Government is the problem, not the answer. Mounting constraints on freedom in the U.S. have reached an inflection point. Forcing free citizens to cover their face with a mask in a farcical attempt to avoid the annual flu is waking up alert individuals to the degree of freedom which has been lost over the past century. (Overwhelming evidence from around the globe clearly shows that mask imposition does NOT improve health outcomes, but that’s another story.)
100-years ago, global interests got one foot in the door of America’s experiment in freedom by engineering U.S. Congress’ passage of the Federal Reserve Act. Following that, America has been gradually transformed into a globalist-connected state with ever-expanding government and steadily diminishing freedoms (summarized in part one of this paper).
Influential internationalists including Bill Gates and George Soros are working overtime to sweep the U.S. off its sovereign pedestal and into a global socialistic ~cabal with Europe—under elite control. The New World Order sabotage now underway and led by World Economic Forum’s Klaus Schwab appears likely to fall short, for a number of reasons—one being that China and Russia, which recently shed Communism, won’t be sucked in.
The new U.S. administration is working just as hard, bumbling-over with newfound power, and intent on making America at least as socialistic as Europe. Lizzie Warren’s proposed wealth tax on Rembrandts, diamonds and yachts of the wealthy, for example, is a gambit right out of Karl Marx’ playbook and ignores the ability of the wealthy to vote with their feet (which is what will happen). Leftist rhetoric is in the end attractive only to the naïve, who barely understand how civilization works—much less how to improve it.
The ensuing turmoil is providing an interesting time to consider other alternatives: such as, how about LESS rather than MORE government? After all, limited government was key to America’s evolution.
Retracing America’s path to becoming the most successful nation in the world, Stephen Molyneux noted that until 1865 Americans couldn’t imagine a society without slaves. After slaves were freed, it became cost-efficient to find ways of doing things that required less labor. The result was the modern world, with a plethora of labor-saving devices and products that are made by machine.
Molyneux maintains that private solutions would be more effective and less costly than government services in almost all areas, including dispute resolution & justice, healthcare, money and banking, roads, schools, social safety nets, etc.
For example, consider government’s role in providing security and protection in a free economy. Currently local police service this need and the greater the crime, the more policemen that are needed… so an increase in crime is actually being incentivized! As an alternative, why not charter organizations that profit when crime is low? If your car is stolen, the company responsible for protecting it will need to fund a
replacement. What a motivation to reduce crime!
Philosophizing professor Michael Huemer noted that private security guards already outnumber police in the US by 2:1. And since the entire political system is driven by illegal contracts (influence peddling through political donations), might the world not work better with legal contracts between individual parties? Current court systems are enormously expensive and tedious and are being replaced by dispute resolution, and arbitration clauses are already widely-used in employment contracts, saving money and time.
A private security & protection system would have three components: (1) independent security; (2) a dispute resolution mechanism; and (3) private insurance.
Doctors share your objective of staying healthy, as do insurance companies. Why not then reverse incentives and pay your doctor every month if he kept you well... but when you got sick, you wouldn’t pay him until you were fully recovered? So the doctor would be incentivized to keep you well. Your rate could even vary, depending on maintaining a healthy body-weight index. Providers would also be incentivized, making more money when they keep you healthy. We plan to release an extensive, separate letter on health solutions, later in April.
Mary Ruwart, author of “Short Answers to the Tough Questions,” points to government as the principal reason for problems in the fishing industry, which struggles in areas where fishing rights are imposed, while thriving in New Zealand and Namibia, where the fishermen themselves set seasonal catch limits in a way that ensures local and area sustainability.
Mary also commented on the impact of FDA drug approval cycle times escalating from 4 to 14 years, while effectively shaving 5-10 years off of our lives. As FDA power increased, preventing (for example) advertising of nutrients in bottled water, 50-80% of innovation disappeared. Emphasis shifted from prevention to treatment. Information on prevention is now effectively banned by the FDA.
But thankfully, consumer organizations are establishing a second track and already reducing cycle times.
Mary maintains that most poor people are the result of government regulation—prohibiting individual actions. The City of Austin, TX initially banned Uber, until complaints forced the city to back down. Institute for Justice is a pro bono legal organization that helps people fighting for liberty and private property rights.
Derrick Broze observed that the Libertarian Party emerged from the disruption of the 1960’s, before becoming compromised. He’s a proponent of Agorism, a social philosophy that advocates a voluntary society, free of coercion and force and supported by people who opt out of the corporate state control grid.
Counter-economics is the theory and practice of all human action neither accepted by the state nor involving any initiatory violence or threat of violence. It entails operating in gray and black markets. Neighborhood kids mowing your lawn without paying taxes would be “gray”. Selling cannabis would be “black” in most states.
Individual action should include limiting involvement with organizations/agencies (~IRS) that you don’t support. (Examples: Move your money from the banking system into a credit union or operate a business without a license.) Removing ourselves from the white market and into the black and grey markets would gradually starve the existing systems. In fact, more people around the world are already living outside tax systems, rather than participating in them.
A stateless society would operate in accordance with the “non-aggression principle”, which applies practices that work for us in our daily life (don’t use force, don’t hit, don’t steal). Why should we have different rules for society as a whole than we do for individuals? Since the non-use of force is a universal principle in our lives, why shouldn’t it be applied everywhere?
The non-aggression principle could be extended to everything. Why can government do things that we can’t do? Why can it initiate force? What gives it the right to financially enslave unborn infants with $200 trillion in liabilities? What’s immoral for us as individuals should be immoral for all human beings.
TPTB (The Powers That Be) don’t want you to imagine a world without them. Instead, they are busily implementing the Great Reset – a top-down restructuring by WEF and other institutions & individuals, maintaining that since capitalism is broken it needs to be redesigned in a more socially equitable, sustainable way. Anyone questioning this vision is labeled a conspiracy theorist.
But where is the people’s reset? And what do WE think life in America should be like? Although we can’t impose freedom, we can attempt to protect people’s freedom/ability to create freely – in every sector of human endeavor, and in alignment with the non-aggression principle. Love and the majority of people on the planet are on our side.
Consider anarcho-capitalism, which means NO RULERS and VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE. In contrast, socialism means COLLECTIVE CONTROL of all capital by the state, meaning that an individual does not have the right to set up his/her own business. That’s where the globalists are heading!
We need liberty and voluntarism, rather than liberal-vs-conservative politics-as-usual.
The use of force is wrong, so let’s stop doing it!
Individuals are free and have the right to collaborate voluntarily with others, without government interference. If the world to come is a world without the state, production of goods and services will be those that consumers desire, and they will be relatively inexpensive. Demand for services in such a free market will automatically create a supply of solutions.
Transition to this better world can be affected through 3 overlapping stages: (1) bring integrity to the current system: cut defense spending in half and get rid of the Federal Reserve, freeing $1T/year—enough to feed everyone on the planet, heal the environment and handle social issues; (2) shrink federal controls, protect individual liberty, and move to sound currency; (3) stop involuntary governance (rules but no
rulers), protecting individual rights.
Countless countries, industries and entrepreneurs have become wealthy simply by creating a free society and minimizing government interference, including taxation. Why not here? Why not now?
(Wayne Peterson publishes this blog periodically at his website.)
The above article contains excerpted information from two Thrive March 2021 two-hour Freedom Portals— a forum in which Foster Gamble presents 2–3 outstanding programs each month on topics of high interest to humanity. Foster’s mission is assisting individuals to regain true freedom here and around the world. I share his enthusiasm and am lending my support to this approach to restoring individual sovereignty here and abroad. In April, Foster plans to unveil an interconnected Hub—with connections to 1100 groups, addressing the same or similar issues in 90 countries.
Legal Disclaimer: Material in this blog is for information purposes only and is not intended to be an offer or solicitation for the sale of any financial product or service or a recommendation or determination that any investment strategy is suitable for a specific investor. This information is not intended to provide financial, tax, legal, accounting, or other professional advice since such advice always requires consideration of individual circumstances. This blog does not constitute an offer to sell any securities in the United States. We will not be liable for any financial losses which might occur as a result of your use of this material.