Kicking the Hornet's Nest

Conspiracy is fun.  Perhaps it's my conservative roots, perhaps it's just a natural reaction to a good ghost story.  And like a good ghost story, here's one you haven't heard yet:

In December of 2012, while we were all waiting for the end of the world, the Republican Party was in complete shambles.  Yes, they continued to control the US Congress, but they were divided and beaten.  It appeared that, perhaps, the beast of Austerity was finally slain, and America could breathe a sigh of relief.

Of course, that's not the situation now, just 3 months later.  For some unknown reason, the Democrats in the US Senate chose to pursue a list of social policies, including gun control, rather than issues that could have driven the Republicans into the ground, like Social Security, the Post Office, bank regulation, and ending the Bush tax cuts.

And instead of swinging America back to a moderate position, we now see conservatism even stronger than ever.  Instead of marginalizing the right-wing radicals, this latest string of Democratic initiatives has energized and empowered them.

Obama is caving on every single economic issue, he's championing our radical foreign policy, and he has fully left progressives in the dust.  These social issues are just an excuse to get everybody fighting again.  The Democratic Senate continues to issue bills that they know won't pass the House, but that don't challenge the grassroots support that the Republican House still retains.

And Austerity continues.

So, is this a conspiracy?  Reasonable people will weigh in on every issue that's put before them.  But who puts these issues before us?  Have you noticed that for the past 3 months, all that MSNBC wants to talk about is guns and gay rights?  I mean, sure, we all have opinions on that, and reason should prevail.  But is THAT the issue facing America that should be unifying us?

If you want to get rid of a hornet's nest, you don't go up to it and smack it with a stick first.  That's just stupid.  So either the secret masters behind this battle plan are stupid, or they're diabolical.

Help me uncover this grand conspiracy, this great betrayal.  There's no need to attack Social Security and Medicare, no reason to kill the Post Office, no reason to starve America into submission.  And there's no reason to empower your enemies with pokes and prods when such core issues are at stake.

Liberty, Democracy, and the Political Center

This blog began three years ago as part of a US Congressional race.  Recently, I created a YouTube video that caps off my activities in the Libertarian Party and explains why I can no longer support that organization any longer.  Please give it a watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STzf4EuDHog

Transcript:

I served for 30 years as an active member of the Libertarian Party,
and then another 3 years trying to re-brand the Pennsylvania chapter as a moderate, common sense and full-fledged political party.

Here in Pennsylvania, we soon limited the radicals by a new, simplified platform,
one that respected their extreme ideology but that would also accomodate
other moderate views... and therefore many more people.

Unfortunately, the radicals saw it as Heresy, and nothing was achieved in 2 years due to in-fighting and hack politics.

My only choice was to either surrender the party,
      or to stop negotiating and expel the radicals from the party altogether.
I chose to leave.

So, while I'm at the end of the story, let's move on to the beginning.

I joined Libertarian Party through the Clark Campaign in late 1979

I served as State Chair of the Delaware LP 81-85

And I ran for National Chair at the 1985 Phoenix Convention (where I carried 2 states)

In '89, I moved to western Pennsylvania to raise a family
 and served 4-years as an elected School Board Director

I rejoined the LP of Pennsylvania in 2009 where I came to serve as Secretary for a year, and managed to rally overwhelming support for a new, simplified and reasonable platform, only 10 statements long.

I also ran for US Congress in 2010 and received over 3% of the popular vote.

However, my platform wasn't the normal Libertarian Party BS you see today: 

I advocated single-payer medical insurance, which I justified from a libertarian perspective.

My motto was, "We don't need less government, we need better government"

And built my public statements on the assumption
   that Liberty and Democracy are NOT opposing ideas.


After the race, I started calling myself a "Progressive Libertarian".

I spent 3 years total in the LPPA trying to make it an inclusive, broad-based political party

However, the national Party is under complete policy control rooted in Austrian Economics and Ancap fundamentalism.

I'm done fighting with them.  They'll retake the state party this April and the LP of Pennsylvania will once again be just a right-wing populist group on the fringe of conservatism.

Good news is that I've come out of this experience with a new position, what I call Radical Centralism.

I recognize that, historically, the point of any economic policy is to secure wealth.

That's how it has always been.  Any progress for humanity is ultimately a balance with its conservative roots, between Property and the People.

And that is why the political Center the most volitile position in politics, because that's where change is actually made.

And this is also why Right-Wing Populism, which is what Murray Rothbard advocated, is such a dangerous phenomena in the US today.

They are educating a new Corp of youth and veterans,
 all under councils of Old Guard Conservatives

The trolls you find that spout off about NAP and "voluntaryism" are simply leaders-in-training.

Now, I'm not saying that they are Fascists.  I'm not.  I'm saying that fascists are like Them.

People wrapped up in this Anarcho-Capitalist, Austrian School bullshit need to check themselves.

If you truly believe in the principle of Liberty, it's time you embraced the principle of Democracy as well.

This is America.  For all its faults, the US stood against the monarchies of Europe, from the Congress of Vienna to the end of the Habsburg Empire.  The Austrian School was born under the Habsburgs and continues the tradition to this day.

Anarcho-Capitalism is a very radical view, a belief in the privatization of everything and an end to all democracy.

The Libertarian principles of "individual sovereignty" and "self-ownership", as if people can be owned at all, needs to be questioned.

I'm not calling them feudalists, but that feudalists are like Them.

These "new intellectuals", as Ayn Rand called them, all talk the same, all argue the same way.

They're being trained that way.  They're everywhere.  And frankly, it's exhausting.

Government is not the problem.  Corruption is the problem, and we need to correct it.

I believe that government should Serve== to protect the People and secure their rights.

I think that rights in property should be respected, but that citizen rights must also be respected.

And in referencing the US Constitution, Article 1 Section 8, the phrases "common defense" and "general welfare" should carry equal weight.

Anyway, that's how I see things now.  If you'd like to discuss anything, post your comments and we'll chat.

Thanks for watching.

Liberty, Democracy, & Monetary Reform 2

A new video I posted:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdc6Gbvx9tE

Arguing for a progressive view on monetary reform.  Links to 7 documentaries in the description box.

Less than 9 minutes long.  I hope you enjoy it.

Voting is a Right

Incredible--- that this actually has to be explained.

Voting is a Right.  It is your right as a citizen of the United States, just like any other civil right.  The monarchist, or anarchist, who says you don’t have a right but a “privilege” to vote, is simply wrong.   If anything, rights are the opposite of privilege.  This should be obvious.

There are two guiding principles of American government.  First is the principle of Liberty-- the belief that people have the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

The second is the principle of Democracy—the belief that sovereignty should be shared equally by all citizens.  It is the “Consent of the Governed” mentioned in the preamble of the Declaration of Independence.  Simply put, Liberty and Democracy are not opposing ideas; they are essential to each other.

And these two ideas have pretty much encompassed the world.  Most nations today enjoy a strong sense of freedom and democracy, and the average citizen enjoys a high standard of living.  We don’t want to lose this.

In many ways, we already have.  The corruption of the democratic process has been overtaking America for decades.  Money decides politics, and our democracy has been turned into some Orwellian game show.

Voter suppression through new Voter ID laws, draconian ballot access laws, secret and unlimited corporate finance, and outright fraud through electronic voting systems--- this is where we have come as a nation.  This is the direction we are going.

Now I’d be the first to advocate Open Primaries and public funding of elections, but that really isn’t going to happen is it?  Seriously, who would invest money in that idea?  A 20-dollar donation from 5000 people would be impressive, but that’s only a hundred grand.  Your US Congressman has millions.

And where the heck is the Democratic Party anyway?  Here in the 64^th State Representative district, they haven’t run a candidate for over a decade.  If that isn’t a clear sign of corruption, I don’t know what is.

You have the right to vote.  Not only is that right being assaulted, but the choices you have on the ballot are being manipulated horribly-- without any interest or regard to our civil liberties.  People should be upset about this.  Like my dad always said, “If you’re not fed up about something, you’re not paying attention.”

Your state representative has the power to introduce change.  It’s only one vote in the House, yes.  But it would be a voice of courage and not complicity.  Unfortunately, when big campaign donors are more important than voters, I imagine that decision isn’t quite so easy as it appears.

Your representative was complicit with the recent Voter ID laws pushed by Gov. Corbett.  Is that what we elected him to do?  Is the voice of our people also the voice of voter suppression?  Without the third-party candidate, there wouldn’t have been a choice at all!  Is this democracy?

And the Democratic Party in Venango is just as complicit-- For not running an opposition candidate, for not organizing their constituents, for not giving a rat’s petootee about the rights of the People, for not running a candidate in election, after election, after election.

It’s the same way with the Republican party down in Pittsburgh, I’m sure.  The terms “urban republican” and “rural democrat” rarely suggest any direct representation in their state government.

The result of our current circumstance is that your right to vote and to participate in the democratic process is almost non-existent.  All we have left is to go through the motions of voting, with blinders on to the corruption of it all.  It’s just sad that year after year, there’s really no choice on the ballot.

Any third-party competition has been virtually eliminated in Pennsylvania.  Unfair ballot access requirements, personal litigation, and outright stupidity have dominated our election laws for the past few decades. 

Yet registration levels in both R & D parties continues to decline as more and more people opt for independent or third party affiliation.  People are not stupid, and they’re not apathetic.  They count on their government to provide them with civil protection, infrastructure and social services, and their confidence in the R/D parties has been waning.

People don’t want to live under a totalitarian government.  If there is no opposition candidate, no public debate, if dumps of cash are the only means to election, then what does a vote actually represent?  Hope?  Please.

They’ve effectively turned our State Representative district into a Princedom, and our US Congressional district into a national Fiefdom.  Elected offices should not be open to the corruption of private investment.  Alas, free and fair elections are a thing of the past.

Notice I haven’t mentioned policy once so far.  This is because policy isn’t the core issue.  Policy aboard ship is irrelevant if the ship itself sinks or the captain goes mad.  A calm appeal to reason is essential to any debate.  It isn’t the results, but the process of government that confronts us today.

Frankly, somebody has to stop them.  The upper echelon of the Republican Party has gotten way out of hand.  The inmates have taken over the castle, and we need to take it back. We have to demand our right to vote and to participate in the electoral process.

More importantly, our Representatives need to demand our right to vote and participate.  Our elected representatives should demand free and fair elections.  The members of our state and national legislatures should represent the people, not the corruption of money.

This notion that government is implicitly “evil” is simply not true.  Democratic sovereignty is much more preferable to the alternatives.  Again, I find this incredible that in 2012 we still have to argue about this.

Look, I really like living here in Oil City.  I come home from work each day, sit on the back porch of my “humble abode”, and look over the Allegheny River valley.  It’s a great place to live, and I consider myself very fortunate.

My local government provides many services at a marginal cost.  The water supply here in Oil City is second to none.  We have cable internet, excellent trash pickup, the roads are relatively well maintained, and they run a bunch of cute public events during the year to bring everybody together.

Sure, we’re like every other small, dying city in western Pennsylvania burdened by debt and mild corruption.   But that isn’t what the people see day in and day out in our “pursuit of happiness”.   We’re just trying to live in peace.  So long as we remain guided by the principles of Liberty and Democracy, we’ll all be better off for it.

Pride of Nations - My Foreign Policy

I downloaded a new game last month on Steam... it's called "Pride of Nations" by Paradox Entertainment, a Swedish design group I've been following for years now.  I've played Europa Universalis III with a college professor and other friends, and also the Hearts of Iron series as a solo game... for hundreds of hours.

Interesting point about "gamers"... we don't talk politics.  Usually.  I mean, everyone is entitled to their opinions and their own pursuits, and I have to thank all my gamer friends who have tolerated my participation over the decades.  Like West Point graduates of the mid-1800's,, we know and respect each other.

These games are "epic scale", encompassing the entire Earth:  Europa Universalis begins in 1399 and proceeds as far as the early 1800s.  Hearts of Iron begins in 1936 and lasts until the end of an eventual World War Two.    If anyone wants to understand the expansion of "western civilization" over the world, these two games provide interesting models to consider.

But this latest game, Pride of Nations, just gave me the heebie-jeebies.  The game begins in 1850 and ends in 1920.  Think of that.  Just 70 years--  The "Victorian Age", the beginning of modern warfare.  The Age of Imperialism; the Age of Industrialism.  The Forge of the Modern Age.

I clicked on United States to begin a solo campaign-- and I just stared at it for a second, a minute, ten minutes... and I had to turn away.  Shut down!  NO WAY.  I can't deal with this.

The US begins the game barely "controlling" the eastern part of what we now call America.  The Spanish, the English, the Austrians.. you name it... and the "indigenous peoples" who would eventually be displaced and exterminated like so many Ukranians... I can't handle this "model".  It's too real.

But that's the fact of history.. the fact of reality, a fact of "Sovereignty".  Serously, what would YOUR foreign policy be in 1850 as the US player?

I have always, for over 30 years, been anti-war, anti-draft, anti-imperialism; yet I have always been drawn to games where the martial arts are involved.  The Art of War defines any claim to Sovereignty.  This has been true since the first campfires of civilization lit the night sky.

Those who seek Peace should prepare for War.  There is no alternative, no reasonable Excuse:  "Pandora will shit you out with zero warning."

And I quote Avatar here because, quite frankly it has been the most unquoted film of all time, in spite of it's epic success and acclaim.  When YOU seek to establish your personal "foreign policy", you really should resolve the issues presented in Avatar... from both perspectives.

I've tried, but I'm still thinking.

Is there a way to extend "sovereignty" without violating human rights?  I think there is.  But seriously, I'm looking for input here.  Please speak your mind in the comment section below.

Lincoln on OWS (Occupy Wall Street)

Below is from an email I received from the Alan Grayson campaign referring to a speech Lincoln gave to Congress just two years before the Gettysburg Address. I offer it here as an interesting, historical observation about Labor and Capital during the early years of the American Civil War. Of course, Lincoln was the first Republican president.

This is what President Lincoln said to Congress, to America, and to us:

"It is not needed, nor fitting here [in discussing the Civil War] that a general argument should be made in favor of popular institutions; but there is one point, with its connections, not so hackneyed as most others, to which I ask a brief attention. It is the effect to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor, in the structure of government.

“It is assumed that labor is available only in connection with capital; that nobody labors unless somebody else, owning capital, somehow by the use of it induces him to labor. This assumed, it is next considered whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers, and thus induce them to work by their own consent, or buy them, and drive them to it without their consent. Having proceeded thus far, it is naturally concluded that all laborers are either hired laborers or what we call slaves. And further, it is assumed that whoever is once a hired laborer is fixed in that condition for life.

“Now, there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed, nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false, and all inferences from them are groundless.

“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights."

Occupy Your Precinct

It may be possible to organize and change our federal government without corporate finance.  In fact, the only way to truly end the wholesale corruption of our US Legislature is to organize in spite of corporate money.  How can people do this?

There are over 500,000 registered voters in your US Congressional District.  These districts are broken down into "Precincts" where you, as a citizen, go to vote.  There are usually hundreds of precincts in each district.

100 active community leaders (i.e. anyone who wants to go outside and actually do something) located one-per precinct could generate:

• 3000 petition signatures in a single weekend (for ballot access or whatever)
• 10,000 fliers distributed to local neighborhoods in 3 hours
• 1000 yard signs distributed and maintained throughout the congressional district
• 500 supporting members, running local campaigns and helping out when they can
• 10,000 new registered voters in the district each year

Combine this model with another 100+ US Congressional Districts just like it, and you have a national movement capable of displacing the current power structure in America.

Seems simple enough?  Enter the question of "policy".  That's usually when everyone throws their hands up and goes home.  My view on policy is that it should outline the Social Contract--- bind the organization to a common trust, complete with a definition of rights and privileges of membership.  But that's me...

You, I, we each have the ability to occupy our own precincts.  Map your district, get a street list from the local county election board, and get voter registration effort started.  Combined with the efforts of others, the effect could be immense.

Ah, but how do you trust the others in the group?  How do you trust your very own candidate?  This needs to be resolved.  If it were up to me, I'd organize a national party at the Congressional District level, binding them to charters that guaranteed membership rights.  It is not up to me though.

It is up to you.  If you're willing to take responsibility for your precinct, and if 100 other people also take responsibility for theirs, and if those 100 precinct leaders formed a Congressional District committee, the people could stand up to financial control, win popular support and change their government.

As long as the policy doesn't suck :)