorize indefinite military detention and trial by military commission of “any person” – including U.S. citizens and lawful residents – upon the mere say-so of the President or one of his subordinates in the Executive Branch, such as within the Department of Defense or CIA.

Number three on the Oath Keepers list of Orders We Will Not Obey states:

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.

That is near the top of our list for very good reason – this claimed power will kill our Bill of Rights unless it is stopped.  To be blunt, we consider the NDAA of 2012 to be a declaration of war on the American people, and an act of treason.   But even if you disagree with that view, and merely consider those who voted for it to be oath breakers, please work hard to remove them all from office.  Oath Keepers members across the nation will lead or assist efforts in their states to remove any member of Congress, regardless of party, who voted for this monstrosity.

We encourage all Americans of whatever political party to set aside their differences and come together in defense of our Bill of Rights by rooting out this den of vipers in Washington D.C. who are either knowingly killing our Bill of Rights, were too concerned with their careers to take a principled stand by voting against the NDAA, or are useful idiots who don’t understand what they swore an oath to defend.  Whatever their excuse, they have violated their oaths to defend the Constitution and must be sent packing.  This is not about politics.  This is about defending the Constitution.  As Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes put it:

These politicians from both parties betrayed our trust, and violated the oath they took to defend the Constitution.  It’s not about the left or right, it’s about our Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, there is no America.  It is the Crown Jewel of our Constitution, and the high-water mark of Western Civilization.

 

As two time Medal of Honor winner Marine General Smedley Butler once said “There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights.”   Time to fight.

This is a bi-partisan assault on the Bill of Rights that will require a bi-partisan defense.  We the People must adopt a scorched-earth policy against all who voted for the NDAA of 2012, regardless of party, using any and all lawful means available to remove them from office.  If you can remove them by means of recall, then do so.  If that option is not available in your state, consider working to make it an option in your state.  If attempts to recall are stopped by the courts, then root the oath breakers out in the next primary of whatever party they are in, making this issue the litmus test and supporting a challenger who will pledge to repeal this dangerous law.   Make this desecration of our Bill of Rights campaign issue number one.

 

And if you don’t manage to root them out in the primary, then defeat them in the general election, again supporting a challenger who pledges to repeal the detention provisions of the NDAA.   Use whatever lawful means or combination of strategies available to get the job done.   And even when any particular method “fails,” it still succeeds in keeping the focus on this act of betrayal, and it serves to educate the American people, waking them up to the ongoing bipartisan assault on our Bill of Rights.  Even if we lose a battle we can still win the war.

 

We must keep this issue in the public eye, and keep the pressure on.  Just as Jefferson and Madison were successful in rallying opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, which clearly violated the Constitution, and used that opposition to sweep the Federalists from Congress in what was known as “the revolution of 1800,” we must rally opposition to this clearly unconstitutional act and use it to sweep all of the Bill of Rights killing career politicians, of both major parties, out of Congress.   Clean them all out!
Continue reading and comment at Oath Keepers: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2011/12/25/oath-keepers-launches-national-effort-to-recall-andor-remove-members-of-congress-who-voted-for-ndaa-military-detention-merry-christmas-u-s-congress/

Adherence to the Oath (Veterans for Ron Paul)

Congressmen’s incomes triple while America gets poorer

RT

Published: 27 December, 2011, 21:11

The US Capitol (AFP Photo / Karen BLEIER)

 

 

If you feel like Congress fat cats can’t relate to their fellow Americans anymore, the truth behind the matter might just be that they can’t.

While Americans have seen a recession ravage savings accounts, lawmakers on Capitol Hill have only gotten richer.

Between the US Senate and House of Representatives, the median net worth for a member of Congress is around $913,000, reports The New York Times. That man in the middle is Ed Pastor (Dem-AZ), and although he makes a pretty penny nowadays, his income today is gigantic when gauged with what he was worth when he first came to Washington. Twenty years earlier, Pastor pulled in enough to have only $100,000 saved up, a figure he has magnified nearly tenfold in the two decades since.

Comparing the mean in 2009 with the mean for lawmakers’ assets in 1984, the figure has tripled.

Off of the Hill, however, others aren’t so lucky. Taking into account all of America, the median net worth today is roughly $100,000 — what Congressman Pastor pulled in 20 years earlier. And while lawmakers have seen their wallets only fatted in recent times, the incomes of average Americans have dwindled as a recession and depression downturned the American economy.

Somehow, those effects managed to largely miss Washington.

While the US Census Bureau reports half of America as either impoverished or otherwise living in low-income conditions, 250 members of Congress — nearly half of the Hill — can say that they are legit millionaires. In Washington DC, one-in-ten residents live below half of the poverty line — but if you can track down Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) in his Capitol Hill chamber, you might be able to borrow a few bucks from the richest man in Congress — who holds onto $294.21 million in assets.

Rep. McCaul wasn’t always as lucky. Back in 2005, his worth was only at around $12 million. But with dozens of lawmakers worth more than just one or two millions, those that they represent think that perhaps their vote isn’t being cast by a voice that really represents the people.

“There’s always a concern that they can’t truly understand or relate to the hardships that their constituents feel — that rich people just don’t get it,” Representative Laura Richardson tells The New York Times. While Rep. Richardson might have an office on Capitol Hill, the Democrat from California is also in debt to the tune of $464,000. She is among the poorest members of Congress, but that group isn’t exactly a big one. Regardless, with 200-plus lawmakers pulling in the multi-millions, it’s easy to see why the so-called 99 percenters feel poorly represented in America today.

The National Defense Authorization Act that recently cleared Congress has become a hot topic for debate among average Americans who fear the provisions in the bill that will allow for the US to detain and torture citizens indefinitely. Despite petitions and pleas from coast-to-coast, the legislation passed overwhelmingly. As it turns out, many politicians may be representatives of the people, but their voices are ones bought by corporations. Senator Robert Portman (R-Ohio) not only voted in favor of the NDAA, he also received $272,853 from the special interest groups that backed the bill.

For others, incomes are subsidized in other ways. Rep. Pastor from Arizona, his income is also subsidized by Social Security. If that makes you angry tough, don’t worry — you’re not alone. A study conducted by CBS News in conjunction with The New York Times this October revealed that Americas’ job approval rating of Congress was at an all time low. A similar poll this summer courtesy of the Washington Post revealed that Americans were more into human cloning than Congress, too.

Invasion USA

Citizens to be Declared Enemy Under FEMA’s (COG) Plan: Infowars Nightly News

The Chosen Criminal Elite

‘This Is WAR’ — Congressional Black Caucus Travels US Cities Using Violent Rhetoric: Declares ‘War’ on Racist Tea Party, Says Tea Party Wants to Lynch Blacks, Calls for Bank Runs, Civil Unrest in Their Neighborhoods and Homes

<object style=”height: 390px; width: 640px”><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/tG8x6X8xn3c?version=3″><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”><param name=”allowScriptAccess” value=”always”></object>

Newt Gingrich Is No Libertarian

by Murray N. Rothbard

This originally appeared in the Washington Post, December 30, 1994.

E. J. Dionne is wrong in identifying the Republican elites, in particular the Gingrich faction, with the libertarian revolution (op-ed, Dec. 6) . The truth is that since we have been stuck with a two-party system, any electoral revolution against big government had to be expressed through a Republican victory. So it is certainly true that Newt Gingrich and his faction, as well as Robert Dole, have ridden to power on the libertarian wave.

But to speak, as Mr. Dionne does, of “the rise of libertarians as a key party constituency and the centrality of libertarian ideas to many of the party’s new leaders” is going a bit too far.

As Ralph Nader – no libertarian – pointed out, it took less than a month for Gingrich, Rep. Dick Armey and the others to betray the new revolution by collaborating with President Clinton and a discredited Congress to push through the World Trade Organization, which institutionalizes government management of world trade, complete with punitive sanctions and fines.

Anti-interventionism (smeared as “isolationism”) is at the heart of the Old Right, as Dionne mentions, and it is also the source of the libertarian split from the conservative mainstream during the Cold War. Yet, now that the Soviet Union and the Cold War are happily dead and gone, the Republican and Democratic elites continue in lockstep to favor pushing other countries around for their own alleged good, while imposing vast burdens on the American taxpayer. Gingrich and Dole, in fact, criticize Mr. Clinton’s foreign policy for not being interventionist enough.

What could be a clearer example of the rift between the Gingrich-Dole-Armey Republican elites and the mass of the American public? The American people couldn’t care less about Bosnia or Somalia or Haiti; they resist government-made multinational trade cartels, and they oppose foreign aid. Yet the Republican “conservatives” are at least as enthusiastic as Democratic liberals about these programs.

The same is true on the domestic front. The libertarian Old Right was born in opposition to Franklin D. Roosevelt and his New Deal. Yet Gingrich has repeatedly emphasized his devotion to FDR (“the greatest figure of the 20th century”), to his statist political program (“the truth is we would have voted for much of it”), and to his legacy (“He did bring us out of the Depression”). Accepting as truth the most damaging anti-capitalist cliche of the century, Gingrich reveals his ignorance of history as well as of economics.

Gingrich’s support of the libertarian revolution is, so far, only lip service. His concrete proposals would likely expand the welfare state’s burden on the taxpayers, for example, by forcing states to create and operate a vast array of government orphanages and group homes. Instead of being rearranged, spending should be slashed and the money returned to its original owners.

The Gingrichians had petty reservations about the Clinton crime bill, but they enthusiastically supported the dangerous nationalization of crime-fighting functions, which, according to both libertarian precepts and the Constitution, are supposed to dwell exclusively in the states and local communities. And we should never forget that Gingrich advocated a compromise with the president on health care.

Indeed, if a Democrat had delivered Newt Gingrich’s acceptance speech, calling on the nation to “reach out together as a family” and promising to right every social wrong, Republicans would have ridiculed him as another Mario Cuomo. But call social engineering the “opportunity society” and it becomes “futurism.”

Dick Armey, who in his early years in Congress was indeed, as Dionne says, influenced by the libertarian Ludwig von Mises, has also succumbed. In addition to his vote for the WTO, Mr. Armey has emphasized his strong support for the “untouchable” Social Security.

Social Security, now the largest government program, was also the biggest single tragedy of the New Deal. It plunders income and savings, wastes them in government spending, and then taxes people again to pay for the “insurance” benefits. No libertarian could pronounce this bankrupt and disastrous racket to be sacrosanct.

As Dionne would be the first to understand, though, none of this means the prognosis is hopeless. The Republican sweep has brought to Washington a number of libertarian-minded backbenchers. They will pressure the Republican elites from the libertarian right, reflecting both passionately held ideology and the libertarian mood of the people who elected them.

Murray N. Rothbard (1926–1995) was dean of the Austrian School, founder of modern libertarianism, and chief academic officer of the Mises Institute. He was also editor – with Lew Rockwell – of The Rothbard-Rockwell Report, and appointed Lew as his literary executor. See his books.

Copyright © 1994 Washington Post

Government Turning Bugs into Spies

No War for Israel in Syria and Iran !

Golden State – Bombs (The Ron Paul Song)