The Federal Reserve Cartel Part IV: A Financial Parasite

February 25, 2012

by Dean Henderson

United World Federalists founder James Warburg’s father was Paul Warburg, who financed Hitler with help from Brown Brothers Harriman partner Prescott Bush. [1]

Colonel Ely Garrison was a close friend of both President Teddy Roosevelt and President Woodrow Wilson. Garrison wrote in Roosevelt, Wilson and the Federal Reserve, “Paul Warburg was the man who got the Federal Reserve Act together after the Aldrich Plan aroused such nationwide resentment and opposition. The mastermind of both plans was Baron Alfred Rothschild of London.”

The Aldrich Plan was hatched at a secret 1910 meeting at JP Morgan’s private resort on Jekyll Island, SC between Rockefeller lieutenant Nelson Aldrich and Paul Warburg of the German Warburg banking dynasty. Aldrich, a New York congressman, later married into the Rockefeller family. His son Winthrop Aldrich chaired Chase Manhattan Bank. While the bankers met, Colonel Edward House, another Rockefeller stooge and close confidant of President Woodrow Wilson, was busy convincing Wilson of the importance of a private central bank and the introduction of a national income tax. A member of House’s staff was British MI6 Permindex insider General Julius Klein. [2]

Wilson didn’t need much convincing, since he was beholden to copper magnate Cleveland Dodge, whose namesake Phelps Dodge became one of the biggest mining companies in the world. Dodge bankrolled Wilson’s political career. Wilson even wrote his inaugural speech on Dodge’s yacht. [3]

Wilson was a classmate of both Dodge and Cyrus McCormick at Princeton. Both were directors at Rockefeller’s National City Bank (now Citigroup). Wilson’s main focus was on overcoming public distrust of the bankers, which New York City Mayor John Hylan echoed in 1922 when he argued, “The real menace to our republic is the invisible government which, like a giant octopus, sprawls its slimy length over our city, state and nation. At the head is a small group of banking houses, generally referred to as the international bankers”. [4]

But the Eight Families prevailed. In 1913 the Federal Reserve Bank was born, with Paul Warburg its first Governor. Four years later the US entered World War I, after a secret society known as the Black Hand assassinated Archduke Ferdinand and his Hapsburg wife. The Archduke’s friend Count Czerin later said, “A year before the war he informed me that the Masons had resolved upon his death.”[5]

That same year, Bolsheviks overthrew the Hohehzollern monarchy in Russia with help from Max Warburg and Jacob Schiff, while the Balfour Declaration leading to the creation of Israel was penned to Zionist Second Lord Rothschild.

In the 1920’s Baron Edmund de Rothschild founded the Palestine Economics Commission, while Kuhn Loeb’s Manhattan offices helped Rothschild form a network to smuggle weapons to Zionist death squads bent on seizing Palestinian lands. General Julius Klein oversaw the operation and headed the US Army Counterintelligence Corps, which later produced Henry Kissinger. Klein diverted Marshall Plan aid to Europe to Zionist terror cells in Palestine after WWII, channeling the funds through the Sonneborn Institute, which was controlled by Baltimore chemical magnate Rudolph Sonneborn. His wife Dorothy Schiff is related to the Warburgs. [6]

The Kuhn Loebs came to Manhattan with the Warburgs. At the same time the Bronfmans came to Canada as part of the Moses Montefiore Jewish Colonization Committee. The Montefiores have carried out the dirty work of Genoese nobility since the 13th Century. The di Spadaforas served that function for the Italian House of Savoy, which was bankrolled by the Israel Moses Seif family for which Israel is named. Lord Harold Sebag Montefiore is current head of the Jerusalem Foundation, the Zionist wing of the Knights of St. John’s Jerusalem. The Bronfmans (the name means “liquorman” in Yiddish) tied up with Arnold Rothstein, a product of the Rothschild’s dry goods empire, to found organized crime in New York City. Rothstein was succeeded by Lucky Luciano, Meyer Lansky, Robert Vesco and Santos Trafficante. The Bronfmans are intermarried with the Rothschilds, Loebs and Lamberts. [7]

The year 1917 also saw the 16th Amendment added to the US Constitution, levying a national income tax, though it was ratified by only two of the required 36 states. The IRS is a private corporation registered in Delaware. [8] Four years earlier the Rockefeller Foundation was launched, to shield family wealth from the new income tax provisions, while steering public opinion through social engineering. One of its tentacles was the General Education Board.

In Occasional Letter #1 the Board states, “In our dreams we have limitless resources and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions fade from their minds and, unhampered by tradition, we will work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive rural folk. We shall try not to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or men of science…of whom we have ample supply.”[9]

Though most Americans think of the Federal Reserve as a government institution, it is privately held by the Eight Families. The Secret Service is employed, not by the Executive Branch, but by the Federal Reserve. [10]

An exchange between Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and Fed Chairman Paul Volcker at Senate hearings in 1982 is instructive. Kennedy must have thought of his older brother John when he told Volcker that if he were before the committee as a member of US Treasury things would be much different. Volcker, puffing on a cigar, responded cavalierly, “That’s probably true. But I believe it was intentionally designed this way”. [11] Rep. Lee Hamilton (D-IN) put it to Volcker that, “People realize that what that board of yours does has a very profound impact on their pocketbooks, and yet it is a group of people basically inaccessible to them and unaccountable to them.”

President Wilson spoke of, “a power so organized, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breaths when they speak in condemnation of it.” Rep. Charles Lindberg (D-NY) was more blunt, railing against Wilson’s Federal Reserve Act, which had cleverly been dubbed the “People’s Bill”. Lindberg declared that the Act would, “…establish the most gigantic trust on earth…When the president signs this act, the invisible government by the money power will be legitimized. The law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation. From now on, depressions will be scientifically created. The invisible government by the money power, proven to exist by the Money Trust Investigation, will be legalized. The whole central bank concept was engineered by the very group it was supposed to strip of power”. [12]

The Fed is made up of most every bank in the US, but the New York Federal Reserve Bank controls the Fed by virtue of its enormous capital resources. The true center of power within the Fed is the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), on which only the NY Fed President holds a permanent voting seat. The FOMC issues directives on monetary policy which are implemented from the 8th Floor of the NY Fed, a fortress modeled after the Bank of England. [13]

In the fifth sub-basement of the 14-story stone hulk lie 10,300 tons of mostly non-US gold, 1/3 of the world’s gold reserves and by far the largest gold stock in the world. [14]

The world of money is increasingly computerized. With the introduction by the Eight Families of complicated financial instruments like derivatives, options, puts and futures; the volume of inter-bank transactions took a quantum leap. To handle this the fed built a superhighway eerily known as CHIPS (Clearing Interbank Payment System), which is based in New York and modeled after Morgan’s Belgium-based Euro-Clear – also known as The Beast.

When the Fed was created five New York banks- Citibank, Chase, Chemical Bank, Manufacturers Hanover and Bankers Trust- held a 43% stake in the New York Fed. By 1983 these same five banks owned 53% of the NY Fed. By year 2000, the newly merged Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank combines owned even bigger chunks, as did the European faction of the Eight Families. Collectively they own majority stock in every Fortune 500 corporation and do the bulk of stock and bond trading. In 1955 the above five banks accounted for 15% of all stock trades. By 1985 they were involved in 85% of all stock transactions. [15]

Still more powerful are the investment banks which bear the names of many of the Eight Families. In 1982, while Morgan bankers presided over negotiations between Britain and Argentina after the Falklands War, President Reagan pushed through SEC Rule 415, which helped consolidate securities underwriting in the hands of six large investment houses owned by the Eight Families: Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Salomon Brothers, First Boston and Lehman Brothers. These banks further consolidated their power via the merger mania of 1980s and 1990s.

American Express swallowed up both Lehman Brothers-Kuhn Loeb – which had merged in 1977 – and Shearson Lehman-Rhoades. The Israel Moses Seif’s Banca de la Svizzera Italiana bought a 7% stake in Lehman Brothers. [16] Salomon Brothers nabbed Philbro from the South African Oppenheimer family, then bought Smith Barney. All three then became part of Traveler’s Group, headed by Sandy Weill of the David-Weill family, which controls Lazard Freres through senior partner Michel David-Weill. Citibank then bought Travelers to form Citigroup. S.G. Warburg, of which Oppenheimer’s Chartered Consolidated owns a 9% stake, joined the old money Banque Paribas- which merged into Merrill Lynch in 1984. Union Bank of Switzerland acquired Paine Webber, while Morgan Stanley ate up Dean Witter and purchased Discover credit card operations from Sears.

Kuhn Loeb-controlled First Boston merged with Credit Suisse, which had already absorbed White-Weld, to become CS First Boston- the major player in the dirty London Eurobond market. Merrill Lynch – merged into Bank of America in 2008 – is the major player on the US side of this trade. Swiss Banking Corporation merged with London’s biggest investment house S.G. Warburg to create SBC Warburg, while Warburg became more intertwined with Merrill Lynch through their 1998 Mercury Assets tie up. The Warburg’s formed another venture with Union Bank of Switzerland, creating powerhouse UBS Warburg. Deutsche Bank bought Banker’s Trust and Alex Brown to briefly become the world’s largest bank with $882 billion in assets. With repeal of Glass-Steagal, the line between investment, commercial and private banking disappeared.

This handful of investment banks exerts an enormous amount of control over the global economy. Their activities include advising Third World debt negotiations, handling mergers and breakups, creating companies to fill a perceived economic void through the launching of initial public stock offerings (IPOs), underwriting all stocks, underwriting all corporate and government bond issuance, and pulling the bandwagon down the road of privatization and globalization of the world economy.

A recent president of the World Bank was James Wolfensohn of Salomon Smith Barney. Merrill Lynch had $435 billion in assets in 1994, before the merger frenzy had really even gotten under way. The biggest commercial bank at the time, Citibank, could claim only $249 billion in assets.

In 1991 Merrill Lynch handled 26.8% of all global bank mergers. Morgan Stanley did 16.8%, Goldman Sachs 16.3%, Lehman Brothers 16.1% and Credit Suisse First Boston 14.5%. Morgan Stanley did $60 billion in corporate mergers in 1989. By 2007, reflecting the repeal of Glass-Steagel, the top ten NMA advisers in order were: Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, UBS Warburg, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank and Lazard. In the IPO stock underwriting field for 1991 the top four were Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and CS First Boston. In the arena of global privatization for years 1985-1995, Goldman Sachs led the way doing $13.3 billion worth of deals. UBS Warburg did $8.2 billion, BNP Paribas $6.8 billion, CS First Boston $4.9 billion and Paribas-owner Merrill Lynch $4.4 billion. [17]

In 2006 BNP Paribas bought the notorious Banca Nacionale de Lavoro (BNL), which led the charge in arming Saddam Hussein. According to Global Finance, it is now the world’s largest bank with nearly $3 trillion in assets.

The leading US debt underwriters for the first nine months of 1995 bore the same familiar names. Merrill Lynch underwrote $74.2 billion in the US debt markets, or 15.3% of the total. Lehman Brothers handled $52.5 billion, Morgan Stanley $47.4 billion, Salomon Smith Barney $45.6 billion. CS First Boston, Chase Manhattan and Goldman Sachs rounded out the top seven. The top three municipal debt underwriters that year were Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and UBS Paine Webber. In the euro-market the top four underwriters in 1995 were UBS Warburg, Merrill Lynch, Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs. [18] Deutsche Bank’s Morgan Grenfell branch engineered the corporate takeover binge in Europe.

The dominant players in the oil futures markets at both the New York Mercantile Exchange and the London Petroleum Exchange are Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Goldman Sachs (through its J. Aron & Company subsidiary), Citigroup (through its Philbro unit) and Deutsche Bank (through its Banker’s Trust acquisition). In 2002 Enron Online was auctioned off by a bankruptcy court to UBS Warburg for $0. UBS was to share monopoly Enron Online profits with Lehman Brothers after the first two years of the deal. [19] With Lehman’s 2008 demise, its new owner Barclays will get their cut.

Following the Lehman Brothers fiasco and the ensuing financial meltdown of 2008, the Four Horsemen of Banking got even bigger. For pennies on the dollar, JP Morgan Chase was handed Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual. Bank of America commandeered Merrill Lynch and Countrywide. And Wells Fargo seized control over the reeling #5 US bank Wachovia. Barclays got a sweetheart deal for the remains of Lehman Brothers.

Former House Banking Committee Chairman Wright Patman (D-TX), declared of Federal Reserve Eight Families owners, “The United States today has in effect two governments. We are the duly constituted government. Then we have an independent, uncontrolled and uncoordinated government in the Federal Reserve System, operating the money powers which are reserved to Congress by the Constitution”. [20]

Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, US debt (mostly owed to the Eight Families) has skyrocketed from $1 billion to nearly $14 trillion today. This far surpasses the total of all Third World country debt combined, debt which is mostly owed to these same Eight Families, who own most all the world’s central banks.

As Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) pointed out, “International bankers make money by extending credit to governments. The greater the debt of the political state, the larger the interest returned to lenders. The national banks of Europe are (also) owned and controlled by private interests. We recognize in a hazy sort of way that the Rothschilds and the Warburgs of Europe and the houses of JP Morgan, Kuhn Loeb & Co., Schiff, Lehman and Rockefeller possess and control vast wealth. How they acquire this vast financial power and employ it is a mystery to most of us.”[21]

Tomorrow: Part V The Solution

[1] Behold a Pale Horse. William Cooper. Light Technology Press. Sedona, AZ. 1991. p.81

[2] Dope Inc.: The Book that Drove Kissinger Crazy. The Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. Washington, DC. 1992.

[3] Democracy for the Few. Michael Parenti. St. Martin’s Press. New York. 1977. p.67

[4] Descent into Slavery. Des Griffin. Emissary Publications. Pasadena 1991

[5] The Robot’s Rebellion: The Story of the Spiritual Renaissance. David Icke. Gateway Books. Bath, UK. 1994. p.158

[6] The Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. p.504

[7] Ibid

[8] Ibid

[9] Ibid. p.77

[10] “Secrets of the Federal Reserve”. Discovery Channel. January 2002

[11] The Confidence Game: How Un-Elected Central Bankers are Governing the Changed World Economy. Steven Solomon. Simon & Schuster. New York. 1995. p.26

[12] Icke. p.178

[13] Solomon. p.63

[14] Ibid. p.27

[15] The Corporate Reapers: The Book of Agribusiness. A.V. Krebs. Essential Books. Washington, DC. 1992. p.166

[16] The Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. p.79

[17] “Playing the Middle”. Anita Raghavan and Bridget O’Brian. Wall Street Journal. 10-2-95

[18] Securities Data Corporation. 1995

[19] CNN Headline News. 1-11-02

[20] The Rockefeller File. Gary Allen. ’76 Press. Seal Beach, CA. 1977. p.156

[21] Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids. Jim Marrs. Harper Collins Publishers. New York. 2000. p.77

http://www.deanhenderson.wordpress.com

Advertisements

A Dollar Cataclysm Is Imminent

January 29, 2012

Editor’s Notes~

Washington has lit the match on a time bomb called the Iranian economic sanctions. DC and its grudging allies are attempting to shut out the Iranian central bank and keep Iran from selling oil. But Iran has powerful friends…the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India & China). The unintended consequences of the sanctions are that the world is aggressively working to supplant the Dollar as the world reserve currency. Iran just made a deal with India to sell them oil and accept payment in gold. Iran will do this with other nations through the Kish Island Oil Bourse that opened in February, 2008. The American-led economic warfare, poorly disguised as diplomatic alarm about Iranian nuclear capabilities, is not about splitting the atom or building a bomb. Washington knows that if the oil-producing nations forsake the Dollar to settle all oil transactions, the Dollar is over. Washington has overplayed its hand in this high-stakes poker game. Iran holds the trump card: it sits on an ocean of crude oil that the Europe cannot live without. Washington’s global influence is in steep decline as the world is tired of DC’s bullying tactics. The BRIC nations are rapidly ascending.

Some recent history is in order. Saddam Hussein planned to stop selling Iraqi oil in dollars and switch to the Euro. Muamar Gaddafi of Libya planned to create a new gold-backed African dinar and settle oil payments in the new gold-backed money.

What happened to both of them and their countries? They were attacked by Washington. Both leaders are dead.

Pepe Escobar of The Asian Times has written a very important article that you must read. The Iranian parliament is meeting TODAY, SUNDAY January 29th, to discuss Iran’s response to Washington and Europe.

If Iran stops selling oil to Europe…even for a week or two…oil prices will skyrocket worldwide. European nations already teetering on the brink of default could quickly collapse. The Euro could collapse and the Dollar also.

If you have any brains between your ears, you’ll turn your paper investments into cash and get your cash out of the financial institutions RIGHT NOW. Buy a safe and keep your money at home.

The Iranian Oil Embargo Blowback
By Pepe Escobar


Secession Versus Balkanization

November 7, 2011

Why Secession is the only solution for Liberty

By Russell D. Longcore

I have a fellow traveler on the Liberty Road named Kerodin. He blogs very thoughtfully at Memento Mori and Three Percent Patriots. Recently he wrote about secession and Balkanization and that got my attention.

What is a “Three Percent Patriot”?

(from Sipsey Street Irregulars)

”During the American Revolution, the active forces in the field against the King’s tyranny never amounted to more than 3% of the colonists. They were in turn actively supported by perhaps 10% of the population. In addition to these revolutionaries were perhaps another 20% who favored their cause but did little or nothing to support it. Another one-third of the population sided with the King (by the end of the war there were actually more Americans fighting FOR the King than there were in the field against him) and the final third took no side, blew with the wind and took what came.

Three Percenters today do not claim that we represent 3% of the American people, although we might. That theory has not yet been tested. We DO claim that we represent at least 3% of American gun owners, which is still a healthy number somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 million people. History, for good or ill, is made by determined minorities. We are one such minority. So too are the current enemies of the Founders’ Republic. What remains, then, is the test of will and skill to determine who shall shape the future of our nation.

The Three Percent today are gun owners who will not disarm, will not compromise and will no longer back up at the passage of the next gun control act. Three Percenters say quite explicitly that we will not obey any further circumscription of our traditional liberties and will defend ourselves if attacked. We intend to maintain our God-given Unalienable Rights to liberty and property, and that means most especially the right to keep and bear arms. Thus, we are committed to the restoration of the Founders’ Republic, and are willing to fight, die and, if forced by any would-be oppressor, to kill in the defense of ourselves and the Constitution that we all took an oath to uphold against enemies foreign and domestic.

We are the people that the collectivists who now control the government should leave alone if they wish to continue unfettered oxygen consumption. We are the Three Percent. Attempt to further oppress us at your peril. To put it bluntly, leave us the hell alone. Or, if you feel froggy, go ahead AND WATCH WHAT HAPPENS.”

Ok, dear readers. Got the context? Kerodin is a fan of restoration of the USA. Kerodin’s post was about the “Balkanization” of CONUS (which is the CONtinental US). He’s against it. So am I. However, secession is not Balkanization. Let’s explore this idea.

Definitions always come first with me, so we all know that we’re using the same terms and not talking past each other.

“Balkanization:” (from Wikipedia) A geopolitical term, originally used to describe the process of fragmentation or division of a region or state into smaller regions or states that are often hostile or non-cooperative with each other, and it is considered pejorative… The term refers to the division of the Balkan peninsula, formerly ruled almost entirely by the Ottoman Empire, into a number of smaller states between 1817 and 1912…The term is used to describe…disintegration.

What is happening NOW in America is Balkanization. States are already often hostile and un-cooperative with each other. Washington does not create a climate of cooperation between the states. The present political system is a system of spoils, pitting each state against each other for the Federal largesse. When a Congressman or Senator “brings home the bacon,” they are judged by whether or not they can wheedle more money coming back to their state than the state sent to DC. That is considered success in the Balkanized America of 2011.

Secession will not happen before economic collapse. There is not one statehouse in America that is a hotbed of secessionist thought. You cannot find one state that is even contemplating something as simple as collecting their state taxes in silver and gold, or re-vitalizing a state militia. Sure…you’ll find dozens of states that have passed resolutions against national IDs, or other weak-kneed, limp-dicked resolutions. But there is no state of the fifty where radical liberty is being even considered.

But wait until the US economy collapses, followed by the economies of the rest of the world. All politics will become local again. Only AFTER economic collapse will local and state governments begin to consider secession. I contend that widespread economic devastation, disease and death will almost force some states to launch out to seek their own fortunes without Washington.

So before we start arguing over the color of the drapes in this house, we must go down into the cellar and determine if the foundation for the house can support it.

It is inevitable that the United States of America will collapse as a political entity. The government in Washington is entirely out of control, spending wildly, taxing voraciously, making war indiscriminately, borrowing profligately and destroying the national money supply. In the population of the USA there is discontent but no national mission to repair Washington. Why? There are too many people on the public dole. And DC’s power base will never place itself under anyone’s control again. So fragmentation and dis-integration is unavoidable.

Let’s go back to the First War of Secession in 1776. Thirteen colonies of Great Britain fought and won a war (the Three Percent) so that they could become thirteen sovereign nations. They did not fight to become just another nation with thirteen big counties. The Articles of Confederation were a loosely organized management agreement between sovereigns, something short of a treaty. But men who wanted a stronger central government met in Constitutional Convention and drafted a new Constitution. Most of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence did not sign the Constitution. Thomas Paine hated the new Constitution. Patrick Henry would not sign it either.

But the Constitution is not a contract, nor is it a treaty, nor is it a legal document. It is a pact between the people alive at the time it was drafted and ratified. The Constitution has no force of law to bind any two people to it or to each other. The parties did not sign it…you did not sign it…I did not sign it.

To learn all you need to know about the US Constitution in about 40 pages, go to: Lysander Spooner

There is no foundation whatsoever for a United States of America as presently configured. CONUS should have sovereign nations from sea to shining sea. So I cannot enter into a discussion about restoring America when it should not even exist in its present form.

Kerodin only posted a few sentences. So I will show each sentence and my response following. I will challenge Kerodin’s preconceptions and world view, and hopefully yours also.

There are many who anticipate a Balkanization of CONUS. I anticipate the collapse of the Washington government. But that does not automatically translate into a Balkanization. I believe that most American states will stay in the Union, awaiting their orders from their next set of masters.

For some it is a Strategy for defeating the republic. Smaller pieces of a pie are easier to eat. I know of no one who proffers the idea of “balkanization” to defeat the republic. I’m not even sure why Kerodin wrote this. Most who wish to defeat the republic are using socialism, not the idea of breaking up the Union. And any person or group of persons who are dedicated to secession PRIOR to the economic collapse of the Washington government and the American economy are, in my opinion, providing a very valuable service by educating the American populace ABOUT secession before it occurs. For example, the Texas Nationalist Movement touches the lives of hundreds of thousands of Texans each year with the message that Texas should once again be a sovereign nation. That will not happen before collapse, but Texans will be far more prepared for liberty because of the TNM.

Some in the Patriot Community are actively seeking the same ends, through secession. The result will be the same – tyranny will win. I do not believe that tyranny will win EVERYWHERE. Once the overarching Federal Government is stripped of its power and money, there will be a fight between tyranny and liberty. Please remember what happened to the Soviet Union in 1989 and later. The USSR dissolved, and the 15 republics that comprised the USSR returned to sovereign nation status. The mighty Red Army did not crush secession. Secession won, and won big.

However, every one of those 15 nations that had seceded simply repeated the mistakes of the tyrants, just on a smaller scale. And today, every one of those nations will suffer some form of economic illness when the US Dollar collapses and ceases to be the world reserve currency. So while the concept of secession means potentially greater liberty, it can easily be hijacked and used as a tool for tyrants. Unfortunately, there is no better alternative to secession. And the Three Percenters will be more important to America than ever.

The Right to secede is one thing, and creating the circumstances in which few want to secede is a better goal (such as we had in 1791).

Kerodin is mistaken here. In 1791, there were thirteen sovereign nations on the Eastern coast of CONUS. They had just completed the overthrow of King George and secession from Great Britain a few years earlier. And in the ensuing years after the Articles of Confederation were ratified, and even after the Constitution was ratified, state secession was contemplated and threatened many times by states unhappy with Federal interference (like the Whiskey Rebellion, and the Alien and Sedition Acts).

Humans have an Unalienable Right of free association, the right to have relationships with whomever they choose. And the “right to secede” is simply another Unalienable Right…the Right to Contract. In that right you may enter into contract as well as leave a contract. Diminishing the demand for secession means increasing the supply of personal liberty and property rights. I contend that this cannot be done in a nation of over 300 million diverse souls, especially when most of those souls do not want more personal liberty and increased property rights.

Simple fact of warfare – if this nation breaks up into pieces, she’ll never be whole again and the concept of Liberty will be dead across the entire planet.

I agree that “she’ll never be whole again,” but that is the best outcome possible. I respectfully and vociferously disagree with Kerodin about Liberty. Monopolies always eventually tend toward tyranny, because competition has been suppressed. DC has a monopoly on government and a monopoly on American money. The greatest saturation of personal liberty occurs where the greatest saturation of competition exists…competition of ideas, competition of the free market, competition of money and capital…and that very level of competition always devolves down to smaller and smaller units of human effort.

Several in our community are linking to a man who spent a year in a Balkan city under siege. I’m linking him as well, and already added his site to the blog roll. At the moment his site is still new, so reading through it from the beginning is easy, and I commend it to you. Consider what is offered, keep what works for you, discard the rest. Here is his first post.

Kerodin, I realize that this happened in a Balkan city. But after the economic collapse that WILL happen in America, this will happen in EVERY American city. This is the very reason that all of us keep beating the drum for survival preparedness, PT and resistance. It is precisely because this collapse will occur, taking America back to the 18th Century in many locales, that the concept of secession will blossom like weeds in the cracks of the sidewalks. Hunger and privation tends to focus the mind. The Three Percenters will be more crucial to basic civilization than you presently imagine, and you already think they will be the vanguard of leadership on CONUS.

Conclusion

My friend Kerodin has some very valid concerns about our futures. I shared those same concerns about America back in the ‘90s. But I found that America’s path is away from liberty, and Washington’s path is a bullet train toward tyranny and monopoly. I discovered that the only chance that Liberty has on CONUS is through secession. Friends, stop thinking nationally. Start thinking small government. Then think smaller. That’s were Liberty will live in our futures.

Secession is the Hope for Mankind. Who will be first?

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

© Copyright 2011, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


A Tale of Two State-Sponsored Killings

September 26, 2011

by William L. Anderson

(Editor’s Note: Executions…yet another thing that government regularly screws up and should never be trusted with.)

The other night, the State of Georgia killed Troy Davis for the alleged murder of an off-duty police officer. The execution was controversial because a number of witnesses who testified at Davis’ trial later recanted their statements. What was most interesting to me about that was that prosecutors had no problem accepting their testimony when it implicated Davis, but when those same witnesses later claimed to have been coerced and said that they lied because that was what police and prosecutors wanted, suddenly those same conveyors of truth had become “unreliable.” Likewise, those wearing the black robes of judges came to the same conclusion.

The case itself became a symbol of the state ramrodding through executions even though there could be doubt about the guilt of the convicted, and I join in the disgust and anger that others who have opposed this execution have expressed. However, Davis’ state-sponsored homicide was not the only execution in the USA that night; the New York Times had an Associated Press article about an execution in Texas:

White supremacist gang member Lawrence Russell Brewer was executed Wednesday evening for the infamous dragging death slaying of James Byrd Jr., a black man from East Texas.

There were no vigils and no protests of this government killing, and the headline in the NYT said it all: “White Supremacist Executed for Texas Dragging.” The placing of the two accounts together supposedly highlighted the contrast between the natures of the stories. In one, the state was killing a black man convicted of killing a white cop and there was doubt about the verdict, thus bringing together all of the political issues at once. In the other, we see a vicious, racist killer getting his just desserts in an open-and-shut case.

With Davis, we have a story about issues of racism, the killing of a state agent, and wrongful convictions, all wrapped in the ugly shroud of executions. One cannot put together a case with more political implications, and the response to it was what one would expect. The wounds of past injustices are great and only opened more when the State of Georgia injected poison into the body of Davis, and also injected more venom into our Body Politic. Racism. Cop killing. Wrongful convictions. Executions. There is nothing to add.

Brewer’s state-sponsored homicide brings different emotions. I remember seeing an African-American juror who had voted death to Brewer being interviewed on television afterward, and he said that while he opposed the death penalty, the nature of this case made such punishment justified. To put it another way, the horrific circumstances of the murder of Byrd and its racial and political implications permitted people to do away with their own principles and to support that which they normally would oppose. (To their credit, the family of Byrd asked for clemency for Brewer, while the family of Mark McPhail, the dead officer, supported Davis’ execution.)

He had participated in the murder of a black man, and was identified with groups that openly are racist. His views of others of a different race made it easier for those who say they oppose executions to support his being put to death by state authorities. Like Davis, who allegedly killed a member of a politically-favored group, police officers, Brewer not only had violated the life of someone else, but he had engaged in politically-incorrect behavior. Thus, the government apparatus that seeks to execute went into high gear in order to make sure that these alleged miscreants were to face the full fury of the law.

Before Brewer was to be killed, he declined to make a statement; Davis, about to die, calmly expressed one last time that he did not do what he was about to be killed for allegedly doing. They were different men, different events, yet they are tied together and not just because they were executed on the same date in the same country.

Would Troy Davis have supported the execution of Lawrence Russell Brewer? Would Lawrence Russell Brewer have supported the execution of Troy Davis? I don’t know. What I do know is that when it comes to state-sponsored killings, all principles are discarded. People become what they have hated, and supposedly-principled people become the worst of hypocrites.

People who say they are “pro-life” try to justify executions in that same light. John Ashcroft, who lost his U.S. Senate election in 2000 to a dead man, had enraged black voters in his state of Missouri because he single-handedly denied the appointment of a black judge to the federal bench because Ashcroft claimed that the judge “was soft on the death penalty.” Yet, Ashcroft was one of the most staunchly anti-abortion members of Congress and always was feted by “pro-life” groups for his legislative actions.

Likewise, many others who oppose state-sponsored killings of people convicted in the courts believe that taxpayers should be forced to fund the killing of children who are ready to be born, the “partial-birth” abortion in which a medical professional brings out the head of a child from the womb, stabs the back of the head with scissors, bringing death. Like those in the execution chamber, the child is not deemed worthy of staying alive by people in legislative office and by men and women wearing black robes, not to mention the editors of the “Newspaper of Record.”

What I am describing is a Culture of Death, and a state-sponsored Culture of Death at that. In fact, a society cannot degenerate into that awful culture without the prodding and the sponsorship of the State. In the end, the State itself becomes Death.

Government


I don’t know if Troy Davis did what police and prosecutors claimed and what jurors and judges believed, although given what I know about how the courts in the USA work, I have my doubts. On the other hand, no one disputes the perfidy of what Lawrence Russell Brewer did, and it is understandable why jurors were willing to discard their own principles so that they could order his execution.

As I see it, once we give the State the privilege of killing whom it may choose, things are set into motion that are expressly unjust and cannot be reversed. The fact that Brewer took part in a terrible murder no more justifies his execution than the chance – and only the chance – that Davis shot a cop to death justified the State of Georgia killing him. (The officer was off-duty, but the fact that he was employed as a police officer was enough to label Davis a “cop-killer.”)

By giving the State the power to kill others “legally,” we also must realize that the State will kill those whom are politically deemed unfit to live. Plenty of people commit terrible murders for which no one is officially put to death. Only when a killing is deemed politically-incorrect is someone executed, and if politics ultimately is to become the standard of who is to live and who is to die, then we have become people who have passed the Point of No Return.

Following Davis’ execution, the economist Robert Higgs wrote:

“Those who compose the state have estranged themselves from their fellows and arrogated to themselves the power of life and death. Heedless of natural law, they are cruelly selective and opportunistic in their obedience even to the “laws” they have made. They have traded their consciences for power and political place, and their souls are as cold as ice. They are, morally, the walking dead.”

I would add that other people who support such things also join those who are spiritually dead. That is where state-sponsored killings always lead.

William L. Anderson, Ph.D. teaches economics at Frostburg State University in Maryland, and is an adjunct scholar of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. He also is a consultant with American Economic Services.

Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Politician Personality Disorder aka Sociopathy

July 1, 2011

By Russell D. Longcore

The premise of this article is that persons who seek and hold elective office have latent, and often overt sociopathic personalities.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition, DSM IV-TR = 301.7, a widely used manual for diagnosing mental disorders, defines ”antisocial personality disorder” as:¹

A) There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by three or more of the following:
1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;
2. deception, as indicated by repeatedly lying, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;
3. impulsiveness or failure to plan ahead;
4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;
5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others;
6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations;
7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another;
B) The individual is at least age 18 years.
C) There is evidence of conduct disorder with onset before age 15 years.
D) The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of schizophrenia or a manic episode.

Now, I’m going to list those characteristics again, and give examples in bold print after each characteristic. Some of this will be tongue-in-cheek, but that doesn’t mean it’s not true:

A) There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 years (runs for Student Council, runs for Class President, editor of the school newspaper, becomes an attorney, etc.), as indicated by three or more of the following:
1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest (voting to violate the US or state constitution is a criminal act);
2. deception, as indicated by repeatedly lying (campaign pledges), or conning others for personal profit or pleasure; (accepting money from lobbyists, or voting to “save” the Ponzi schemes Social Security and Medicare);
3. impulsiveness or failure to plan ahead (voting for any bill without reading it, voting to spend tax money on unconstitutional acts, or raising the Federal debt ceiling to allow Washington to borrow more money it cannot repay);
4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults (in election season, going negative to destroy political opponents);
5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others (allowing the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA to even exist, voting for anything that violates the 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, 5th Amendment…pretty much any of the Amendments in the Bill of Rights);
6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations (a history of employment in government, spending tax money profligately, failing to pass balanced budgets, hiding off-budget spending, using government accounting principles instead of GAAP²);
7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another (running for re-election);
B) The individual is at least age 18 years.
C) There is evidence of conduct disorder with onset before age 15 years.
D) The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of schizophrenia or a manic episode.

You see? Most politicians or wannabe politicians are sociopaths. You’d be hard pressed to find one that isn’t.

At DumpDC.com, we beat the drum incessantly for secession. But I don’t want you to get the idea that we believe that secession is some panacea…some utopia…some Nirvana. A seceded state, which would be a newly formed sovereign nation, will have a government formed and designed by human beings. That new nation would have the opportunity to craft a government built around individual liberty and property rights, founded in the Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP).

Haven’t heard of the Zero Aggression Principle? Thusly: that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force or fraud against another human being for any reason whatever; nor will a person or persons advocate the initiation of force or fraud, or delegate it to anyone else.

In light of the ZAP, the new nation would have to be very creative as it forms its own constitution and methods of governance. In most situations, government and the ZAP are mutually exclusive ethical systems and principles.

Government is force. Government relies upon the inevitable threat of violent force and/or death for its power. Think I’m overstating the cruelty of government? Let me give you three benign examples. Leave me a note if you disagree.

1. You get a parking ticket for $20.
– You do not pay your parking ticket.
– Eventually, the issuing law enforcement agency swears out a bench warrant for your arrest.
– A Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) may seek you out and attempt to place you under arrest. Or, you may be stopped for some other traffic infraction and the LEO finds your bench warrant when he does your background check. Either way, the LEO attempts to place you under arrest.
– You resist arrest.
– The LEO escalates his use of violence.
– You escalate your resistance.
– The LEO will draw his service firearm and use deadly force.
– You’re dead over a $20 parking ticket.

2. You fail to file your income tax return.
– The IRS contacts you to recommend that you file your return.
– You ignore them.
– The IRS attempts to confiscate your assets, attach your real property, clean out your bank account, or garnish your wages to collect tax, fines and penalties.
– You resist their attempts.
– Eventually, you will receive a visit from armed IRS agents. They may attempt to place you under arrest.
– You resist arrest.
– The agent escalates his use of violence.
– You escalate your resistance.
– The agent will draw his service firearm and use deadly force.
– You’re dead over a tax return.

3. You fail to pay your property tax.
– The taxing agency forecloses on your property.
– The county Sheriff comes to your property to evict you.
– You refuse to leave.
– The Sheriff attempts to place you under arrest.
– You resist.
– The Sheriff escalates his use of violence.
– You escalate your resistance.
– The Sheriff will draw his service firearm and use deadly force.
– You’re dead over unpaid property tax.

We here at DumpDC acknowledge that all government is evil. We also acknowledge that a seceding state will likely get most everything wrong when it tries to form a new national government. To the degree that the Founders adhere to the ZAP will tell the world how much the new nation’s politicians wish to use deadly force in their new laws. We believe that there is an inverse proportion to the number of laws and the degree of individual liberty. More laws, less liberty. More laws, more deadly force to enforce the laws.

The accretion of political power is the reason for living for the government worker or elected official, but is antithetical to being a true “public servant.”

May God help us as we pass from the United States of America to seceded new sovereign nations. May He help us find non-sociopathic leaders who truly have the heart of a servant.

Secession is the Hope For Mankind. Who will be first?

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

[1] Antisocial personality disorder – Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth edition Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) American Psychiatric Association (2000) – pages 645–650
[2]Generally Accepted Accounting Principles

© Copyright 2011, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Humpty Obumpty and the Arab Spring

June 6, 2011

By Spengler

DC Insanity: Washington Borrows From China and Gives The Money To The Arabs

(Editor’s Note: I keep giving you proof of the myriad ways that the global collapse will occur. It could come from within DC. But is just as likely to come from outside the USA as other nations implode. And don’t forget about the European Union. HALF of its member nations are already bankrupt. And OBama commits $20 Billion to Arabs…money that we are borrowing to “lend” to the Arab nations that are in trouble.)

I’ve been warning for months that Egypt, Syria, Tunisia and other Arab oil-importing countries face a total economic meltdown (see Food and failed Arab states, Feb 2, and The hunger to come in Egypt, May 10). Now the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has confirmed my warnings.

The leaders of the industrial nations waited until last weekend’s Group of Eight (G-8) summit to respond, and at the initiative of United States President Barack Obama proposed what sounds like a massive aid program but probably consists mainly of refurbishing old programs.

The egg has splattered, and all of Obumpty’s horses and men can’t mend it. Even the G-8’s announcement was fumbled; Canada’s Prime Minister John Harper refused to commit new
money, a dissonant note that routine diplomatic preparation would have pre-empted.

The numbers thrown out by the IMF are stupefying. “In the current baseline scenario,” wrote the IMF on May 27, “the external financing needs of the region’s oil importers is projected to exceed $160 billion during 2011-13.” That’s almost three years’ worth of Egypt’s total annual imports as of 2010. As of 2010, the combined current account deficit (that is, external financing needs) of Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Morocco and Tunisia was about $15 billion a year.

What the IMF says, in effect, is that the oil-poor Arab economies – especially Egypt – are not only broke, but dysfunctional, incapable of earning more than a small fraction of their import bill. The disappearance of tourism is an important part of the problem, but shortages of fuel and other essentials have had cascading effects throughout these economies.

“In the next 18 months,” the IMF added, “a greater part of these financing needs will need to be met from the international community because of more cautious market sentiments during the uncertain transition.”

Translation: private investors aren’t stupid enough to throw money down a Middle Eastern rat-hole, and now that the revolutionary government has decided to make a horrible example of deposed president Hosni Mubarak, anyone who made any money under his regime is cutting and running. At its May 29 auction of treasury bills, Egypt paid about 12% for short-term money, to its own captive banking system. Its budget deficit in the next fiscal year, the government says, will exceed $30 billion.

And the IMF’s $160 billion number is only “external financing”; that is, maintaining imports into a busted economy. It doesn’t do a thing to repair busted economies that import half their caloric intake, as do the oil-poor Arab nations.

Egypt’s economy is in free fall. Its biggest foreign exchange earner was a tourist industry that won’t come back for a decade, if ever. The IMF’s $160 billion doesn’t take into account the costs of teaching two-fifths of the Egyptian population to read, or raising crop yields to more than a fifth of American levels, or training university graduates to do more than stamp identity cards and shuffle papers. As the international organization made clear, this is what Egypt and its neighbors require merely to pay for essential imports.

Of course, the IMF’s admission that Egypt, Tunisia, Syria and Yemen can’t meet the majority of their import bill without foreign aid does not increase the probability that these countries will obtain financing on that scale. On May 30, the IMF announced that it would lend $3 billion to Egypt – a tenth of its budget deficit – sometime in June. The G-8 offered the grandiose pledge of $20 billion in their own money along with $20 billion from the IMF, World Bank, and so forth, to support the “Arab Spring”, with the dissension of the Canadian prime minister. But it is unclear whether that represents new money, or a shuffling of existing aid commitments, or nothing whatever.

Whatever the Group of Eight actually had in mind, the proposed aid package for the misnomered Arab Spring has already become a punching bag for opposition budget-cutters. “Should we be borrowing money from China to turn around and give it to the Muslim Brotherhood?” Sarah Palin asked on May 27.

“Now, given that Egypt has a history of corruption when it comes to utilizing American aid, it is doubtful that the money will really help needy Egyptian people. Couple that with the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood is organized to have a real shot at taking control of Egypt’s government, and one has to ask why we would send money (that we don’t have) into unknown Egyptian hands,” the former Republican vice-presidential candidate added.

Whether any amount of foreign aid will stabilize Egypt’s economic position is questionable, even if the industrial nations and the Arab Gulf states opened their purses, which is doubtful.

From Arab-language online media, it appears that Egypt’s economic troubles have metastasized. Last month, rice disappeared from public storehouses amid press reports that official food distribution organizations were selling the grain by the container on the overseas market. Last week, diesel fuel was the scarce commodity, with 24-hour queues forming around gasoline stations. Foreign tankers were waiting at Port Said on the Suez Canal to pump diesel oil from storage facilities, as government officials sold the scarce commodity for cash.

This is the sort of general breakdown I observed in 1992 in Russia, following the collapse of the communist government. As an adviser to finance minister Yegor Gaidar, I heard stories of Russian officials selling unregistered trainloads of raw materials on foreign markets and depositing the proceeds in Swiss banking accounts. Anything of value that could find a buyer overseas was sold. I didn’t last long as an adviser; looting and pillaging wasn’t my area of competence. Russia, it should be recalled, is largely self-sufficient in food and is among the world’s largest oil producers, while Egypt imports half its food. Russia had enormous resources on which to draw. Egypt, Syria and Tunisia have nothing.

For 60 years, the Egyptian army and associated crony capitalists ran the economy as a private preserve. Although the army remains in nominal charge, the public humiliation of Mubarak serves notice on the previous masters of Egypt’s little universe that they are as vulnerable as their former patron. Everyone who can get out will and will take with them whatever they can.

Syria is also vulnerable to hunger, the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) warned May 23. “Continuing unrest in Syria will not only affect economic growth but could disrupt food distribution channels leading to severe localized shortages in main markets,” according to the FAO. ”Syria hosts one of the largest urban refugee populations in the world, including nearly one million Iraqis who have become more vulnerable because of rising food and fuel prices.”

Nearly 700,000 Libyan refugees have reached Libya and Egypt, fleeing their country’s civil war. At least 30,000 Tunisian refugees (and likely many more) have overwhelmed camps in Italy, and perhaps a tenth of that number have drowned in the attempt to reach Europe. A large but unknown number of Syrian refugees have fled to Lebanon and Turkey.

Robert Fisk wrote in the London Independent on May 30 that Turkey fears a mass influx of Syrian Kurdish refugees, so that “Turkish generals have thus prepared an operation that would send several battalions of Turkish troops into Syria itself to carve out a ‘safe area’ for Syrian refugees inside Assad’s caliphate.” The borders of the affected nations have begun to dissolve along with their economies. It will get worse fast.

Spengler is channeled by David P Goldman.

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd.


The Tragedy of Immigration Enforcement

June 5, 2011

by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

(Editor’s Note: Lew proves that government is a thousand-armed monster, and at the end of each arm is a stinger. There is no way to interact with the monster without getting stung. Rather than deal with the millions of immigrants who are actually breaking the law, DC goes after the businesses who hire them. DC doesn’t have to chase the business owner…he is in a fixed location. Plus, even if the business goes through the process of trying to verify legal status, forged papers are easily created. So a business could do everything right and still be destroyed by Washington. That’s the country you live in folks. Don’t you think secession could remedy this disaster?)

Here’s the problem. If you give government a job to do, even one that seems justified in the abstract, it will use its power to make a terrible mess in practice. This is true in a host of areas from welfare to warfare, but it is even true in the complicated area of immigration.

Just imagine this. The owners of Chuy’s Mesquite Broiler in Phoenix and 13 other locations around western states have been kidnapped from their popular restaurants and dragged to jail. This will be followed by trial, and certain personal bankruptcy. They could face 80 years in prison. In the raid, “Homeland Security” stole their computers, their accounting and employment records, and walked out the door – just like a gang of thieves. The only difference is that these thugs operate under the cover of the law.

And what evil did these restaurateurs do? Were they poisoning people, stealing customers’ wallets, secretly running an assassination conspiracy, sending in the predator drones against people they hate, or what? To lock anyone away for life is a shocking sentence, so surely the punishment must fit the crime. Pyscho sniper-murderers have gotten less.

What they are alleged to have done is hired people who don’t have the proper bureaucratic forms filled out for them. That’s all. Nothing more. It is being done in the name of immigration enforcement and cracking down on illegals. The workers themselves are untouched by any of this. Their benefactors – and the benefactors of society – are the ones being targeted with police-state tactics.

The government is busting up a whole series of voluntary labor relationships that are designed to provide people with good food. Let us be clear: to the extent that many people object to illegal immigration, it has nothing to do with those who go to work and make an honest living doing things like working in restaurants. The problem with illegal immigration is related to other issues that drive people crazy, like going on welfare, engaging in actual (not pretend) crime, and demanding tax-funded support services.

People finding jobs to do and other wonderful commercial things is a praiseworthy aspect of immigration, legal or illegal. In fact, there are millions of jobs in this country that would simply not be done at the current price without such immigration, and this is true in a vast range of industries from housing to horticulture. American natives think too highly of themselves to accept these jobs at the market price.

And it is this very thing that government, given the power to enforce immigration statutes, wants to crack down on, not by rounding up workers, which would be bad enough, but by criminally prosecuting the business owners themselves, the people who are not only providing jobs but also providing good food for the public. The whole thing boggles the mind.

But the utilitarian will object. Yes, these tactics are rough, with results that are regrettable for property owners and those who like to dine out, but at least it helps address our nation’s problems with illegal immigration.

But will it? If mainstream employers are afraid of lifetime jail terms, they will not hire. And that leaves only marginal employers to pick up the slack. These include drug operations, fly-by-night underground businesses, gray markets, prostitution rings, and other things from the seedier side of life.

Or the result could be no employment at all, which means turning to crime itself. In other words, these efforts attempt to stop the best part of immigration and enhance the worst. For this we can thank the government.

Try to think of this issue in terms of the risk to attempting illegal immigration. No one on the other side of the border, faced with a porous fence, is thinking: I’ll take this risk only on the condition that I can go to work for Chuy’s Mesquite Broiler.

No, they will come anyway. In order to eliminate every possible job opportunity for immigrants, the Obama administration will have to jail and terrorize vast numbers, destroying the commercial life of major swaths of the country. This is a catastrophic plan that amounts to a fundamental attack on liberty, and the nationalization of the service industry. (I should add that I prefer illegal immigration to legal, since we have far too many citizens able to vote themselves other people’s property, and too few people who want to work hard for a living.)

Just as George Bush used national security as the great excuse to shred the Bill of Rights, the Obama administration is using illegal immigration as the excuse to achieve the socialist dream of bringing employer-employee relations entirely under government purview. It is a form of micro-nationalization.

And why? Socialist ideology plays a role here, and another authoritarian anti-market ideology, protectionism. But if you look closely enough at this enforcement, you will find the hand of Obama affiliated big labor unions at work behind the scenes. It’s not that they are against immigrants. The unions hate any employee who works for the going market wage. As their power and influence continues to fall, if not in DC, they are resorting to ever more desperate tactics to shore up their slipping cartel.

You can see, then, that this crack down has nothing to do with nationalism or racialism or securing the borders or anything else. It is all about bolstering the power of the state and its unions over the American economy, and making the rest of us poorer.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., former editorial assistant to Ludwig von Mises and congressional chief of staff to Ron Paul, is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute, executor for the estate of Murray N. Rothbard, and editor of LewRockwell.com.

Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com.