Prison For your Political Views: UPDATE
Feb 10, 2010 Anti-State, Libertarianism, Philosophy, Police State, Politics
UPDATE: It appears the facts of this story are in fact about 30 years late. This bill may be in the process of being repealed. The law is reality, only it has been an existing law since the 70’s, so this is nothing new or recently passed as assumed in the article. The facts of the law are all still relevant and true.
Yes! You can be placed in prison for your political views in South Carolina. The strength of the Police State continues to grow. The future looks grim. Independent Institute pointed out an article on The Raw Story: No joke: South Carolina now requires ’subversives’ to register. South Carolina did it. They are demanding that Anarchists and others register with the state. Let’s see you oppose the state so the state says you should register with them. To do what? To exist? To think? Let’s see:
They are calling it the Subversive Activities Registration Act. It is found under Title 23 Law Enforcement and Public Safety Chapter 29. Apparently they feel that law enforcement is on par some how with public safety; this could not be further from the truth. Now your political views are seen as some sort of menace to public safety? It is our views and philosophy that will have a future impact on the existence of the State. Yes, the truth threatens their control and ability to take from us or force themselves upon us. The Oppressor must maintain it’s power over the oppressed. The state sees a growing threat. Freedom can not be tolerated by the state.
The bill defines a Subversive Group as:
Tags: Freedom of speech, Police State, Political party, South Carolina
A Case For Self Governance: High Fashion
Jan 10, 2010 A Case For Self-Governance, Anti-State, Libertarianism, Philosophy, Police State
This is not about government control this is about the redundant responses people give me when I say I oppose all government. I am going to talk about a world where the government came in and took over all clothing manufacturers and began to be the sole provider of clothing. What was created was two wasteful bureaucracies to create low quality clothes at a higher rice subsidized by our taxes. We will call our new government agency the Government Agency for Clothes Control (GACC) You get essentially K-mart quality for Armani prices. Fashion will be frozen. Any advancements from creativity and modern inventions in fashion will cease. This will freeze the clothes we wear as the government sees necessary. Now, I am not painting this illustration to show why I oppose government control, but to show the flaws in the many arguments for government control.
Now in this new system I will begin to say we need to abolish the GACC. This will lead to people screaming “You want the poor to go naked!” or “How would we get clothes?” and ” Why don’t you like clothes?” I have nothing against clothes. I wear clothes. I have never seen a naked homeless man in America. There are systems of charity and compassionate individuals who give gloves and coats at Christmas. I want clothes.
A case against government Part 3: State Violence
Dec 1, 2009 A Case Against Government, Anti-State, Anti-War, Philosophy, Police State, PunkJohnnyCash Blog
It occurred to me that there may be those out there who read this site and still do not comprehend my philosophy. I think people loose me when they argue what the role government should have. I ask if we should have a government. My answer is no. I think a good place to start is to look at is what I call State Violence. In order to accept the existence of a state you must accept state violence. A state has no way to force it’s will upon the people without threat of force. In order for a state to exist it must embrace two basic forms of violation. These are theft and violence. The state exists as a parasitic entity that is destructive to both the host and itself.
I am convinced I should have started my series “A Case Against Government” with this article. It is the heart and base of all government power and violations.
Tags: Government, Violence and Abuse
Media Bias More Left vs. Right
Nov 6, 2009 Anti-State, Corporatism, Philosophy, Politics
Media bias is everywhere and after the White House brought it to light I feel it should stay in the main stream media. We should not let this go. Thankfully there are reporters like John Stossel who have been facing this and keeping it alive. Like usual John Stosel is on the front line preaching to the republicrats a libertarian view point. He is a lone voice in a forest of statism.
The Double Standard About Bias in Journalism
Every reporter has a point of view. But some refuse to admit it.It is reassuring to see John Stossel out there, and it looks like his writings are over at Reason Magazine now. This somewhat disappoints me. I like him out there speaking to the left and right more so than to the already established libertarian minded individuals.
In September John Stossel also addressed this issue.
The Truth About Media Bias
Every reporter has political beliefsIt seems that this is a topic he will be confronting, and I hope he will not stand down from this.
Does the Existence of the State Cause Conflicts of Interest?
Oct 28, 2009 Anti-State, Corporatism, Philosophy, Police State, Politics
provided by Wilton D. Alston
My phone is tapped. My mail is read.
They know the thoughts inside my head.
The money I deposited
is now reported to the Fed.
They chip my hand, dispense my bread.
I think they watch me go to bed.
I don’t object. I’m glad instead
to be controlled until I’m dead.
- G. Edward Griffin, from “It’s All for My Security“
As I listened to a classic speech from Murray Rothbard, entitled, “The History of Taxation” something he said struck me. (Often,when listening to Rothbard, this happens.) He mentioned the obvious connections between people who worked inside the banking elite and those who worked, or seemed to work, outside of it, in the regulatory realm. There seemed to be, at that time and now, a cross-pollination between the two bodies, even though one is supposed to oversee the other.
Democracy, Failing mankind for over 2,500 years
Oct 7, 2009 Libertarianism, Philosophy, Police State, Politics, history
There is a belief that democracy is this patriotic concept that will save us all. Democracy has no boundaries, and will allow one group to steal, kill, and oppress the other groups who could not manage to gain as much support or numbers. What does one do if they are the minority? The United States of America was started as a Plutocracy. A Plutocracy is similar to a democratic system where the power is held by a select few in our case, wealthy white men. We have groups with beliefs that are not represented because of the monopoly of the two party system. We have groups in the United States who can not vote. We decided people without proper paperwork from the massive controlling bureaucracies are “Illegal” thus can not vote. If a court has convicted one of a crime (guilty or not) they are a “Felon” thus have no say in the matter. This can be from something as unjust as having a drug addiction which should be dealt with as a sickness not a loss of rights. We have chosen to exclude people groups, and we will do this more in the future as long as we allow other people to decide who they feel should have rights and who should not.
Political Stockholm Syndrome in the U.S.
Oct 2, 2009 Current, Fear And Loathing, Gonzo, Philosophy, Politics, Satire
I sat on the couch last night reading Fear and Loathing on the Campaign trail 72 and the words of the great Doctor Thompson once again touched me. Not in that Dirty old drunken Uncle Sam way where you feel his warm breath on your back as you fearfully prepared to be violated, but in that spiritual eyes opened awakening kind of way. Who would ever want to be in DC? I lived there for a while, and the city is wonderful. Baltimore is wonderful. The East coast is a unique place, but to live and work in the Den of Harlots that is our legislative branch, who would want that? What does it offer?
These are Dogs. They are the worst types. These people who want to go to this place and live their life in conflict and turmoil. Don’t tell me they do it for us. I know and you know perfectly well they do it for self gain. Money, power, and influence. These are megalomaniacs. Now here is where you republicrats fall short. You think that the one that blows smoke up your ass and tells you what you want to hear is different. We all can look at these guys voting records and see otherwise. You all think that the one you voted for cares about you, and is not a greedy bottom feeder. That is wrong. That is more idealistic, naive, and foolish than anything I have ever promoted or proposed.
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism & History of the Libertarian Party
Oct 1, 2009 Libertarianism, Philosophy, Politics, history, video
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism part 1
A case against government Part 2: Migration
Sep 21, 2009 A Case Against Government, Philosophy, Politics, history
(video at bottom)
Are freedoms determined by birth alone? The issue of immigration is based on biases, and prejudices no matter how subtle. This is not to call pro-state controlled immigration advocates “racist” but mostly unaware and misinformed. It is also a tendency for those individuals to claim to have anti-statist views or small government views which are compromised by their support of the state in this area in an attempt to keep out the others. This is the typical us vs. them conflict once more.
Welfare! No Free Lunches! Work Hard get far! Immigrants are leeching off the welfare system! All rubbish. That is right, all of these battle cries of the Neo-Con and conservative right are rubbish. “But Punk Johnny Cash!” you scream, “you support the abolition of welfare, social security, Medicaid, Medicare, and any government assistance whatsoever, how can you say such things are rubbish?”
Read the rest of this entry »
A case against government Part 1: Police State
Sep 16, 2009 A Case Against Government, Corporatism, Gonzo, Philosophy, Police State, Politics
Read the rest of this entry »
We have to have government. Who would protect us if we didn’t have police? Right? I keep hearing these questions and claims. The Supreme Court blew holes in those arguments when they decided it was not the job of the police to protect people. If you have a hard time with believing that then just check it out yourself Click here. So we know the police are not there to protect us, but they are there to enforce laws. What laws do they enforce and why? Well we know they enforce the laws that enable them to demand money from law abiding citizens. This is what happened to Fire Chief Don Payne, who spoke out against the extortion racket his town was running. When the federal government and state budgets run short police stations find ways to get the funding they need from citizens. We hear about it on the news and around town and in Jericho.
