We’ll Be So Much Better Without Them

There are millions of people – a majority in many places – who believe in a liberty philosophy: That the golden rule is the right way for humans to interact, that centralization is a problem, that leaving markets alone is better than rigging them, and so on. But there is a problem: Rather than pushing forward into action, most of these well-intentioned people limp along in uncertainty.

There are many explanations for this, of course, but the root is probably a fear that rulers have some kind of magic. We fear that without them we’d crash and burn. After all, we’ve been trained in precisely that for a hundred generations. Rationally we know it isn’t true, but emotionally we’re not entirely convinced.

So today I’d like to make an important point: That we’ll be better off – massively better off – without them. The nagging fear that we’re missing something is simply false. The better we get away from rulership, the better off we’ll be.

The Numbers

I like crunching the numbers on these things because the failure of rulership is hidden in plain sight, little recognized. Digging into numbers the rulers themselves publish can help break through the blockage.

And so…

In the US, the social safety net costs at least 2.5 trillion dollars per year. If you add up the federal programs ($717 billion back in 2010 and more now), the state programs ($210 billion in 2010), Medicare and Social Security ($1.3 trillion) and perhaps a few smaller items, it comes to that.

Now, here’s what you should know: That annual spending equates to 7 million new houses, plus feeding 100 million families, plus providing health care for 100 million families. The second year we could build another 7 million houses as well as feeding and doctoring almost everyone in the country… again.

If you have a nagging feeling that these numbers can’t be right, please find them and run them for yourself, it’s not that hard to do and it’s likely to help you a great deal.

Now, let’s look at the “keep us safe” expenses.

The US military budget is $686 billion per year. The US intelligence budget is close to $80 billion (but probably more). So, we’ll call it $766 billion.

Given 247 million adults and 127 million households in the US, with $766 billion we could give each adult a .30-06 rifle with scope and gear, 1000 rounds of ammunition, training and a bulletproof vest. On top of that we can add a mortar launcher, a case of 12 shells, training, and a sighting scope for each family… the first year.

The second year we could provide a Stinger missile system to every 12th family. The third year we could give a tank and training to each grouping of 100,000 people. The fourth year, I don’t know… what else do we need?

Again, please run the numbers yourself. Maybe your numbers won’t agree with mine. I used more of a national average on house prices for example, which may be lower than you’re used to. Do it your way and see how it comes out. Maybe you’ll only come up with money enough for 4 million free houses per year. But if so, please remember, that’s four million free houses per year! (Plus food and doctors!)

And bear in mind that none of the numbers above include police departments.

What This Means

What this means is that our superstitions are very expensive, and that they’re holding us down financially. Badly.

It is clear… glaringly obvious… that what the rulers “do for us” (with our own money) is being done horribly. I once wrote a line about governments sending our wealth down the twin sewers of welfare and warfare, and I still think it was well said. None of us who has run a business or a household could survive operating so incredibly stupidly.

Once we see this, and accept that it’s really true, we see that liberation from rulership is not just a liberty issue, it’s a legitimate financial issue, and a big one((More than anything else it’s a moral and spiritual issue, but I’m trying to stay on point.)).

So, for an increasing list of reasons, it behooves us to start building our better world, laying aside the fear that we’re somehow missing some crucial ability. We aren’t, and that feeling is merely an old superstition.

To act positively is to expand life. To remain frozen in place is to paralyze life. Pick a spot and start acting.

* * * * *

The novel that helped put the crypto revolution into high gear.

Comments from readers:

“Of the twenty five or so people I worked with last fall, all of them revered A Lodging of Wayfaring Men as a bible. They referred to the house and their community effort as a Lodge. We all felt it was modeled on the Free Souls.”

“Actually, I am somewhat at a loss as to how I might explain how I feel about this book other than to say what a great mind to write such an awesome story!”

“I’m an Old guy and find that Rosenberg has captured many Real-World truths in this novel. I wish the Millennial Generation would read this novel and consider the concepts and rationale presented here.”

Get it at Amazon or on Kindle.

* * * * *

Paul Rosenberg
www.freemansperspective.com

Fish Are the Last to Notice the Water

FishWater

I ran into this phrase in a physics lecture, of all places, and knew it would be the title of my next article. And this is generally a true statement. Those who are immersed in something… who have always been immersed in it… are the last to see what it really is.

By now it should be obvious to the people of the West that they’re being held in a primitive bondage. And fortunately, more eyes are opening to this than ever before.

But still, most people are so used to this particular “water” and have so long acclimated themselves to it, that they haven’t recognized it. There’s nothing inherently wrong with most of these people; they just haven’t stepped back far enough to see the obvious.

So, let’s do that.

The Long View

A single model of human life has dominated the West for thousands of years. We’ve covered this carefully in the subscription letter((Particularly in issues #24, #32, and #75.)), but I can summarize by saying that this rulership model began to form in about 5400 BC, dominated Mesopotamia by about 4000 BC, took hold in Egypt by 3000 BC, and spread over the rest of the world from there. So, it has dominated for some 5,000 or 6,000 years, depending on which dates you prefer.

This model is so common that it’s hard to make out at first. Here are its parts:

  1. A small minority of men hold a monopoly on making rules everyone else will live by.

  2. This minority enforces these rules on everyone else.

  3. The minority extracts regular payments from everyone else. This is said to be necessary for protection and justice.

  4. The minority fails to provide justice on a daily basis and very often sends the children of the majority to fight in battles to the death.

  5. A minority-aligned intellectual class assures the majority that this is the best that can be had and that it has been sanctified by some higher power (gods, ancestors, tradition, reason, experience, progress, or whatever).

  6. No one is permitted to escape this model. Those who try are punished as traitors and heretics.

This is the primary model of human organization and has been for some 5,000 years. And aside from arguing over details (or fury over the audacity to say it), there is no real challenge to this statement.

Moreover, this model has been an abject failure – a demonstrable failure:

  • Wars have continued throughout its entire reign.

  • Justice has never been achieved and generally came closest in places away from power centers.

  • Human happiness has not noticeably increased.

  • Even when science has broken out, it has been recaptured and forced to serve the model. (The internet, for example.)

On top of that, this model has to be maintained by force. As noted above, straying from it is harshly punished. If this system was truly superior, force wouldn’t be required. After all, we don’t have to force people to buy houses or cars.

So, by any number of measurable standards, this model fails, and very, very badly. The best defense one might make for it is that something else could be worse. But since we’re not permitted to test that assertion, the word bondage is perfectly fitting.

At a bare minimum, we can say this:

Any system with no major upgrade in 5,000 years must be considered hopelessly obsolete, moribund, and degenerate.

This is where we stand today. And it is crucial that we help our fellows see it.

How Do We Do Make Them See?

First off, we cannot make people see. And truthfully, they generally see it quite well on their own. What they lack is inner strength to acknowledge what they see.

It is not intellectual strength that most people lack; it is emotional strength. And so, you’ll have to be slow and gentle if you want success. Rigorous intellectual arguments are not enough, and in many cases they’re counterproductive.

In the end, the way to help your friends and neighbors is downright biblical: Plant seeds, wait for them to germinate, water them. Show kindness, love them, shine light on their path.

It doesn’t matter if this sounds hokey to you or if you’d rather engage in brilliant arguments. This is what works.

So, decide what you really want: for your friends and neighbors to see, or for you to “win.”

The fish need faith to imagine a dry shore, and they’re not going to get it from intellectual badgering.

* * * * *

A book that generates comments like these, from actual readers, might be worth your time:

  • I just finished reading The Breaking Dawn and found it to be one of the most thought-provoking, amazing books I have ever read… It will be hard to read another book now that I’ve read this book… I want everyone to read it.

  • Such a tour de force, so many ideas. And I am amazed at the courage to write such a book, that challenges so many people’s conceptions.

  • There were so many points where it was hard to read, I was so choked up.

  • Holy moly! I was familiar with most of the themes presented in A Lodging of Wayfaring Men, but I am still trying to wrap my head around the concepts you presented at the end of this one.

Get it at Amazon ($18.95) or on Kindle: ($5.99)

TheBreakingDawn

* * * * *

Paul Rosenberg
www.freemansperspective.com

6,000 Years on the Hamster Wheel

HamsterWheel

Modern man is trained to think in certain ways and to turn away from anything that differs… to give authority the benefit of every doubt, instinctively and forever.

Nearly all of us have been pushed (nay, shoved) in that direction, and we’ve instinctively feared to break our inertia: “But I’ll be poor.” “Girls (or boys) will think I’m weird and won’t want me.” “Only crazy people step off the path.”

That path, however, has no end and kills us by inches. It was paved by our abusers and it is, in effect, a hamster wheel we never leave.

Back to 4000 BC

Between 5400 BC and 3800 BC, the model of rulership we know formed in Mesopotamia, beginning in a city called Eridu. With a few sags, breaks, and occasional exceptions, the basic pattern has held ever since.

The pattern, as we well know, features one group of men dominating all other people. This small group orders the others around, takes a large share of their earnings, punishes them if they fail to obey, sends their children to kill people they’ve never met (or to be killed by them), and is held to be righteous while doing so.

There are other parts of the model, and they’ve been consistent over the millennia as well: mandatory accounting, state-aligned intellectuals, surveillance, monuments, and the glorification of order. (Fear has always played a major role, but mainly because it’s the best way to make people stupid.)

None of those parts are our subject for today, however. As ridiculous as they are – and as horrifying as it is that they’ve continued since the Early Bronze Age – today I want to focus on the more intimate aspects of our abuse.

Like the Sumerians Before Us

I’ve written before on the obsession with status: It’s irrational and devolutionary, but it’s encoded in human cultures and was clearly involved in the model from 4000 BC. The great assyriologist, Samuel Noah Kramer, held it to be a fundamental part of the rulership model and described it as an “ambitious, competitive… drive for pre-eminence and prestige.”

And why was it made a fundamental part of the system? Because it distracted people from the fact that they were repeatedly being robbed.

The cultivation of status was used to drive men, even as the fruits of their labors were stripped away. It trained them to strive for a cheap imitation of actual rewards.

This scam began for the Sumerians in the same way it does for us: in school. “May you rank the highest among the school graduates,” is found among Sumerian inscriptions, just as it is among ours. Kramer describes the situation:

[T]he drive for superiority and prestige deeply colored the Sumerian outlook on life and played an important role in their education, politics, and economics.

The bosses from 4000 BC built hierarchical structures, each level of which gave its occupants a certain level of status – status they fought for all their lives. They could never be as high as the ruler, but they could at least be higher than their neighbor… and they learned to trade that for actual prosperity and self-determinacy.

What This Means

This means that all the times we ignored the small group of men stealing from us… and all the times we scrambled to be better than our neighbors… we were being suckers. (Sorry, but that’s the truth.)

Sure, we were born into it and were trained in it all our lives, but no matter how much we excuse ourselves (and we can, to a large extent), we were still playing the role of the sucker.

Which is more sensible, to work endlessly to convince people that you’re better than the guy across the street or across the hill, or to actually make yourself better?

Think about this: It’s more work to appear better than the other guy than it is to simply be better. So why do it the hard way? Why care about the other guy so much? Why not care about you – what’s in you, what you can develop, what makes you happy – rather than what impresses other people?

The Truth of It…

The truth of this is that all the status crap we’ve been immersed in – that we see 24/7 on Facebook and TV – is a huge, old scam. It tears us away from creating actual benefit for ourselves and our families and focuses us on the mere opinions of others… opinions that are subject to change at any time.

To work for real, concrete benefits is not only more rational than life on the hamster wheel, but it’s a far more efficient way to live.

Still, the ramp down from the hamster wheel is marked off with bright red tape, saying, “If You Cross, Everyone Will Hate You.” That can be scary.

Getting off the hamster wheel requires us to transcend our fears and even to suffer the slanders of those who remain on the wheel. In other words, it requires us to be heretics.

But if becoming a heretic sounds frightening, remember that the other choice is to yield your very life to your abusers.

Living as a heretic strikes me as far better than living as a hamster on a wheel.

* * * * *

A book that generates comments like these, from actual readers, might be worth your time:

  • I just finished reading The Breaking Dawn and found it to be one of the most thought-provoking, amazing books I have ever read… It will be hard to read another book now that I’ve read this book… I want everyone to read it.

  • Such a tour de force, so many ideas. And I am amazed at the courage to write such a book, that challenges so many people’s conceptions.

  • There were so many points where it was hard to read, I was so choked up.

  • Holy moly! I was familiar with most of the themes presented in A Lodging of Wayfaring Men, but I am still trying to wrap my head around the concepts you presented at the end of this one.

Get it at Amazon ($18.95) or on Kindle: ($5.99)

TheBreakingDawn

* * * * *

Paul Rosenberg
www.freemansperspective.com

Banning Cash: Serfdom in Our Time

Over the last few months a stream of articles have crossed my screen, all proclaiming the need of governments and banks to eliminate cash. I’m sure you’ve noticed them too.
It is terrorists and other assorted madmen, we are told, who use cash. And so, to protect us from being blown up and dismembered on our very own street corners, governments will have to ban it.

BanningCash

Over the last few months a stream of articles have crossed my screen, all proclaiming the need of governments and banks to eliminate cash. I’m sure you’ve noticed them too.

It is terrorists and other assorted madmen, we are told, who use cash. And so, to protect us from being blown up and dismembered on our very own street corners, governments will have to ban it.

It would actually take some effort to imagine a more obvious, naked attempt at fearmongering. Cash – in daily use for centuries if not millennia – is now, suddenly, the agent of spring-loaded, instant death? And we’re supposed to just accept that line?

But there are good reasons why the insiders are promoting these stories now. The first of them, perhaps, is simply that they can: After 9/11, a massive wave of compliance surged through the West. It may not last forever, but it’s still rolling, and if the entertainment corporations can pump enough fear into minds that want to believe, they may just get them to buy it.

The second reason, however, is the real driver:

Negative Interest Rates

The urgency of their move to ban one of the longest-lasting pillars of daily life means that the backroom elites think it will be necessary soon. It would appear that the central banks, the IMF, the World Bank, the BIS, and all their backers, see the elimination of cash as a central survival strategy.

The reason is simple: cash would allow people to escape from the one thing that could save their larcenous currency system: negative interest rates.

To make this clear, I like to paraphrase a famous (and good) quote from Alan Greenspan, back from 1966, during his Ayn Randian days: The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

That was a true statement, and with a slight modification, it succinctly explains the new war on cash:

The preservation of an insolvent currency system requires that the owners of currency have no way to protect it.

Cash is currency that you hold in your own hands, that stands more or less alone. It is primarily external to bank control. Electronic money – bank balances, credit, etc. – remains inside the banking system and fully subject to bank control.

A combination of no cash and negative interest rates would be a quiet, permanent version of what was done in Cyprus, where the government simply shut down everything, allowed only the smallest deductions via ATMs, and then stole money from thousands of bank accounts at once.

The Cypriot spectacle was fairly large, however, and that tends to undermine the legitimacy of rulership. So, it is much better to have no ATMs and no cash at all. There would be no lines of angry people talking to each other, only isolated losers with no recourse, licking their wounds while the talking heads on television tell them to stay calm and watch the flashing images.

Negative interest rates would give the banks 100% control over your purchases. They could, even in the worst pinch, allow you to purchase food while freezing the rest of your money. The average person would have no recourse and would simply be robbed… but very smoothly and with no human face to blame on.

Negative interest rates mean that your bank account shrinks day by day, automatically. Your $1000 in January becomes $950 by December. And where does that money go? To the banks, of course, and to the government. They syphon your money away, drip by drip, and there’s nothing you can do about it. This accomplishes several things for them at once:

  • It finances government, limitlessly and automatically. Forget tax filings; they can just take as they please.

  • It pays off the bad debt of the big banks. (And there are oceans of debt.)

  • It forces you to spend everything you’ve got, as soon as you get it. (Otherwise it will shrink.)

  • It gives the system full control over your financial life. Everything is monitored, everything is tracked, and every single transaction must be approved by them (or not). If they decide they don’t like you, you’re instantly reduced to begging.

In short, this is a direct return to serfdom.

I suggest that you start talking to your friends and neighbors about this now, before it’s too late. Don’t let them comply without a fight.

Paul Rosenberg
www.freemansperspective.com

What Rulers Believe

I’ve been working on collections of quotes lately, and I have one more that I’d like to present… this one on the thoughts of rulers. For a number of years I’ve been telling people that the incentives faced by productive people and the incentives facing rulers (of whatever stripe) are very, very different. This list, I believe, will make that point.

RulersBelieve

I’ve been working on collections of quotes lately, and I have one more that I’d like to present… this one on the thoughts of rulers.

For a number of years I’ve been telling people that the incentives faced by productive people and the incentives facing rulers (of whatever stripe) are very, very different. This list, I believe, will make that point.

You’ll find quotes from ‘bad’ rulers on this list, of course, but also some from the ‘good’ rulers. And please note that the ‘bad’ ones are very often held in high regard in their times. Joseph Stalin, for example – the #2 most prolific killer in all of human history – was the ‘great ally’ of the US in World War II and was routinely presented to the American public as “Uncle Joe.”

So, beginning with Uncle Joe, here are the things that rulers believe:

Joseph Stalin

  • Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.

  • Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?

  • Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs.

Mao Zedong

  • The cult of xenophobia is the cheapest and surest method of obtaining from the masses the ignorant and savage patriotism, which puts the blame for every political folly or social misfortune upon the foreigner.

Adolf Hitler

  • Terrorism is the best political weapon, for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death.

  • I have not come into this world to make men better, but to make use of their weaknesses.

  • What good fortune for those in power that people do not think.

  • I have sympathy for Mr. Roosevelt, because he marches straight toward his objectives over Congress, lobbies and bureaucracy.

  • [I]n the simplicity of their minds, [people] more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie… It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have such impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and continue to think that there may be some other explanation.

Hermann Göring

  • Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece… But… the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

Winston Churchill

  • What a man! I have lost my heart! (referring to Benito Mussolini, 1927)

  • One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations.

Franklin Roosevelt

  • There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy.

  • The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson. (to Colonel Edward House)

Vladimir Lenin

  • Our power does not know liberty or justice. It is established on the destruction of the individual will.
  • The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.

Leon Trotsky

  • The real criminals hide under the cloak of the accusers.

Napoleon Bonaparte

  • Of all our institutions public education is the most important… we must be able to cast a whole generation in the same mould.

  • A man becomes a creature of his uniform.

  • The life of a citizen is the property of his country.

Charles Maurice Talleyrand

  • We were given speech to hide our thoughts.

  • An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public.

Henry Kissinger

  • The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.

Cardinal Richelieu

  • Give me six lines written by the most honorable of men, and I’ll find an excuse in them to hang him.

Joseph Goebbels

  • Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.

  • The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Edgar Hoover

William H. Woodin (US Treasury secretary)

Benito Mussolini

  • The Truth Apparent, apparent to everyone’s eyes who are not blinded by dogmatism, is that men are perhaps weary of Liberty. They have a surfeit of it… we have buried the putrid corpse of liberty … the Italian people are a race of sheep.

Roman Emperor Caracalla

  • As long as we have this [pointing to his sword], we shall not run short of money.

Prince Phillip, duke of Edinburgh

  • I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus.

Charles de Gaulle

  • In order to become the master, the politician poses as the servant.

Paul Rosenberg
www.freemansperspective.com

Our Future Has Been Commandeered

FutureCommandeered

We should be living in the time of humanity’s greatest flower. But we’re not. Instead, we’re stuck in a condition of permanent war, rising xenophobia, endless fear, perpetual distraction, and suffocating conformity. Worse, we’re living inside of a surveillance state that is morphing into something truly, truly evil.

I’m here to tell you that nearly all of this is artificial. We have more than enough technology to be living among the stars, to fill every hungry mouth on the planet, and to meet nearly every human need.

We already know how to do all those things… and this fact is demonstrably true.

And yet we sit immersed in fear, confusion, privation, and even hate. And why? Mainly because the elites of our civilization have demanded that we sacrifice our wills to theirs, and because most of us have silently complied.

We have space-age knowledge, yet we remain firmly under the domination of bronze-age rulership. And since these rulers would be wiped away by the spread of space-age technologies, they have carefully contained them.

“Thou Mayest Not Go There”

As I write this, we are at the end of the year 2015. Back in 1968 – almost two generations ago – men traveled to the moon. The next year, they landed there. This was well before microwaves, cell phones, and the Internet. It was even before personal calculators. But right there, space travel was stopped in its tracks. In fact, it was first pulled back and then stopped. No human has left Earth’s gravity since 1972.

Have we more technology than we did in 1968 – 47 years ago – or have we less?

Obviously we have far more and far better, but space technology has been commandeered and space has been locked shut. Our future has simply been cut off. Does any reasonable person believe that it would be harder to go to space now than it was before Kevlar and fiber optics and computers that didn’t fill an entire room?

And let’s be honest about this: That future was eliminated by the lords of our world because it would ruin their game. Letting the cows out of the barn would severely undercut their interests.

Many of you should be reading my posts as you sail among the stars, or at least among planets, moons, and asteroid belts. We have the technology… and we’ve have had it since the late 1960s. That’s not even debatable.

Requiem for the Internet

Before the Internet, nearly all information was forced to move through well controlled conduits. Exceptions to that rule were mainly print newsletters. But then came the Internet, which allowed anyone to speak to everyone; it allowed information to move from individual to individual with no gatekeeper. That was a very large and very significant change.

To be honest about it, we got the Internet mainly because the elites screwed up. They could have bottled it up, but they simply failed. (They are not smarter than we are.) Sure, other people would have written an Internet-type of communications protocol soon enough, but that kind of slow rollout would have given the bosses time to limit the technology and keep some bottlenecks in place.

Now, after a couple of decades, the Internet has been substantially retaken by the elites. Already, nearly everything is being funneled into Google and Facebook, both of whom have whored themselves out to the rulers. (See this, for example.) It will probably be a matter of a few years until unapproved content starts to be pushed out. Matt Drudge, for example, claimed recently that a Supreme Court justice told him so personally.

Putting information back into controlled channels is massively in the interest of the rulers, and there is no one to oppose them. Their populations are among the most compliant in all of human history.

On top of that, the Internet is already a surveillance system, with the aforesaid Google and Facebook being major components of it. Since Snowden, that’s not debatable either.

Worse, that surveillance system (that is, the Internet) is quickly being turned into the most effective manipulation system in all of human history. In other words, the Internet has been more than commandeered; it has been weaponized and turned against its users.

I could go on, but I won’t: More facts won’t change more minds. Opposition to these truths is psychological, not intellectual.

It’s All About Will

We can have our future back, but only if we stop laying our minds and wills at the feet of rulers… rulers whom most of us acknowledge to be liars and thieves, by the way.

So long as we reflexively obey the people who stole our future, they will never, ever give it back. And why should they? That future isn’t in their interests, and so long as everyone obeys them, why should they change?

In the end, it comes down to the issue of will: Do we believe that we have a right to live and act according to our own minds? Or do we simply evade such considerations?

The usual unexamined slogans (“We have to work through our democratic institutions.”) merely lock us into place as will-less cogs in a hierarchy that hasn’t changed in any of our lifetimes. Truthfully, it’s just obscured slavery: “Pay attention to the flashing lights and keep doing as we say.”

There are answers to all our problems, and we are more than capable of reclaiming our future. But that will never happen if we keep surrendering our wills to the same elites who took it from us.

Paul Rosenberg
www.freemansperspective.com

We Have Undervalued Ourselves

undervaluedGrowing up, I heard lots of complaints from parents and teachers about children being conceited, proud, and arrogant. Looking back, it seems to me that most of these complaints were related to a failure to obey. We did have one or two kids who were arrogant jerks, but the rest of us received the same comments they did.

But whatever motivated the adults of my youth, they were mostly wrong – it’s not our overvaluation of ourselves that is the real problem; it’s our undervaluation.

Here is a passage from G.K. Chesterton’s The Defendant that makes this argument:

There runs a strange law through the length of human history — that men are continually tending to undervalue their environment, to undervalue their happiness, to undervalue themselves. The great sin of mankind, the sin typified by the fall of Adam, is the tendency, not towards pride, but towards this weird and horrible humility.

I think Chesterton was entirely correct, and I think we have all been surrounded by, and influenced by, a “weird and horrible humility.”

Most of us, most of the time, fear making errors, think about our failures and deficits, and live in a sea of guilt. Not only is this dark self-image unnecessary, but it degrades us and is built upon falsehoods.

We are, since childhood, trained to view ourselves as dangerous creatures, teetering on the edge of error and harm. We absorb these ideas through what currently passes as “law” and by parts of modern religion… particularly the doctrine of “original sin.”

Even the definition of “good” is held to be “selflessness,” which clearly maintains that “self” is bad.

Bear in mind that I’m not saying all humans are good. Clearly, some of them are violent and vile. But these are a small minority, and we should not lump normal people in with them.

The System as It Is

The world system we were all raised in is built on the assumptions noted above: that people are dangerous, need to be controlled, and must be held in a permanent fear of punishment.

Furthermore, the system requires us to feel inferior, uncertain, and flawed:

  • Free, confident people don’t just obey because someone in a particular costume tells them to; they require a reason.
  • People who think on their own easily understand that when they are told, “The law requires this,” it really means, “Do this or we’ll hurt you.” And they also grasp that such statements are orders backed by violence, not reason.
  • People who are free from guilt do not feel inferior and do not automatically comply with authority.

Whenever it is that a significant number of people develop healthy psyches, modern systems of rulership, including “law and order,” will fail. These systems assume that they will always enjoy instant and unreasoned obedience. Once that changes, they will be ill-suited to survive.

Under the modern scenario of rulership, a truly healthy person is the proverbial “square peg,” and ruling institutions are the proverbial “round hole.” The two do not fit together naturally.

Other Views of Humanity

While my disapproval of doctrines such as “original sin” stands, it’s worth noting (for believers and nonbelievers alike) that this low opinion of mankind is not really a biblical thing. Consider these passages:

You are gods. All of you are children of the most high. (This was first spoken by David, then repeated by Jesus.)

You have crowned him (man) with glory and honor, and set him above all the works of your hands.

The noted psychologist Abraham Maslow found the same thing as Chesterton, by the way. He writes,

Human history is a record of the ways in which human nature has been sold short. The highest possibilities of human nature have practically always been underrated.

And as Maslow went about to study the healthiest and best people, he ran into another problem:

Even when ’good specimens,’ the saints and sages and great leaders of history, have been available for study, the temptation too often has been to consider them not human but supernaturally endowed.

In other words, human nature has been depreciated, and when a clearly good case comes along, it is promptly identified as being something other than human.

It has been an imperative that “human” must equal “broken and untrustworthy.” This is a false, degrading, and cruel sentiment; yet our current world systems rest fully upon it.

Last thoughts

In another passage in The Defendant, Chesterton writes,

Every one of the great revolutionists, from Isaiah to Shelley, have been optimists. They have been indignant, not about the badness of existence, but about the slowness of men in realizing its goodness.

If we could drop the dark images we hold of ourselves and accept credit for the good things we do, we would partake of pleasure without guilt, and we would have a greater capacity to experience beauty, awe, and wonder in our everyday lives.

Whenever it is that we come to understand ourselves and the true nature of the world, doing the right thing will cease being a burden. We will do the right thing simply because any other action would be stupid.

Give this some thought of your own, please.

Paul Rosenberg
FreemansPerspective.com

Is the Government Out to Eat You?

rulershipThis graph is a very typical display of the predator/prey relationship. It comes from a study on rabbits and coyotes, but the relationship is the same for all predator/prey tandems, from tiny parasites and their hosts to lions and antelopes. The predators always overfeed until the prey can no longer sustain them, then most of them die and the rest wait for the prey to replenish themselves.

It works in the same way for human governance. You are the rabbits; the rulers are the coyotes.

This thought – that rulership is a predatory strategy – is uncomfortable for most of us. Nonetheless it is true. But there is a serious difference between human rulers and coyotes: Humans are intelligent beings, so the predators must use mental strategies more than physical strategies. The effective rule of humans must focus on their minds more than their bodies; unsupported physical domination is too difficult and expensive. This is why legitimacy matters so much in human governance.

The interesting thing about our current situation is that the rulers of the West retain their overwhelming power, but their legitimacy rests on a number of fragile structures. When one or two of them fail, the others may go down with them. And if this happens, the current system of rulership will not be rebuilt as it is now. What comes next may be better or may be worse, but it will not be the same.

The Reverse View

The graph above shows the predator/prey relationship between rabbits and coyotes. Very often in my writings, I take the rabbit’s view of the situation. Now I’d like to reverse that and explain the coyote’s view.

Rulership is an exercise in skimming. Think of your own interactions with your government – the primary exchange is that they take some of your production. This occurs in many ways: when you get a paycheck, when you pay your electric bill or phone bill, when you get a license plate for your car, every time you pay sales tax, and so on. Rulership lives on the skim.

In order to maintain the skim, a ruler has several mental tools:

  1. Claims of necessity. Make people fear that without the ruler, monstrous foreigners will invade and make things much, much worse.
  2. Inertia. Once people are moving in any given direction (such as paying the skim as a matter of course), they will tend to keep moving that way until an outside force deflects or stops them.
  3. Tradition. This is the story that it has always been this way, and that your grandparents (and their grandparents) have all lived this way and called it righteous. Tradition displaces analysis. At the gate of analysis (deciding if the skim is or isn’t good for you), tradition stands as a guardian saying, “You shall not pass.” To analyze would be to spit in tradition’s face.
  4. Fear of standing alone. The friends of rulership can be counted on to present images of conformity and to exalt the concept of unity. The effect of this is to raise the price of non-conformity. To question the skim, you must face the fear of becoming an outcast.
  5. Disguising fear. This is crucial and multifaceted. Rather than saying, “Pay taxes or armed men will imprison you,” for example, they must appeal to patriotism, shared sacrifice, helping the poor, or something. Of course it is true that people only pay because of fear, but that truth should not be seen. A plausible substitute must be provided.

There are many structures of rulership, of course, but all of them live on the skim. They just enforce and justify it differently. It used to be that the ruler claimed a special relationship with God or that he was a superior type of being. In modern times, a larger number of people were brought into rulership, making the broad population feel that they were also part of it. Through it all, however, humans could easily be broken down into those who are skimmed from, and those who are skimmed to.

So, if you live on the skim, your goal is for people to go along with your orders willingly…

At the same time, if you are the prey, the entire system is set to make you believe “It is right for other people to order me around.”

Do you?

[Editor’s Note: This article is an excerpt from our flagship newsletter Freeman’s Perspective – Issue #13: “Rulership’s Last Stand, Part 5 – Predatory Breakdown.” If you liked it, consider taking a risk-free test drive. Not only will you gain immediate access to the rest of the issue, but you’ll also be able to enjoy the entire archive – more than 520 pages of research on topics of importance and inspiration to those looking for freedom in an unfree world. Plus valuable bonus reports and all new issues as well. Click here to learn more.]

Paul Rosenberg
FreemansPerspective.com