Sunday, March 4, 2007

Why You Should Never Believe any Aspiring,Unelected, or Elected Politician

Why You Should Never Believe any Aspiring,Unelected, or Elected Politician

To continue with the theme of the previous post, below is a link to an overlong but illuminating article [if you have the time/patience], exposing the naivete of those who seek so-called " limited government".

To cut a long story short, all he really needed to point out is the fact that all governments are criminal enterprises, funded as they are by direct theft [taxation] , and counterfeiting [so called monetizing of the governments debt via a government -run centralized banking system.

He does eventually make that point [governments are criminal], but then only really applies it to "The Myth of Checks and Balances", when it it has far broader implications which demolish not only the arguments of all "limited government" proponents [whether they call them selves libertarian, conservative or liberal], but also the world-changing aspirations of advocates of _every_ political party everywhere, and of _anyone_ who runs for office, regardless of whether we are talking about a Hillary Clinton, an Obama, a McCain, John Edwards or Ron Paul.

Here are my 3 easy to understand reasons:

Point [1] [The most important point]

As I previously stated, [and as he does] all governments are criminal enterprises, funded as they are, and it is impossible to change that core nature as long as they are funded in the manner they are. Once a criminal organization, always a criminal organization.

Point [2] [Regarding outsiders seeking to join government to produce change via their election etc.]

Fact: Anyone outside of government who joins it/gets elected, is becoming a part of a criminal organization whose only collective motive is to continue doing what it already does [ i.e. direct theft, counterfeiting]. They [the outsiders] or their party are not going to ever change that collective motive or even limit it to areas they and their supporters are in favor of it being limited to. [It should be fairly obvious that theft cannot be "legally" limited by the organization "legally" carrying out the theft in the first place!].

They [outsiders who join] will become absorbed/ assimilated by the criminal organization they have joined, and that organization will [must] continue its operations as before regardless. This is imperative for its survival ; theft is its highest priority, to be achieved BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. And what it cannot steal, it MUST counterfeit.

Incentives For Those Newly Joining

And don't forget ,the incentive to lie by those who wish to join/get elected is possibly even greater than for those already inside, simply because, up to a point, the bigger the lie, the more chance there is of getting elected, and then being on the free lunch gravy train of stolen/"legally" counterfeited "money".

Lesson: Believing the promises of those seeking to join governments "to change them/ make them work better", "change society" etc. is a mugs game, exceeded in naivete only by those who believe the promises of those already on the inside and "working" for that organization:

Point [3] [Regarding Insiders - i .e those already elected and benefitting from stolen money/counterfeiting].

My question : If a politician/bureaucrat/ employee [i.e. a member of a well established criminal organization] tells you/ promises you something, WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU BELIEVE HIM/HER? Are you in the habit of believing the word of other, non-governmental criminals?

Lesson: Anyone who believes the word of an established criminal or group of criminals is an even bigger mug that those who believe the word of those seeking to join said criminal organization to supposedly " make it work more efficiently", or for any other reason ["change society" etc. etc.], as described in point [2] above.

This [point[3]] is a point the author does not even get into. Instead he refuses to follow through on his observation that we are dealing with a criminal organization, run by necessarily habitual liars, which leads him to make the fatal error in logic at the end of his article of demanding that "aspiring nation builders" draft "constitutions predicated on a system that truly separates the powers – free market anarchism.", when in reality, his "free market anarchism" already exists in all of its glory, everywhere, [you just have to look for it- but really , its staring us all right in the face], and already existing without any so-called help from "aspiring nation builders" whatsoever, outside, indeed , _despite_ , and _because_ of, all of them.

Oh my. He just don't git it, do he? And I suspect, he's far from alone

Main article: "The Myth of Checks and Balances"