Category: Current Events

Honorable Rebellion, Honorable Leaders and the Naming of Army Forts

I am sure this title caught your eye. The point is that rebellion is actually GOOD once in a while. Personally, teenage rebellion is good as well, otherwise the teenager stays in one’s basement for decades and no honorable person, parent or child, wants that long term. Allowing and encouraging these young adults to “be all that they can be” is a most honorable path I would think.

Countries and cultures are similar in that there comes a time when going separate ways brings out the best for all parties.

Thomas Jefferson was one that spoke to the benefits of rebellion:

God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13 states independant 11 years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.- Thomas Jefferson (1787)

Rebellion is a warning shot that liberties have been violated. This is an honorable recourse when peaceful approaches have been ignored time and again. Liberty can grow in the way that the American Revolution’s conclusion was conducted, not so much how the French Revolution was conducted.

If the 1776 rebellion was honorable, why not the 1860/1861 rebellion? What might help to set the context is to compare the presidential inaugural addresses of both President Lincoln and President Davis.

Lincoln’s 1st Inaugural Address 04MAR1861

Lincoln made the strongest case ever in the defense of Southern slavery even supporting its enshrinement in the text of the constitution to be a perpetual right but on the issue of tax collections he would definitely go to war to enforce the newly doubled federal tariff.

Davis defined the South as an international trading community that sought free trade with the world and promised to resort to the sword if the North were to invade to put an end to the Confederacy’s free trade policy.

Davis also set the context for the formation of an agent to work on the principle’s (13 sovereign states) behalf when he said:

The declared purpose of the compact of the Union from which we have withdrawn was “to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and our posterity

He continued on why the seven states had voted to leave such a Union:

When in the judgement of the sovereign states now composing this Confederacy, it had been perverted from the purposes for which it was ordained, and it ceased to answer the ends for which it was established, a peaceful appeal to the ballot box declared that so far as they were concerned, the government created by that compact should cease to exist. In this they merely asserted a right that the Declaration of Independence of 1776 had defined to be inalienable .. they, as sovereigns, were the final judges, each for itself ..

What few people know is that this man was so honorable and such a Unionist up until his home state of Mississippi seceded, that his logic, actions and words were honorable to their core.

So what do we do with men like this after a War for Southern Independence is fought and lost? We honor honorable men of that day by naming military forts after them, even when they in the end were not victorious in securing an independent country against a country who secured a victory in less than honorable means.

Walter E. Williams addresses this in his article at Lew Rockwell today. He lays the groundwork as to why we have forts in the US today that bear the name of honorable Confederate generals who were fighting for their homes and families against a tyrant who violated the US Constitution left and right.

Walter addresses a statement made by an ignorant military man, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, who said in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee arguing in favor of renaming Confederate named military bases:

The Confederacy, the American Civil War, was fought, and it was an act of rebellion. It was an act of treason, at the time, against the Union, against the Stars and Stripes, against the U.S. Constitution.

Ignorance knows no bounds, as I pointed out yesterday that Lincoln himself was the one that acted treasonous and also acted violently against the US Constitution. The Southern state’s secession was NOT an act of treason, even if your feelings and emotions convince you and Gen. Mark Milley that way. He needs to find a safe space, and by renaming these forts I do hope he feels better soon.

But I digress ..

Walter E. Williams starts with context of the union in the first place:

Let’s start at the beginning, namely the American War of Independence (1775-1783), a war between Great Britain and its 13 colonies, which declared independence in July 1776. The peace agreement that ended the war is known as the Treaty of Paris signed by Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Jay and Henry Laurens and by British Commissioner Richard Oswald, on Sept. 3, 1783. Article I of the Treaty held that “New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States.”

This fact is something that Lincoln himself ignored to retain his narrative that the “Union” preceded the states, which then dovetails into his own personal thought that the states should have asked permission of all the other states before leaving.

Walter continues:

Delegates from these states met in Philadelphia in 1787 to form a union. During the Philadelphia convention, a proposal was made to permit the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, rejected it. Minutes from the debate paraphrased his opinion: “A union of the states containing such an ingredient (would) provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a state would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound.”

The fact that Lincoln never acknowledged the states as having seceded, left him with the complicated aspect that he actually violated the principle above, that his making war on states still in the union meant the compact was in fact dissolved. He wanted to ask for the “divorce”, he did NOT want the spouse(s) to have that status!

With this thought, that each of the sovereign states would voluntarily join this union one at a time, each state also understood that they each could voluntarily leave this union.

During the ratification debates, Virginia’s delegates said, “The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression.” The ratification documents of New York and Rhode Island expressed similar sentiments; namely, they held the right to dissolve their relationship with the United States.

Note that northern states also expressed interest in the ability to exit. Only 16 years later, there was talk of that from that section of the federation:

Many New Englanders were infuriated by President Thomas Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase in 1803, which they saw as an unconstitutional act. Timothy Pickering of Massachusetts, who was George Washington’s secretary of war and secretary of state, led the movement. He said, “The Eastern states must and will dissolve the union and form a separate government.” Other prominent Americans such as John Quincy Adams, Elbridge Gerry, Fisher Ames, Josiah Quincy III and Joseph Story shared his call for secession.

Sparking secession talk again was the War of 1812 that hurt the New England commerce the most, rekindling this viable option:

While the New England secessionist movement was strong, it failed to garner support at the 1814-15 Hartford Convention.

By early 1861, many Northern government officials and presses were well aware of the dangers of not allowing an honorable rebellion to take place and voiced such before Lincoln took action to send armed reinforcements to Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor:

  • Rep. Jacob M. Kunkel of Maryland said, “Any attempt to preserve the union between the states of this Confederacy by force would be impractical and destructive of republican liberty.”
  • New-York Tribune (Feb. 5, 1860): “If tyranny and despotism justified the Revolution of 1776, then we do not see why it would not justify the secession of Five Millions of Southrons from the Federal Union in 1861.”
  • The Detroit Free Press (Feb. 19, 1861): “An attempt to subjugate the seceded States, even if successful, could produce nothing but evil — evil unmitigated in character and appalling in extent.”
  • The New-York Times (March 21, 1861): “There is a growing sentiment throughout the North in favor of letting the Gulf States go.”

Walter summarizes this so well in saying:

Confederate generals fought for independence from the Union just as George Washington fought for independence from Great Britain. Those who label Robert E. Lee and other Confederate generals as traitors might also label George Washington a traitor. Great Britain’s King George III and the British parliament would have agreed.

Spot on Walter, you rock as an 80-something!

Named for Confederate General Braxton Bragg, who had previously served in the United States Army in the Mexican-American War.

Should the ten forts named after Confederate officers be renamed? No. But it seems that stupid people with a lot of feelings now rule. While the name of a fort does not do anything physically, it is a part of the culture cleansing going of to remove whatever is left of this country’s honorable past.

In my mind, the past was already being erased a little at a time over the last 100+ years. I think it is the shear momentum of this now that has many feeling that it is over the top and openly wondering when if ever will it stop.

Honestly, can we start talking secession now, or is it too early yet? Asking for a friend.

Peace out.

-SF1

Will President Trump Refrain from Total War Against Some States, Unlike Lincoln?

A couple posts ago I lamented about the GOP’s DNA from the birth of that political party that Lincoln was elected under:

.. in 2020, the Trump administration would never concede to have GOP majority states secede from the US and allow the Democrats to have the empire. The GOP’s DNA is war and empire.

However, could the Trump administration stray from their DNA (I mean with politicians, “principles” are easily discarded)? Could the GOP part with large sections of California, New York and New England? Could the city-states of Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati (along with other Democratic majority cities in various states) be allowed to go on their own and pay their own way?

This is a real question. No one, I mean no one brings this up because supposedly states can’t secede, but I really think it is because BOTH parties are Marxist at their core.

Lincoln was adored by Karl Marx, and the Progressives since 1901 have been in control of this country’s leadership and cemented the deal in 1913 with Constitutional amendment to place the private entity the Federal Reserve in charge of the fiat currency (USD).

While I really doubt any politician these days thinks philosophically, the statesmen of yesterday did. It was important for the likes of Jefferson, Calhoun and even Jefferson Davis to get it right, based on principle.

While the Constitution is not in the forefront of 2020’s political debates between Twitter Trump and Dementia Joe, the statesmen of 1861 saw it all clear as day. I would say that the following is why the southern seven states that seceded were so confident of a peaceful separation, because in their mind their ancestors did the same in 1776.

Article 3 Section 3 of the US Constitution defines treason as follows:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or to adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort

The words THEM and THEIR refer to who? Well, the truth is the first time the “United States” was written it was the “united States”. That is why it is plural, a collection, a federation, a confederacy of states. So levying “War” against them was about going to war with Massachusetts or Virginia, or any other state!

Technically then, there is NO treason except that against the individual states themselves according to the US Constitution. Opposition to Washington DC is NOT therefore treason! Nor is defending your own state from Washington DC.

Let that soak in before I proceed. Doesn’t this all have a connection to 2020?

Now look at 1861 from this Constitutional perspective and we see that Lincoln made war, not just on the seven states that left the union by FEB1861, but also against the four others that left after Lincoln called up volunteers in APR1861 after Fort Sumter’s surrender. Lincoln is guilty of treason, but don’t expect the US history books to state that fact.

In essence, Lincoln engaged in treason for four years and redefined treason, not by a constitutional amendment, but with cannon and rifles. Treason became to include anyone who was critical of the US general government or himself. As a result he suspended the writ of habeas corpus and had his soldiers arrest and imprison thousands of northern civilians for speaking up against him in public, for publishing newspaper articles in opposition to his policies.  Lincoln had congressmen arrested, arrested the grandson of the author of the Star Spangled Banner, Francis Scott Key and also had a congressman from Ohio deported to Canada. Lincoln even arrested those who chose to remain silent when hearing Lincoln’s policies discussed!

The man who stands by and says nothing when the peril of his Government is discussed cannot be misunderstood. If not hindered, he is sure to help the enemy, much more if he talks ambiguously – talks for his country with “buts” and “ifs” and “ands”. – Abraham Lincoln

The bottom line is that Lincoln never publicly admitted that secession of any state took place and placed his trust in Article 4 Section 4 of the US Constitution that allows the federal government to protect the citizens of any state from “domestic Violence”.  However, the Constitution couches this in first receiving a request to do so from that state’s legislature or governor. The southern eleven states NEVER asked for assistance with “domestic violence”.

Lincoln is a certified tyrant guilty of treason.

How tempting it must be for President Trump, in command of the American Empire’s military might, to only bring a fraction of that force “for good” against any state that is currently dealing with domestic violence.

If he is wiser that Lincoln, he would have followed the US Constitution and waited until asked.

Will Trump pull a full-on Lincoln? Time will tell.

Peace out.

-SF1

When Does a Tyrant Come Out of the Closet? When a Crisis Hits!

These days as Americans are bombarded with the names Whitmer (MI), Cuomo (NY) and Newsom (CA) leading the charge for born-again tyrants, we probably should look into history to see who might have modeled this best. Being confronted with a crisis reveals the true character of most people, and when these people are politicians, the resulting decisions in the reaction to times of crisis “try men’s souls”.

In my last post I said:

The GOP is stuck because the DNA in their party rests with Abraham Lincoln and his reaction to having seven states PEACEFULLY secede from the united States of America (written as it was inked in the 1783 Paris Peace treaty with the British Empire).

I bet you can guess who I am going to pick on once again. Yes, that president we all know and love from our grade school days, Honest Abe.

We also know from our last post that Lincoln’s reaction to these states leaving the union was NOT to free the slaves, no way, no how. He actually said on 04MAR1861:

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

So after Lincoln tried to “resupply” Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor with TROOPS which triggered, no pun intended, the Confederate forces to pro-actively open the cannons on that fort to force its surrender, with ZERO deaths, Lincoln proceeded to accomplish a long list of decisions the cemented his inner tyrant behavior.

While the calling up of 75,000 volunteers from the remaining states in the union after the surrender of Fort Sumter was based on a 1795 act of Congress that gave the president to call up troops in case of insurrection, this act only allowed 30 days until the president’s authority would cease. Lincoln would milk this for FOUR months before Congress was called into session! Not only that, to add insult to injury, he asked Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas and Missouri to send troops to fight against their culturally “sister” states as well.

The letters from the governors of these states is hilarious, the best first line of the response from Tennessee is priceless:

Your dispatch is received, and if genuine, which its extraordinary character leads me to doubt .. I can be no party to this wicked violation of the laws of this country, and to this war on the liberties of a free people ..

What they did not know was this was only the beginning of the reveal show that Lincoln would unfold in 1861. By 21APR1861 he ordered the blockade of southern ports (an act of war) and the purchase of five naval warships, without congressional approval. On 27APR1861 he suspended the privilege of Habeas Corpus nullifying every civil liberty of every citizen.

On 03MAY1861 Lincoln called up even more troops, this time for a three year enlistment! He also directed the Treasury Department to pay a private firm in New York state $2.0M for military equipment and by 04JUL1861 when Congress was finally called into session, war plans to invade the southern 11 states were already made.

If this were not bad enough, the night of 12SEP1861 he had Maj. Gen. Banks arrest all the Southern sympathizers of the Maryland legislature, 51 citizens in all, to prevent them from voting on secession.

Then, in NOV1861, to ensure southern sympathizers would not vote in Maryland, armed Union troops with bayonets guarded the polling places AND all the Union troops got to vote, even if they were not residents of Maryland.

In Britain, London’s Saturday Review commented:

It was a perfect act of despotism as can be conceived. It was a coup d’etat in every essential feature.

Any Northern press that criticized this the same way was shutdown:

  • Chicago Daily Times
  • The Journal of Commerce (NYC)
  • The Morning News (NYC)
  • The Day-Book
  • The New York World
  • The Freeman’s Journal (Catholic NYC)
  • Philadelphia Evening Journal
  • Christian Observer
  • Republican Watchman (PA)
  • Farmer (ME)
  • Democrat (NH)

Not only were these and another 1,000 newspapers were shutdown, the people involved (up to 10,000) were imprisoned without trial. Newspapers not shutdown were highly regulated throughout the war and censored.

This is only the beginning as Lincoln attempted to have the Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney who had ruled against Lincoln, in the case of Ex Parte Merryman (1861), arrested!.

Talk about the poster child for tyranny. Lincoln is the master.

So look at a picture of your governor or your president or possible next president and know what our US Constitution (and the state constitutions modeled after it) will allow in times of crisis.

I think we are about to see a “Lincoln redux” in action soon all across our land. 1861 was not an easy time to live through in many parts of this country!

Gov. Whitmer – Michigan

 

 

Gov. Cuomo – New York
Gov. Newsom – California
President Donald J. Trump – United States of America
Joe Biden – Possible Future President of the United States

Peace out.

-SF1

Yesterday’s Decisions Impact Tomorrow’s Options – How Lincoln’s Reaction Crippled the USA

USA Communist Party Convention – 1930s

I am not sure I am the only one thinking this, but why does it seem that NO ONE is really about assisting the PEOPLE here in July 2020? It is almost as if there is this standoff that prevents common sense from prevailing. I guess that is the definition of politics, the absence of common sense and logic.

In my last post I said:

In an effort to mask the underlying financial hole that consumes a large part of the world, Covid-19 followed by accusations of racism and white supremacy have been followed by … Covid-19 again. Take 3.

Yes, it should be very obvious by now that in spite of declining Covid-19 deaths, the emphasis has changed to “cases” (more accurately called ‘positive tests’ that mean one may have had Covid-19 or another corona-virus, including one that can cause the common cold).

The psychological effect of this is the ability to easily make face coverings the norm even though the science clearly states that these masks are not effective with this 120nm virus. The social impact of everyone in public being masked up like the OK Corral in the Wild West is to clearly accelerate the distrust factor in this country towards continued division. Governments are great at distracting the masses, so this election year there is plenty of “stuff” to cover up their own critical failures, especially with the US economy and the US debt.

But I digress.

My purpose here is to give a bit of insight into the bind we (USA) find ourselves in. It is rather obvious from the accusation of systematic racism to the cancel culture that everything can be a potential target for those that have no use for other’s property (their bodies and their legal possessions). We have unveiled the great cultural divide in the USA that has been here for decades.

Thomas Jefferson faced a similar issue during and after his presidency, but his approach is never considered.

In a 1803 letter to John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky:

if there is to be a separation .. then God bless them both and keep them in the union if it be for their good, but separate them if it be better

In 1804 Jefferson wrote:

Those of the Western Confederacy will be as much our children and defendants as those of the Eastern, and I feel myself as much identified with that country, in future time, as with this, and did I now foresee a separation at some future day ..

I can understand why the GOP can’t say this, but why can’t the Democrats? (Hint – Marxism requires the WHOLE country to feed on)

SECESSION is the only path forward .. but the US is stuck!

Sometimes, in any relationship, parting can actually be therapeutic for both parties. We can see this with divorce as well as with business partnerships. None of these are really “perpetual” relationships UNLESS both parties work on making it all work without abusing each other.

The GOP is stuck because the DNA in their party rests with Abraham Lincoln and his reaction to having seven states PEACEFULLY secede from the united States of America (written as it was inked in the 1783 Paris Peace treaty with the British Empire). As a result, Trump’s options are like this:

Lincoln forever made the barrier to peaceful secession almost impossible when 80 years after the 13 colonies seceded from the British Empire he decided that “union” was to be achieved at all costs, even that of 750,000 American lives.

It seems that American Exceptionalism is a myth. How come, could Maine seceded from Massachusetts in 1820, Hungary secede from Austria in 1867, Norway secede from Sweden in 1905, Singapore from Malaysia in 1965, the Czech Republic from Slovakia in 1993 and especially the 15 republics that seceded from the USSR? Instead, a four year war is waged on Americans to make permanent something that never was, by invading his OWN nation.

You see, by Lincoln’s logic, the southern states NEVER left the union and its citizens were still American citizens when he direct his armies into the 11 states that eventually voted to secede. This legal gymnastic was needed to allow Lincoln to utilize George Washington’s actions during the Whiskey Rebellion that was described as an “insurrection” so he could unilaterally, WITHOUT Congress, move forward with violence and a plan of war. Legally, secession was not forbidden by the US Constitution and three states, New York, New Jersey and Virginia all had clauses in their ratification document to voluntary join the union.

Another S-word was also not forbidden by the US Constitution, slavery. While most lazy historians accept that slavery caused the southern states to secede, what they don’t know is that the US Constitution would have PROTECTED the slave owners and that Lincoln offered to protect them as well .. FOREVER! There was zero to be gained by any southern state to secede regarding slavery as the Fugitive Slave Act mandated run-away slaves had to be returned to their owners, something Lincoln was also 100% in favor of.

I have seen so many posts that claim the Democrats are the party of slavery and the KKK, however, one only has to look at Lincolns words and actions to know that the birth of the GOP centered on a platform that kept slavery intact!

Here is part of the 1860 Republican Platform:

Resolved: That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions (chattel slavery) according to its own judgement exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend ..”

Lincoln himself quoted the above statement word for word during his 1st inaugural address on 04MAR1861. He also reiterated his support of the Fugitive Slave Act.

Earlier in his address he said:

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

Interestingly, near the end of his address, he says:

I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution–which amendment, however, I have not seen–has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

Total support of an amendment he has not seen? Come on Honest Abe!

Seriously, this is the 1st 13th Amendment (it was never fully ratified so it never because part of the law of the land) called the Corwin Amendment and it is a very interesting part of our history, as well as that of the GOP which were the primary sponsors since seven southern states has already left by FEB1861 when this was first put on the floor of Congress.

The hope was that this amendment would entice the seceded seven southern states to return to the union.

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

This passed the US House of Representatives 133 to 63 on 28FEB1861 and passed the US Senate 24 to 12 on 02MAR1861. Lincoln proceeded to send a letter to each governor explaining this amendment.

With Lincoln’s encouragement, the following states ratified:

  • Kentucky 04APR1861
  • Ohio 03MAY1861
  • Rhode Island 31MAY1861
  • Maryland 10JAN1862
  • Illinois 02JUN1863

Pretty amazing that the “Land of Lincoln” voted for cementing slavery into the US Constitution as late as 1863. What is this all about?

It is pretty apparent that one more piece of the puzzle needs to be looked at here. Why invade the south if slavery was not the issue? Why ramp up the war machine and NOT call Congress into session until 04JUL1861? The War Aims Resolution that Congress passed on 25JUL1861 has a clue.

this war is not waged upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and to preserve the Union ..

‘Save the Union‘ was Lincoln’s motto until that inspiration to the masses lost steam in 1863, and then he shrewdly wove in to end slavery as something to keep the masses engaged. (this is not unlike the Covid-19 –> Racism –> Face Coverings –> ??? we are seeing today)

So in summary, in 2020, the Trump administration would never concede to have GOP majority states secede from the US and allow the Democrats to have the empire. The GOP’s DNA is war and empire.

However, could the Trump administration stray from their DNA (I mean with politicians, “principles” are easily discarded)? Could the GOP part with large sections of California, New York and New England? Could the city-states of Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati (along with other Democratic majority cities in various states) be allowed to go on their own and pay their own way?

Somehow I doubt that. The Marxism agenda is really about taking the whole enchilada and to redistribute whatever survives this process. This is why Marx himself was so encouraged by Lincoln that the two exchanged letters!

Isn’t it a bit ironic that the GOP figurehead and the Democratic party’s role model are one in the same? Totalitarianism of the right boot or the left boot feels the same to “we the people”. The US is crippled in being able to address this rift in culture and society. Splitting up is hard to do!

Something to think about when you might be looking forward to a Republican (stupid party) or Democratic (evil party) win in NOV2020.

Peace out

-SF1

Respect All, Fear None – 2020’s Scary Movie Take 3

“Respect without fear may come from being prepared and keeping all things in proper perspective.”  – John Wooden

Perspective, critical thinking, knowing your options are all essential skill sets to have in this 2020 environment not just in the USA, but also in most countries in the world as the political chess players are making their moves.

The USA itself is forever in a huge debt cycle compliments of the FED, and most European countries are in the same state of affairs. The socialist moves (thanks to BOTH Democrats and Republicans in the USA) over the past 100 years have eroded the ability for people to rise up themselves and be innovators in their business adventures. When technologies would afford people to become true entrepreneurs, this 2020 Crisis has crippled startups and other businesses to seemingly force government loans/grants to ensure continued corporate welfare dependency on a new generation of small businesses and the bailout of large corporate entities as well.

In an effort to mask the underlying financial hole that consumes a large part of the world, Covid-19 followed by accusations of racism and white supremacy have been followed by … Covid-19 again. Take 3.

A hundred years ago, back in the early 1900s, most people in the USA were farmers who had to understand free markets, investments in capital, saving for a rainy day as well as the science behind making their farms profitable. Most were a principled people who knew their individual connection to society. These people had perspective, they were critical thinkers as their lives depended on it and their efforts in farming with nature’s storms and droughts meant they feared men less and respected God more.

Since those days we have lost so much of our principles in our society as government has become daddy, nanny, our god and/or a safety net and more recently an entity that can be called on to make us all FEEL better. It seems that the longer people are in government schools, the more they conform to the government’s mold. This sadly is by design of course.

Today, everyone is offended, monuments, books and movies all can trigger a bad feeling so they must all go away. The US political party called Democrats have generally encouraged this temper tantrum behavior.

Well, y’all enjoy your moment in the sun because there is a day coming where reality will hit you like one of Aunt Minnie’s pies from the movie “The Help”

Some day when the government runs out of other people’s money, those who have been on the government dole will find out what was really in that government “pie”. There ain’t no way you can easily recover from the revelation that you have been a pawn in their game all your life or for many families, for generations.

There are also other political forces (known as the GOP) that are now upset with all the destruction of (their) things that are so very important to them .. like monuments, buildings and the like. They too are being triggered as this is all somehow ending Western Civilization. Well, if it was only these monuments, books or movies that was keeping it going, it was indeed a hollow shell.

Now, let me be very clear, I do contend that destruction of property is a crime no doubt. But I do wish that instead of “public” monuments that these would have been private monuments so that private citizens could defend them on private land without government interference or arrests! You see, having the government own land is not a good thing. The common square can be trashed and government workers are told to defend themselves instead of protecting people or property. It is never government’s fault for anything.

But I digress.

We in 2020 tend to think in terms of either/or. We are for BLM/Antifa or for Trump/GOP/Neo-cons. Well this is BS as there are other ways.

There is indeed another road or two that most people have not found yet. Many might know it in their head but it ain’t in their heart. Religion and politics have inoculated many of these from these alternate roads where one can really respect all as being made in God’s image while fearing no man.

Historically, the Enlightenment from the 1700s on brought some great things but also sought to elevate man and his political governments above God and so now the republics have turned towards socialism which can lead to fascism, Marxism and communism who all see in their minds:

  1. This life is all there is
  2. A most beautiful future where everyone is equal
  3. A future place where no one gets their feelings hurt
  4. A core benefit that Global Warming is stopped so Mother Earth is saved thanks to man’s efforts

Those who know their history know that Marxism/Communism has been tried before time and again with millions killed by their own governments only to see the whole s**tshow collapse time and again. Just ask Russia! Is it no wonder that Russia learned from its pre-1990 times and therefore keeps Rothschild, Soros and Bill Gates from having influence in their republic?

While that side-show is in progress, the elites are now looking to utilize this turbulence to exert more control on the population while reducing it to a size that they can “manage” in a generation or two. Yes, there are evil people thinking about this day and night for their whole lives. They are not like you and me, on the outside they look normal, but inside they are pure evil. (again, think Rothschild, Soros and Gates) They all dream of a sequel to the American Empire.

So, what are the alternatives?

One way has been a hidden road that is revealed with some history of what happened a couple of thousand years ago another empire was falling as well. From what I understand, Jesus and his followers had it right on many levels as how to approach this life in this broken world, in their case, inside the Roman Empire:

  • This all is not about flesh and blood but about good and evil powers and principalities

‘For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.‘ The Bible – Ephesians 6:12

  • This is not about church buildings, monuments, etc.

“believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.” The Bible – John 4:21

  • It is not the things of this world that sustains us in times of crisis, but what is written on our heart

“..you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.” The Bible – 2 Corinthians 3:3

The followers of Jesus, were made free by His love, even when 50% of them were still slaves in the Roman Empire. They were all an inspiration to others in the midst of the empire’s fall. Their oral histories were carried on for generations! This was mainly an underground movement for many years.

It does seem that all it takes is small numbers of people (a remnant) in every country, where it seems that the “safety” governments promised is eroding in the face of violence, that can make a difference one person at a time, spontaneously. We shall see if Jesus-followers make a difference this time.

As to another road or way to live, I look for those with a more libertarian bent that may or may not be Jesus-followers. I for one believe that this other “remnant” and true Jesus followers are not that much different. Both believe in the non-aggression principle BUT still believe in self-defense. Both have a concern for others as INDIVIDUALS and do not play into group definitions. Both also allow others the space to figure things out on their own and will not intrude into their space in an effort to change them. Both allow others to observe their lives, their course that is based on their own principles of life, their North Star, to influence others by their actions.

These roads do not take the top-down attempt to MAKE society worthy of the principles of freedom and liberty. Both of these are grassroots efforts, ignoring political quagmires, in an effort to positively impact others one person or one home at a time from the ground up.

Just as the liberty minded of the 1770s who risked all to exit their security, the British Empire, were actually “formed and molded” by the events of the 1760s where many grew up in their critical thinking and formed a foundation for themselves of principles, either on God and/or on freedom.

These are indeed most interesting times!

So may it be in the midst of this 2020 crisis, we can see clearly a small but encouraging uprising not only in the back-country, but also in the inner-city and suburbs from those that know God as well as those who don’t yet.

Don’t look for this on the news, as any underground movement will remain hidden for some time. Maybe in the next 10-15 years we will begin to see amazing things from small beginnings, a society that changes from the inside out, taking on the Golden Rule (below) as a way to live.

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you”

This is my hope, and my prayer.

Peace out

SF1