Many want to solve a civilization instead of humanity problem. Philosophical arguments with civilizations philosophical solutions. The problem is civilization itself.
Civilization requires civility in an uncivilized world to make it work
all have to conform, both humanity and nature Humanities philosophy is
wisdom not knowledge. There is no compounding of philosophical
gibberish. It's not ideas of how live the idea of humanity is to live.
There is no key
There is no door
Step out beyond your walls
It's wide open out there
To the stars and beyond
Look
Don't you see it
There is no father
No one abandoned you
You were created by the virgin mother
We call her earth
Join and let us celebrate together
Let us respect and heal her
She will protect and nourish us
She is not a beast to slay
What are you afraid of
Only you were created in your own image
Face it
Don't be afraid of your own skin
You are loved
Please share
Pass on the light
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
How lost is our way
I've been writing incessantly in my notebook and elsewhere coming to terms with a subject as such.
I'm not as much conflicted as torn. I am stuck in a world where we are all thinking, about life, how we got here, where we came from, how do I still tinker and make things, I don't really want to make nor does anyone really need to have made. I live close to a forest and it's full of food. I remember childhood television of show from far off lands with different people, and they had food from the land, I have an interest in the indigenous cultures of the land in which I tread now. They lived with the land in nature. They weren't taken by gimmicks or facades. because nature doesn't fool or trick. Somewhere someone started thinking and thinking they were gaining knowledge of what was around them instead of having the wisdom of the things around them.
I'm not as much conflicted as torn. I am stuck in a world where we are all thinking, about life, how we got here, where we came from, how do I still tinker and make things, I don't really want to make nor does anyone really need to have made. I live close to a forest and it's full of food. I remember childhood television of show from far off lands with different people, and they had food from the land, I have an interest in the indigenous cultures of the land in which I tread now. They lived with the land in nature. They weren't taken by gimmicks or facades. because nature doesn't fool or trick. Somewhere someone started thinking and thinking they were gaining knowledge of what was around them instead of having the wisdom of the things around them.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
The stolen island
So our ancestors came to this land, and the people that greeted them, the ones already here, who were in general, wild, free, powerful, philosophical, eloquent, and a solitary people.
A people that could express themselves sensibly, intelligently, with interests of conscience, and of his rights. Our ancestors that explored and cataloged the riches to plunder, had to work with the natives or starve to death and freeze to death out on the prairie, and up in the north. Those who listened to the wisdom of the natives, who lived with the land for centuries, survived.
Then as the exploiters we brought alcohol, guns, and prejudiced against the natives, jails and prisons and so much more. We signed treaties with them.
What were they given in return after signing legitimate treaties, you know things like the residential schools with deadly health conditions, banned their language and culture, subjected them to sexual degradation and physical violence, and disrupted their families.
That's how their freedom and rights were handled.
Nonetheless they survived.
They were an autonomous sovereign people an ungoverned society of people and I think they can guide us to that place again.
While the Mexican people have an even richer native heritage and culture.
Will the signing of the 2005 security and prosperity agreement, bring us to wiping it out also, the Mexican cultural past which is so celebrated. Will the modernization and westernization lead to a cultural annihilation.
Under the British Colonial directive. The Americans annihilated their native population, this is the same control as today. They annihilated everything that was in the way, the natives, the buffalo, the plants, and other animal species.
The colonialists took over the territory. They brought their methods and they made sure that their methods were going to make the land conform.
The Catholic Church, the UN, seem to want to wipe out peoples autonomous history, the destruction of books, the destruction of information, the destruction of our planet, the one source of information. All from one small, tightly controlled, non-elected, non-representational elitist oligarchy.
A people that could express themselves sensibly, intelligently, with interests of conscience, and of his rights. Our ancestors that explored and cataloged the riches to plunder, had to work with the natives or starve to death and freeze to death out on the prairie, and up in the north. Those who listened to the wisdom of the natives, who lived with the land for centuries, survived.
Then as the exploiters we brought alcohol, guns, and prejudiced against the natives, jails and prisons and so much more. We signed treaties with them.
What were they given in return after signing legitimate treaties, you know things like the residential schools with deadly health conditions, banned their language and culture, subjected them to sexual degradation and physical violence, and disrupted their families.
That's how their freedom and rights were handled.
Nonetheless they survived.
They were an autonomous sovereign people an ungoverned society of people and I think they can guide us to that place again.
While the Mexican people have an even richer native heritage and culture.
Will the signing of the 2005 security and prosperity agreement, bring us to wiping it out also, the Mexican cultural past which is so celebrated. Will the modernization and westernization lead to a cultural annihilation.
Under the British Colonial directive. The Americans annihilated their native population, this is the same control as today. They annihilated everything that was in the way, the natives, the buffalo, the plants, and other animal species.
The colonialists took over the territory. They brought their methods and they made sure that their methods were going to make the land conform.
The Catholic Church, the UN, seem to want to wipe out peoples autonomous history, the destruction of books, the destruction of information, the destruction of our planet, the one source of information. All from one small, tightly controlled, non-elected, non-representational elitist oligarchy.
Sunday, July 04, 2010
Cheap-Money Experiments in Past and Present Times
THERE are a few elementary principles in economic science the mastery of which by
the great body of the American people would be of incalculable value to us as a nation. One of
these is that no government can create money out of anything which it may choose to call money.
Another is that all classes of the people, rich and poor, laborer and employer, are far better off with
a sound and stable currency than they are with any of the varieties of "cheap money." Another
is that no part of the financial or business world can be benefited or injured by changes in the
monetary standard of value without corresponding benefit or injury to the other parts.
Still another is that the larger part of the business of the country is transacted upon credit, and that
anything which tends to disturb or to foreshadow disturbances of the monetary standard of value
cripples credit and demoralizes all business. Finally, though we have by no means exhausted the
list, it would be of the highest importance for the common people to become thoroughly convinced
of the fact that in every instance in which the financial world is disturbed by changes or threats
of changes in the standard of value the sufferers are always the poorer people and the beneficiaries
always the rich, for the latter are able to guard against the coming trouble which they are quick
to scent, while the former are powerless to take the necessary precautions even if they were able
to anticipate it.
The harmful delusion that the Government has the power to create money is traceable directly to
the Legal Tender Act of 1862. Previous to that time the American people, in common with those
of other enlightened nations, believed that the sole function of government in relation to money was
to certify to the weight and purity of the metal contained in it. This view, which, it is scarcely
necessary to say, has been shown by the experience of all civilized countries to be the only sound
one, was completely upset in the minds of thousands of uninstructed people by the issue of the
legal tenders and the subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court upholding the right of Congress
to make such issue. The pernicious doctrine that anything which the Government might choose to
stamp as money paper, or silver, or nickel, or copper became ipso facto money for the amount
named on its face obtained so firm a lodgment in the popular mind that calls began to be heard
from all quarters for the liberal issue of Government money in almost every form except gold.
The country has passed safely through several varieties of the "greenback craze," which was the
most radical and dangerous form of the delusion, but it has yet to reach the solid ground occupied
before the war. So long as the admission is allowed that the Government can create money
there is no satisfactory answer to be made to the questions, "Why should we have a gold standard?"
"Why should we have national banks ?"
or " Why should we have any limit put to the volume of our currency ?
" If the Government can create money, why should it not create all
that everybody wants? Why should anybody
work for a living?
We must get back as a people to a just comprehension of the truth that no government can make
an inferior form of money equal in value to a superior form like gold by enacting a law decreeing
that it shall become so, and that it cannot do. this for the simple reason that the superior form
costs more, and it is this cost which constitutes its value as a medium of exchange. The kind of
money which every man wants is the kind which will buy the most of the things which he needs
that is, have the largest purchasing power. Nothing is clearer than that cheap money means high prices,
and dear money means low prices. Cheap money is as costly for a nation as it is for an individual.
Mr. H. C. Adams has demonstrated very convincingly that the legal tenders made the expense
of our civil war greater by $800,000,000 than it would have been had they never been issued.
CHEAP-MONEY EXPERIMENTS
IN PAST AND PRESENT TIMES
REPRINTED, WITH SLIGHT REVISION, FROM
" TOPICS OF THE TIME" IN
THE CENTURY MAGAZINE
,1892
the great body of the American people would be of incalculable value to us as a nation. One of
these is that no government can create money out of anything which it may choose to call money.
Another is that all classes of the people, rich and poor, laborer and employer, are far better off with
a sound and stable currency than they are with any of the varieties of "cheap money." Another
is that no part of the financial or business world can be benefited or injured by changes in the
monetary standard of value without corresponding benefit or injury to the other parts.
Still another is that the larger part of the business of the country is transacted upon credit, and that
anything which tends to disturb or to foreshadow disturbances of the monetary standard of value
cripples credit and demoralizes all business. Finally, though we have by no means exhausted the
list, it would be of the highest importance for the common people to become thoroughly convinced
of the fact that in every instance in which the financial world is disturbed by changes or threats
of changes in the standard of value the sufferers are always the poorer people and the beneficiaries
always the rich, for the latter are able to guard against the coming trouble which they are quick
to scent, while the former are powerless to take the necessary precautions even if they were able
to anticipate it.
The harmful delusion that the Government has the power to create money is traceable directly to
the Legal Tender Act of 1862. Previous to that time the American people, in common with those
of other enlightened nations, believed that the sole function of government in relation to money was
to certify to the weight and purity of the metal contained in it. This view, which, it is scarcely
necessary to say, has been shown by the experience of all civilized countries to be the only sound
one, was completely upset in the minds of thousands of uninstructed people by the issue of the
legal tenders and the subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court upholding the right of Congress
to make such issue. The pernicious doctrine that anything which the Government might choose to
stamp as money paper, or silver, or nickel, or copper became ipso facto money for the amount
named on its face obtained so firm a lodgment in the popular mind that calls began to be heard
from all quarters for the liberal issue of Government money in almost every form except gold.
The country has passed safely through several varieties of the "greenback craze," which was the
most radical and dangerous form of the delusion, but it has yet to reach the solid ground occupied
before the war. So long as the admission is allowed that the Government can create money
there is no satisfactory answer to be made to the questions, "Why should we have a gold standard?"
"Why should we have national banks ?"
or " Why should we have any limit put to the volume of our currency ?
" If the Government can create money, why should it not create all
that everybody wants? Why should anybody
work for a living?
We must get back as a people to a just comprehension of the truth that no government can make
an inferior form of money equal in value to a superior form like gold by enacting a law decreeing
that it shall become so, and that it cannot do. this for the simple reason that the superior form
costs more, and it is this cost which constitutes its value as a medium of exchange. The kind of
money which every man wants is the kind which will buy the most of the things which he needs
that is, have the largest purchasing power. Nothing is clearer than that cheap money means high prices,
and dear money means low prices. Cheap money is as costly for a nation as it is for an individual.
Mr. H. C. Adams has demonstrated very convincingly that the legal tenders made the expense
of our civil war greater by $800,000,000 than it would have been had they never been issued.
CHEAP-MONEY EXPERIMENTS
IN PAST AND PRESENT TIMES
REPRINTED, WITH SLIGHT REVISION, FROM
" TOPICS OF THE TIME" IN
THE CENTURY MAGAZINE
,1892
Saturday, June 26, 2010
This brief sketch of economic history
This brief sketch of our economic history in the United
States seeks to show that Protective Tariffs have always impoverished
a majority of our people, the Agriculturists ;
that agriculture has thus been made a most unprofitable vocation
throughout the States, and that this unsoundness at the very
foundation of the business of the American people has often
forced our finances into such makeshift conditions, that under
any unusual financial strain a panic, with all its wretched
accompaniments, has resulted.
To consider this properly, we must note the well known
fact that in this land, those who live by agriculture directly,
are more than one half of our population. Their votes can
cause to be made such laws as they see fit, hence, one would
expect the enactment of laws to raise the price of farm products,
and to lower the price of all that the farmer has to buy.
But the farmers vote as the manufacturers and other active
classes of the minority of our voters may influence ; and only
twice in our history, from 1789 to 1808, and from 1846 to
1860, have enough of the minority found their interests sufficiently
identical with that of the unorganized farmer-majority
to join votes, and thus secure at once their common end. In
consequence of this coalition during these two periods, two
remarkable things happened: 1, agriculture flourished,
and comfortable living was more widely spread : 2, panics
were very infrequent, and the hardships and far-reaching discomforts
that must ever attend adjustments to new financial
conditions after disturbances were, of course, minimized.
It is not fair to deduce very much from the first period of
prosperity among the farmers, 1789 to 1808, for, during this
time, there were no important business interests unconnected
with agriculture ; but we may summarize the facts that from 1 789
to 1808, there was, 1, no protection, the average duty during
this time being 5 per cent., and that laid for revenue only ; 2,
that agriculture flourished ; 3, that there was not a single panic. " The Embargo" of 1808, followed by the Non-Intercourse
Act in 1809 and the War of 1812-15, and the war tariff, by
which double duties were charged in order to raise money for
war purposes, caused us to suffer all the economic disasters
flowing from tariffs ranging between absolute protection, and
those practically prohibiting, and intensified by the sufferings
inseparable from war.
During this period agriculture, for the first time in our history,
was in a miserable condition. It is significant that for
the first time too, we had a protective tariff. Though our
people made heroic efforts to make for themselves those articles
formerly imported, thus starting our manufacturing interests,
they had, of course, lost their export trade and its profits.
When the peace of 1814 came, we again began exporting our
produce, and aided by the short harvests abroad, and our own
accumulated crops, resumed the profitable business which for
six years our farmers and our people generally had entirely lost.
Our first panic, that of 1814, came as a result of our long
exclusion from foreign markets, being followed by the stimulation
given business through resumption of our foreign trade
in 1 8 14, which was immensely heightened by the banks issuing
enormous quantities of irredeemable paper, instead of bending
all their energies to paying off the paper they had issued
during the war.
The Embargo and the Non-Intercourse Act,
(which was a high prohibitory protective tariff) that all infant
manufactures must be protected, that is, guaranteed a home
market, and by infant it means new industries which had popped up to serve the war.
States seeks to show that Protective Tariffs have always impoverished
a majority of our people, the Agriculturists ;
that agriculture has thus been made a most unprofitable vocation
throughout the States, and that this unsoundness at the very
foundation of the business of the American people has often
forced our finances into such makeshift conditions, that under
any unusual financial strain a panic, with all its wretched
accompaniments, has resulted.
To consider this properly, we must note the well known
fact that in this land, those who live by agriculture directly,
are more than one half of our population. Their votes can
cause to be made such laws as they see fit, hence, one would
expect the enactment of laws to raise the price of farm products,
and to lower the price of all that the farmer has to buy.
But the farmers vote as the manufacturers and other active
classes of the minority of our voters may influence ; and only
twice in our history, from 1789 to 1808, and from 1846 to
1860, have enough of the minority found their interests sufficiently
identical with that of the unorganized farmer-majority
to join votes, and thus secure at once their common end. In
consequence of this coalition during these two periods, two
remarkable things happened: 1, agriculture flourished,
and comfortable living was more widely spread : 2, panics
were very infrequent, and the hardships and far-reaching discomforts
that must ever attend adjustments to new financial
conditions after disturbances were, of course, minimized.
It is not fair to deduce very much from the first period of
prosperity among the farmers, 1789 to 1808, for, during this
time, there were no important business interests unconnected
with agriculture ; but we may summarize the facts that from 1 789
to 1808, there was, 1, no protection, the average duty during
this time being 5 per cent., and that laid for revenue only ; 2,
that agriculture flourished ; 3, that there was not a single panic. " The Embargo" of 1808, followed by the Non-Intercourse
Act in 1809 and the War of 1812-15, and the war tariff, by
which double duties were charged in order to raise money for
war purposes, caused us to suffer all the economic disasters
flowing from tariffs ranging between absolute protection, and
those practically prohibiting, and intensified by the sufferings
inseparable from war.
During this period agriculture, for the first time in our history,
was in a miserable condition. It is significant that for
the first time too, we had a protective tariff. Though our
people made heroic efforts to make for themselves those articles
formerly imported, thus starting our manufacturing interests,
they had, of course, lost their export trade and its profits.
When the peace of 1814 came, we again began exporting our
produce, and aided by the short harvests abroad, and our own
accumulated crops, resumed the profitable business which for
six years our farmers and our people generally had entirely lost.
Our first panic, that of 1814, came as a result of our long
exclusion from foreign markets, being followed by the stimulation
given business through resumption of our foreign trade
in 1 8 14, which was immensely heightened by the banks issuing
enormous quantities of irredeemable paper, instead of bending
all their energies to paying off the paper they had issued
during the war.
The Embargo and the Non-Intercourse Act,
(which was a high prohibitory protective tariff) that all infant
manufactures must be protected, that is, guaranteed a home
market, and by infant it means new industries which had popped up to serve the war.
Plutocracy or self-government
Where you get a country split, between men who live without working, on the labor
of others, and great masses who labor when they get a chance
and get only part of the product of their work, when you get
that kind of a fundamental economic division you have
to build classes and that country will never again be at peace
until that economic division is ironed out. There are two
things before us: one to be a plutocracy where wealth rules
absolutely, and where men and women are stepped on like the
dirt of the street; and the other is to set up self-government
economic life where men and women handle their own economic
affairs just as now they try to handle their own political
affairs.
of others, and great masses who labor when they get a chance
and get only part of the product of their work, when you get
that kind of a fundamental economic division you have
to build classes and that country will never again be at peace
until that economic division is ironed out. There are two
things before us: one to be a plutocracy where wealth rules
absolutely, and where men and women are stepped on like the
dirt of the street; and the other is to set up self-government
economic life where men and women handle their own economic
affairs just as now they try to handle their own political
affairs.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
2010 Canada's year
I received this mailing from the post today, "Canada's Economic Action Plan". "Making 2010 'Canada's Year'"
"Canada is positioned to lead all G7 countries out of the economic recession."
The Government is committed to staying the course towards economic recovery.
Harper the new UN welfare czar is going to lead Canada out of the economic recession. Now what this does not say is which direction he will be taking us out of recession, is it into depression.
What am I getting to, it all sounds benign on the surface, but if you read the text as written, and place within context.
It says exactly what it says.
Economic recovery.
The government continues to make policy which gives away our national wealth, and continues to take from Canadians.
We had the late year visit from Charles and his Camel. Was that to insure things were in place for the ceremonial hand over of Canada to the crown, to be announced in 2010.
What it says to me, is we here in Canada are the first to fall, creating the wall at the north of North America.
"Canada is positioned to lead all G7 countries out of the economic recession."
The Government is committed to staying the course towards economic recovery.
Harper the new UN welfare czar is going to lead Canada out of the economic recession. Now what this does not say is which direction he will be taking us out of recession, is it into depression.
What am I getting to, it all sounds benign on the surface, but if you read the text as written, and place within context.
It says exactly what it says.
Economic recovery.
The government continues to make policy which gives away our national wealth, and continues to take from Canadians.
We had the late year visit from Charles and his Camel. Was that to insure things were in place for the ceremonial hand over of Canada to the crown, to be announced in 2010.
What it says to me, is we here in Canada are the first to fall, creating the wall at the north of North America.
Friday, March 12, 2010
The death of Tyranny.
The death of Tyranny.
While the world around seems to be falling into a tyrannical abyss, I am seeing a different light opening in front of me.
I have lived under an oppressive tyranny my entire life. It seemingly had freedoms and allowances, provided I live the way they want, say what they want me to say, think what they want thought, know only what I am to know, and what I am not to know.
I was born into this nuclear tipped system. Born at a time when the cat was almost let out of the bag, but a few long-range sniper shots fixed that, and the machine accelerated the program to it's end game.
The Clash is now imminent as a universal lie, the deceptive walls of religion, money, and ownership become exposed. We have been witness to the taking, the degeneration, the evil, the plunder, the pilage, and the rape.
The bending and manipulating of the universal laws, the natural laws that inherently govern us will cease. The people of this earth have come to the point of universal language, we are not going to take back what is ours. We are going to give back what is ours.
While the world around seems to be falling into a tyrannical abyss, I am seeing a different light opening in front of me.
I have lived under an oppressive tyranny my entire life. It seemingly had freedoms and allowances, provided I live the way they want, say what they want me to say, think what they want thought, know only what I am to know, and what I am not to know.
I was born into this nuclear tipped system. Born at a time when the cat was almost let out of the bag, but a few long-range sniper shots fixed that, and the machine accelerated the program to it's end game.
The Clash is now imminent as a universal lie, the deceptive walls of religion, money, and ownership become exposed. We have been witness to the taking, the degeneration, the evil, the plunder, the pilage, and the rape.
The bending and manipulating of the universal laws, the natural laws that inherently govern us will cease. The people of this earth have come to the point of universal language, we are not going to take back what is ours. We are going to give back what is ours.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Wow, and then Haiti disappeared
I find it interesting, no news on Haiti.
Clinton was given command of the region by, by what power, The UN. Now the news has stopped, strange how that happens.
First, aid was halted periodically to make way for dignitaries, who flew in for some photo opportunistic posturing.
Then Clinton was given command of these growing forces.
Forces, do not equal aid, you need to use both hands to provide aid to people. So both hands can't also be holding a weapon.
Aid is something that works to overcome forces to bring about a positive outcome.
Force works against aid to bring about failure.
Where is this build up of force headed.
Cuba is quite autonomous, and the countries of South America seem to be doing nicely without the intervention of the IMF and the corporate thieves with their unproductive rules and laws. The bounty of the land is what is setting them free, but this is not the interventionists way.
Mexico has it's evolved tyrannical government.
The US is so out to lunch.
Canada is selling out as fast as possible to undermine treaty claims.
The UN has signed no treaties, so is under no law. Therefore when the UN puts someone in charge of a country, when they have no elected authority to do so and are not under rule of law. Do you really imagine they will be doing anything good for the people.
Clinton was given command of the region by, by what power, The UN. Now the news has stopped, strange how that happens.
First, aid was halted periodically to make way for dignitaries, who flew in for some photo opportunistic posturing.
Then Clinton was given command of these growing forces.
Forces, do not equal aid, you need to use both hands to provide aid to people. So both hands can't also be holding a weapon.
Aid is something that works to overcome forces to bring about a positive outcome.
Force works against aid to bring about failure.
Where is this build up of force headed.
Cuba is quite autonomous, and the countries of South America seem to be doing nicely without the intervention of the IMF and the corporate thieves with their unproductive rules and laws. The bounty of the land is what is setting them free, but this is not the interventionists way.
Mexico has it's evolved tyrannical government.
The US is so out to lunch.
Canada is selling out as fast as possible to undermine treaty claims.
The UN has signed no treaties, so is under no law. Therefore when the UN puts someone in charge of a country, when they have no elected authority to do so and are not under rule of law. Do you really imagine they will be doing anything good for the people.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Harper the “New Human Welfare Czar
2010 World Economic Forum in Davos – Harper the “New Human Welfare Czar” ?
Harper as quoted stating "Going forward, I believe the smaller, but still influential, G8 will focus on security concerns and human welfare. " (January 27, 2010)
“Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, will deliver a special address at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos. Canada is G8 President this year, and Prime Minister Harper will set out his country's agenda for its presidency, which will focus on security concerns and improving human welfare.” (World Economic Forum, 2010)
What is meant by human welfare, "the governmental provision of economic assistance of persons in need."
Sounds all warm and fussy, but with the deterioration of productive capacity and the erosion of jobs it seems that they are right on coarse with creating the fascist state where state ownership of capital and the state ownership of industry is the order of the day. Thus creating the mechanism by which the government provides the economic assistance to persons of need.
Harper as quoted stating "Going forward, I believe the smaller, but still influential, G8 will focus on security concerns and human welfare. " (January 27, 2010)
“Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, will deliver a special address at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos. Canada is G8 President this year, and Prime Minister Harper will set out his country's agenda for its presidency, which will focus on security concerns and improving human welfare.” (World Economic Forum, 2010)
What is meant by human welfare, "the governmental provision of economic assistance of persons in need."
Sounds all warm and fussy, but with the deterioration of productive capacity and the erosion of jobs it seems that they are right on coarse with creating the fascist state where state ownership of capital and the state ownership of industry is the order of the day. Thus creating the mechanism by which the government provides the economic assistance to persons of need.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)