Tag: England

Divorce is Inevitable: Bring It!

When a spouse goes full-crazy, initial attempts to resolve differences are attempted, even with the assistance of neutral parties, but many times the only solution is divorce. The God-given positive in this world of having two stand as one against the world to help bring another generation life towards the hope of a better future is fractured by human brokenness.

While myself (SF1) has been as a child through the divorce process, I can see clearly that there are times that a positive future can emerge that would be better than the strife caused by continued struggle. However, scars will remain, not just for years or decades, but for generations as this human failure of two people no longer being able to work together takes its toll on the kids every time.

So just like the option to dabble in the mRNA experimental biological agents, one has to count the cost and compare the risks with the benefits at an individual level.

This all is a metaphorical intro to the ‘marriage’ of 50 states, federated into one republic as designed by the generation alive in the 1780s. There is no way any intelligent founding father thought that this marriage would ever be permanent let alone last over 200 years. From my post two years ago “Pre-Covid” it was very apparent that we (USA) just have to get this separation and divorce underway ASAP. Without secession, the 50 states will all suffer under tyranny and totalitarianism for decades to come, and our kids will suffer the most.

The first of two articles I would like to draw your attention to is one by James Bovard on how the fixation on the “treason” accusation leveled at those who don’t bow to the current political narrative that rips u and re-writes history while violating natural law at almost every step will actually tear up the nation at a much faster pace. One might think that the Left is trying to trigger the so-called Right in this post-Trump fog of war here in America’s fly-over country.

While the founders learned from England in their political struggles of the 1600 and 1700s and defined treason very narrowly .. :

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

These words were written in 1787 and yet within only a decade, John Adams as the second president of the US signed the Alien and Sedition Act that made it a crime to be critical of the US government. How about that! The temptation to accuse betrayal on the other party in a marriage is at the ready as a tool to undermine the character of the real victim in the relationship.

Fast forward to the 1950s where there was a Communist everywhere in the US, it was not until the Vietnam war when the masses revolted against this stupid expedition based on lies (typical off all wars since the American Revolution) that the calls for identifying traitors domestically were silenced.

Fast forward another 50 years and we find the Left attempting to label Trump a traitor with accusations of his alignment with Russia for over three years of his term until the next crisis could be launched, Covid-19. As a final nail in Trump’s political coffin arranged by the Left was the myth around the 06JAN2021 Capitol Building “insurrection” .. accomplished without weapons. Only in 2021 can feelings alone constitute an insurrection against a triggered section of society, but here we are.

To see how clearly this “treason” accusation can rip apart a nation and launch calls for secession would be the success of a propaganda campaign in 1861 to label all the states that seceded from the union as traitors.

.. the Civil War illustrates the catastrophic damage that can result from broad-brush definitions of treason. Northern politicians quickly persuaded their supporters that all Southerners were traitors — a capital offense. In 1864, Gen. William Sherman wired the War Department in Washington, “There is a class of people — men, women, and children — who must be killed or banished before you can hope for peace and order.” Union armies in Virginia, Georgia, and elsewhere late in the war intentionally devastated civilian populations who were considered collectively guilty of secession and treason.

The Left is channeling William T. Sherman in calls to exterminate a “class” of people here in the USA. The Trump-right in the meantime is calling for the summertime reinstatement of his presidency. So in my metaphor, the whole political bird (with red and blue wings) is the crazy spouse, and the more innocent party is “we the people”.

The only way to get crazy out of the equation is to reduce their sphere of influence by splitting up the USA into 15 republics like the USSR did in 1990 (or “democracies/communist countries” should those regions desire).

The fact is as James Bovard wraps up his thoughts is:

American politics is increasingly becoming toxic because presidents nowadays are elective dictators.

From federated republic to democracy to the totalitarian state, it should be clear to the casual observer that this nation is no longer a place for liberty and freedom.

For decades and possibly for centuries there has been a consistent effort for “new people” to fix all this from the inside. Elect the right people and we can turn this ship around. Sorry, that ship has sailed and the swamp is all encompassing. There is so much corruption that the foundation is gone. Consider the second of two articles in this piece from Jim Quinn:

It has been somewhat baffling to me why the masses have been unable or unwilling to acknowledge the existence of a ruling cabal/invisible government who are the true ruling power in our world. Any impartial assessment of facts, recognition of historical events confirming the observations of Bernays and Quigley, and knowledge of human nature, should unequivocally convince a critical thinking individual what they are told to believe by politicians, media and financiers is entirely false.

For decades, calling anyone who questioned the approved and sanctioned narrative about how our “democracy” supposedly operates has been called a conspiracy theorist. Of course, this term gained widespread use after the CIA used the term about anyone questioning the JFK assassination. CIA Director William Casey could not have been any clearer about the true nature of our government than his statement in 1981.

“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

We have arrived. Everything the media says is indeed false, just 40 years after the CIA director predicted.

Your government and the financial interests who operate the puppet strings of their politician, media and central banker puppets do constitute a malevolent Deep State, designed to enrich themselves, while subjugating, controlling, and manipulating the masses. If anyone was in doubt about this fact, what has transpired in the last fifteen months should have convinced them of their error. The criminal ruling cabal have virtually perfected Bernays’ propaganda techniques through collusion with Big Tech and the traitorous surveillance state apparatus.

They have consciously and intelligently manipulated the ignorant masses regarding a non-lethal – to healthy people under 80 years old – annual flu, in order to test how far they could push their authoritarian un-Constitutional masking and lockdown measures upon us before we pushed back. To their delight and astonishment, the vast majority of Americans proved to be cowardly, easily manipulated, fearful, and begging to be enslaved by their superiors. It has truly been a depressing display of spinelessness, supplication, and subservience.

In addition to full out lies, the expansion of the national debt secures in my mind that the evil elite desire to enslave the next generations of Americans as the political structure collapses on itself:

How can anyone believe there are reasonable methods of solving the problems of this country through democratic means, when the entire system is captured, corrupt, and concealed from visibility by a criminal cabal of sociopathic billionaires and their highly compensated lackeys? The Deep State, or whatever you want to call the ruling oligarchy controlling the levers of society, have been able to deflect responsibility for the current state of affairs by having their captured media mouthpieces deny their existence and classify those of us who call out their misdeeds as conspiracy theorists.

As this denial of reality loses credibility, and every conspiracy theory is proven to be true, these Deep State co-conspirators have stepped out of the shadows and showed their cards during this fake pandemic crisis. I am not sure whether this change in tactics is an act of hubris or desperation.

The empire’s legs can’t sustain this direction, and those in control do hope that they can capitalize on this with a world totalitarian government that US large corps (Tech, Medical, Finance, etc.) all what to be a part of.

Since I am old, I will repeat myself and use Robert E. Lee’s quote a second time in a week:

The ruin has arrived only 150 years after this honorable man’s prophecy.

Time to think local and act local to keep our sanity in these days, hug your kids and your parents and partner with the like minded in your communities.

-SF1

When Innovative Projects Get Hijacked (Part 2 of 2)

As a follow-up to my previous post about innovation hijacking, the above photo shows President George Washington leading 13,000 troops to put down a tax rebellion that was totally just according to the principles of the Declaration of Independence.:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent

Alexander Hamilton’s plan to pay for the combined war debts of all the colonies with a heavy Whiskey Tax (in today’s terms, $2.50/gallon), in the Distilled Spirits Tax of 1791 act.

How very British of Alexander right? Apparently, the Amerexit (secession of the thirteen colonies from the British empire) was all in vain as the names and flags have changed but power instead of liberty reigns yet again. Hijacked!

So in my last post I had shown how George Washington, as a young British officer, sparked a war between two superpowers in the Ohio country, called the French Indian War (1754-1763), this conflict had a distinct fallout in the American colonies after its conclusion.  My effort today is where:

… I hope to bring both the ramp-up to revolution over the next 25 years (1750-1775) as well as the end result of the quest for independence into focus, and how the dreams of the 20% of the people that were for independence, liberty and freedom were hijacked resulting in a culture in 1790 that involved the very things they were fighting against:

… tyranny, new or higher taxes, monopolies, and restrictions …

By the end of the war the British Empire was the undisputed superpower in both North America and Europe and was all too eager to foist upon their hapless colonial subjects the previously unenforced Navigation Acts along with new taxes. Thanks George!

The liberty experienced for the past 140+ years started losing ground to increased power that the state brings with coercion and violence. To be sure, this shift was gradual, but within a generation it was clear that the British empire failed to understand each of the American colonies to the extent that they should never had intervened from thousands of miles away. As any parent knows, once you have a child on the way to their own independent life, attempting to control that child for the parent’s own well-being is an effort in futility UNLESS you make slaves of everyone.

In England itself, with the liberal Whigs out of power and the warmongering Tories in control, there was fresh support for the new King George III who would station its troops in the colonies during peacetime, enforce the Navigation Acts, restrict western settlement to stunt growth, and institute new Parliamentary taxation. Statist power came like a pendulum to each of the colonies. So with the Proclamation Line of 1763 that restricted western settlement, the 1764 American Revenue Act that enacted taxes on sugar and increased customs enforcement, and the 1765 Stamp Act that raised new taxes on paper products, it was finally The Stamp Act that was especially hated and produced a storm of protest.

Why was there no general revolt in 1763, or 1764? Murray Rothbard has a thought from his fifth volume of Conceived in Liberty:

Ultimately, revolutions are mass phenomena, and cannot succeed without the support—indeed the active and enthusiastic support—of the great majority of the population. . . . Otherwise it will not even make a respectable showing, much less take and keep the reins of government. But the masses will not move, will not erupt, if they lack aggressive leaders to articulate their grievances and to point the path for them to follow. The leaders supply the necessary theoretical justification and analysis of the revolution’s short- and long-term goals. Unaided by leaders, the masses tend to accept each act of tyranny, not out of willing agreement, but from failure to realize that successful opposition can be mounted against the status quo. The articulation by the leaders is the final necessary spark that ignites the tinderbox of revolution.

Leaders are not appointed, they rise to the occasion when this kind of statist tyranny happens. These leaders risk all, as during the American Revolution demonstrated in just the lives of those that signed the Declaration of Independence.

In 1765, Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams, who respectively wrote the Virginia Resolves and Massachusetts Resolves stepped up their game. Sam Adams also established a resistance group known as the Loyal Nine, which soon expanded into the colony-wide Sons of Liberty. The result was that by 1766 The Stamp Act was repealed.

However, in Massachusetts after the passage of the tax-increasing Townshend Acts in 1767, British troops occupied Boston and colonial assemblies were forced to be dissolved. The colonies responded to this increasing coercion with mass non-importation protests that severely hurt British commerce. This BOYCOTT sent a message to the British that eventually, three YEARS later resulted in that the Townshend Acts were partially repealed in 1770.

Yet again, the British Empire pushed buttons yet again as they are now dealing with a teenager, and enacted the Tea Act of 1773 that extended the British East India Company’s tea monopoly to American shores.

This was epic BS as ANY nation that picks and chooses where their people can purchase products THEY want (i.e. free trade) is not a friend of the consumer and is a fried of both economic warfare and eventual physical warfare. Here is looking at you President Trump with all your sanctions and trade deals. But I digress …

Those in Boston promptly responded accordingly with the famous Boston Tea Party of December 1773. Great Britain responded with the Coercive, or “Intolerable” Acts of 1774, which provoked the assembly of the First Continental Congress in late 1774.

It was at this point that the radicals (I am pretty sure in 2019 USA that these people would have been targeted, marginalized and most likely suicided), led by Massachusetts’ Sam and John Adams and Virginia’s Patrick Henry and Richard Henry Lee, battled the conservatives and decided upon a colony-wide boycott of all British products.

In the spring of 1775, the British redcoats responded by trying to arrest Massachusetts radicals John Hancock and Sam Adams, who were currently near military supplies in Concord. Paul Revere traveled to nearby Lexington to warn of the impending British, and colonial minutemen confronted the approaching British troops. The showdown led to the famous “Shot Heard Round the World,” and the American Revolution began.

At this point, with open warfare on the people, which is what the confiscation of firearms is, how does liberty respond to power? Philosophically, it was with managing the war that the forces of liberty faced their most difficult challenge, since war is naturally a coercive event that leads to death and destruction.

The war itself split the liberty lovers that probably included less than 20% of the general population. Many would align with power within this renegade government and use British tactics and statism against the British. How absurd. Bringing war to a larger power in the same way that larger power does war is a study in insanity. This was accomplished both during the American Revolution as well in the Second American Revolution, the War Against Southern Independence that most people refer to as the American Civil War.

Murray Rothbard, in Conceived in Liberty Volume I-IV, yet again points to what method actually saved the American Revolution, which was the use of guerilla warfare where he is paraphrased as saying:

… the Patriots’ greatest military strength lay in their guerrilla warfare tactics (ambushing armies, sneaking behind enemy lines, disrupting supply chains, etc.) and he argued that the only libertarian method of fighting a war is through such guerrilla warfare. This is because it is relatively inexpensive since there is no standing army, soldiers are better motivated because they are close to home, and there is far less need for a stifling and oppressive military bureaucracy.

.. and beyond this, the strategy that was chosen:

.. the decision to fight the war conventionally led to enormous government intervention in the economy through paper-money inflation, debt financing, price controls, and confiscation of goods

War debt leads once again to a desire for a strong central government that will eventually bring tyranny to the forefront yet again, like in 1794 with Washington leading 13,000 troops into Western Pennsylvania and the very real situation we have today with a militarized Redcoat fully entrenched here in the USA in 2019:

So we have come full circle in showing how this struggle between liberty and innovation has with power and political status-quo bureaucracy.

So quickly, in general, I will offer two of my own experiences with this as I referred to in my previous post:

Also in “Part 2”, I hope to offer my own general experiences of where an innovative project’s dreams were hijacked by political and organizational forces bent on expediency and short term gains.

I have a two in mind, one in business and one in ministry, that I have personally participated in. The parallels are very interesting!

It does seem that innovative projects and initiatives do threaten the political status-quo in any organization. I have no doubt that this is the main reason that Jesus himself resisted the human-natural act of forming an organization to accomplish some vision or mission.

In corporate America, as opposed to smaller businesses, there seems to be a bent toward managing verses leading, that risks are to be totally managed so as to really make no progress at all for years or decades. In the end, the business can no longer sustain itself as management surrounds itself with “yes men” (I know that sounds wrong in this PC-world, just assume someone else e-mailed me about this aggression) and stifles innovation that would actually IMPROVE the ability of the business to provide value to its customers going forward.

In my specific case, a very innovative project was hijacked in the development stage by management that failed to understand the project’s attributes and decided to bring in a partner that was ill-equipped to compete development and bring the project into production. Along the way, typical traits were demonstrated like the marginalization of those who really knew the core philosophy of the project as well as how the design was intended to positively impact this business. In the end, money was squandered and the project, like so many in government circles (F-35, Ford Carrier Class, etc), ends up imploding and being a general dumpster fire where good money is thrown after bad.

In organized ministry circles, similar innovative approaches can also bring the status-quo political fake news people out of the woodwork to halt anything that they can understand as being beneficial for people who could use a relationship with Jesus to bring peace and love to their lives and give them an insight into the way that Papa (God, Father) is especially fond of them. Close-minded church-goers and rule-followers have little patience for alternative ways that people can be reached whether is be from one’s home, from a coffee-house or even in the marketplace.

In my specific case, a ministry that had already transitioned from an inward facing clique/country club to a spiritual family that actually had a heart for those without Jesus, just could not give up their view that the church building was the center of what Jesus-following is all about. Threatened that their years of tithing (investing) might find them not able to realize their ROI, they effectively marginalized any staff (professional/volunteer) personnel that would not maintain the new status-quo.

In both instances, the lost dreams of the innovators has to be grieved, which is a process that every visionary has to deal with in their own terms. While they will many times see the positives and learnings that came out of the process as being very beneficial for the next “project/dream”, there is usually always a scar on ones heart to those that gave their all to attempt something that others barely or rarely understand, something much bigger than themselves.

I can only reflect on how Francis Marion, guerilla leader of the militia in South Carolina (1780-1783) that successfully dogged Cornwallis so that he could eventually be trapped by the French fleet at Yorktown. After much of the conflict was over, he was already being marginalized for the next chapter of life in the American Colonies as I indicated in a previous post:

So by the fall of 1781 as the British catastrophe at Yorktown reverberated throughout the British Empire, there were nationalist forces that were already parting ways with the radicals, and even the militias that brought them to this day. By 1783, Francis Marion saw the writing on the wall. The NOV1782 election meant that Marion had to leave Pond Bluff yet again for the 06JAN1783 legislative session. Writing from there on January 18th he shared the inequalities that tainted his excitement about the future of the colony as well of the federation of states. It seems that the Rhode Islander Continental Nathaniel Greene was awarded 10,000 guineas from SC toward the purchase of a SC plantation and quoted an old saying “that kissed goes by favor”. Georgia had also given Greene 24,000 acres as well. Marion eventually was awarded 300 acres in 1785.

It should be noted that the correspondence Marion had with Greene stopped abruptly as the hostilities stopped in DEC1782. Marion had hoped that Congress would follow through on the promise of a lifetime of half-pay for officers but it would be 50 years before that practice would finally start. Marion lamented that “idle spectators of war” were in charge now.

It is little wonder then why there is much more effort needed to be put towards the maintenance of liberty in this broken world than it does to maintain power. It seems that power, and kings, is the default mode of man:

Just some things to reflect on.

I do hope this allows y’all to reflect on history as well as current events.

-SF1