Gov. 1A-30: Run Roughshod and Smooth Handling *

    When Libertarians define state power we typically ascribe the source of that power to the explicit threat of violence. If the state could only operate according to this principle the power it would exercise over society would be far less grave. Indeed, the majority of the state's influence comes from subtle corruption and bribery. Not the sword, but bread and circuses. Indeed, it seems the entire purpose of discretionary spending is to secure state power in an age where it is increasingly irrelevant. To the people receiving federal money, all seems well and prosperous. What they don't realize is that the same money which benefits them also extends a sinister tentacle of control into their lives. It is impossible for the state to extend the smooth hand to give without also extending the rough one to control. 

    The eternal fallacy of statism is to believe that one can receive benefits by living at the expense of others without also suffering the proportional consequences of state control. In private life, we know nothing is ever really free, and so it is with the state. Being a monopoly on government, the state always secures its power by imposing rules for the use of its 'free' money. Rulers promise to help communities, but they only do this in search of approval. The incentive is to target a demographic, not to provide services that help people. The people distributing the money have the power to do good and to do evil, and they have goals and an orientation toward control. Of course, there are always strings attached. Money is only doled out with the stipulation it will be used to further the ends of the ruler.

    What do we mean by control? state control of what? The beneficiary, that sector of the economy? the market? all government? society? the lives of every individual in its jurisdiction? No, it must control all of these. The claim of the modern state is sovereignty, by definition, it controls its subordinate units. By nature the state has rejected local independence, it favors centralized power as a fact of its existence. The main tendency of the state is to consolidate federal power, and believe it or not, there are no effective checks on the growth of state power. As individuals, rulers always want more power to suit their ever-expanding ends. An empire can never grow so large and tyrannical as to satisfy a ruler. 

    The best way to envision the ways of the state is to view them as a web of control. The charity of the state, like the silk of a spider, exists to trap their source of power. Rulers wish to feed on you their prey and swell the body of the state. A shining promise hangs above the web, hiding everything in its glare. The web of silken strings is only seen by the prey once they fly straight into the creature's lair. like Eros the bugs near the light, not knowing they can never have what it offers, there are always webs of strings attached. The creature that weaves this web feasts and swells with new power. Observers might not even blame the spider for feeding in this manner, but nobody can deny how it has captured its source of power. 

    Let us be charitable to the statist and assume all of his theoretical rulers are perfectly benevolent and altruistic. They have put a lot of time and money on the line toward a goal. That money HAS to have strings attached, otherwise, it might be used for something not so desirable. Laws are a form of string, they stipulate how the money can and cannot be used. Even if the money is given as discretionary spending there are certain ways it has to be spent, and certain things are required of the recipient. Imagine billions of dollars were doled out with no strings attached, all you can see is corruption and scandal. In fact, such a policy would cause the ruler to lose legitimacy, the opposite of their goals. No, for rulers to be legitimate and attain their 'benevolent' end the money needs to have labels, like infrastructure or homelessness. Inside the state, oversight by incompetent bureaucrats is seen as the best way to prevent this, even if it is stupid. The outcome is the same either way, waste, embezzlement, and misallocation. The difference is that politicians can say they spent a few extra millions on infrastructure or homelessness, some token topic. So even if rulers claim to be benevolent, the underlying incentive structure of state aid lends itself to control and corruption. 

    To see the full and terrifying consequences of this we need to look no further than the reservation system. However you choose to see reservations, either as some form of benevolence or attempted genocide, they are appalling. It is hard to pin down exactly how much is allocated to the system, but most sources put it between two and twenty billion dollars. With this amount of money, undereducated observers might expect serious benefits. However, the results are just the opposite. Native Americans are among the poorest and most underserved communities in America. Where does all the money go? And why have native Americans remained so poor on reservations faithfully managed by the state? It has to do with this appalling web of threads woven with money. The offer of Federal stewardship is the light that attracts the flies, but they get caught by the web made with strings laid by the spider. Once the public is hooked on that offer it becomes caught in the web of rules, regulations, and entitlements the state weaves. Once the offer is accepted the people become slave vassals who only exists to feed the bureaucracy. The state tear into the very being of personality with its imposed law and manufactured justice. The system of reservation camps are said to be independent, but reality is far from it. The promise of democracy is that citizens will be cared for by the bottomless pocketbook of the state, but the truth is that the state owns them. The state holds an impossible claim to all land, all wealth, and all freedoms, even the very personality of the individual is claimed by the state. For the price of all being, they receive nothing because the state does not exist to serve them, its motivation is to feed on them. Any money spent is beyond touch, it disappears with corruption, waste, and embezzlement. This is the reality of your Democratic peoples state!

    Despite all objections, it is impossible for the state to extend the smooth hand without the rough. Promises of aid conceal the more sinister realities of state rule. Masters have ever-expanding fanticies of power, there is no rest in the lust for power. No kingdom can ever satisfy a tyrant, and altruism suffocates the world like an overbearing mother.  Tyranny never doubts her ways, once began, a policy of control is never relinquished. Every law, every act, and every decree works to feed the beuacracy, to feed the state, to give sucor to the tyrant. These promises of candy cottages for every little girl and boy are a great wool over the eyes of the people. A witch stands at the door and promises everything in the world, but it only wants to feast on innocent flesh. If our nation is to prosper it cannot make insane promises of every kind on this green earth. Our people cannot not permit scheming politicians to fleece the nation again and again for whatever they desire. The politics of plunder can lead only to a suffocation by tyranny and the death of all that makes us great.  The people of this once great nation must cast off the great illusion before it is too late! America must embrace freedom, it must embrace liberty rather than death! 

• all it does is create corrupt lies

Western Civ. 1-30: Modern Parallels From The Peloponnesian War

    A major war is forever the defining event of a generation. It is no wonder that they are said to divide history with their earth-shaking consequences. In the history of the west, there have been three wars that truly marked new eras in history. These were the European civil war of 1914-1945, the Thirty Years War, and the Peloponnesian war. From 431-404 BC. The latter is largely remembered as a self-destructive atrocity never to be repeated. Today, all Greeks see themselves as culturally united and the war as shameful brother killing. The great tragedy of the war was the end of peace and unity among the Greeks. Greek brotherhood was undermined by the state to produce war, famine, economic conquest, and death. Terrible war ended the Greek golden age, overturned the Delian League, and shifted the balance of power. The present situation of the west is deeply analogous to this ancient period. This essay will explore the parallels between the two ages and their implications on history. 

    Collusion between states will typically happen after a major war, and the Greek example was no different. Similar to postwar NATO, the Delian league was formed in response to an eastern threat. Like NATO, the alliance initially proved its value through wars and interventions spearheaded by the dominant power, Athens. But after the Peace of Callias, many members questioned the purpose of their continued membership.  For protection, each member state was expected to contribute to 'the cause of freedom'. The most controversial requirement was the building of ships, which was often just outsourced to Athens. With so much money flowing through the treasury, Athens began to embezzle funds to build monuments and public works. Eventually, the Athenians even moved the treasury into their own city, a clear sign of imperial intent. Athens being Athens, she answered objections by citing the cost of rebuilding her city. Embezzlement is corrupt, but not so corrupt as the scandalous plundering of America to fund foreign aid programs. 

    During the same period, Athens became aggressively imperialistic. Modern America loves her puppets, but Athens also enjoyed colonies throughout Ionia, the Bosporus, and the Aegean islands. Strangely similar to the contemporary doctrine of Pax Americanus, A host of garrisons in the Agean gave Athens a strategic advantage. With such mounting controversy, some states got cold feet. Naxos and Thalia withdrew from the Delian League, and Athens demanded their return under a serious threat of war.  We ought to ask what would happen if some country left a modern pact like NATO. Hypothetically imagine that the Ukrainian government joined Russia, or there was some similar occurrence elsewhere. Concerns about the imminent growth of a rival empire would surely spark WW3. In the case of the Greeks, this conflict sparked the most violent war in their entire history, The Peloponnesian War. According to Thucydides "The growth of the power of Athens, and the alarm that this inspired in Sparta made war inevitable." Sparta was a state analogous to China, a rival of America with similar concerns about their rivals. Sparta and its allies in the newly formed Peloponnesian league invaded Athens in 431 BC. 

    During the war, the Athenians stuck to naval confrontation, their shared strength with America. In order to save their population, and prevent a defeat on land Pericles built a long wall connecting Athens proper to its powerful harbor and naval center. The Athenian strategy was to wait for the siege to be called off. The state welcomed every refugee that came near the city, but their plan had a serious flaw, They did not think of plagues. Such a plague broke out in 430 BC, killing 1/2-2/3 of the population, including Pericles. This tragedy was highly demoralizing, but the war continued. Today America also welcomes every refugee, and our cities are full. But the American plague is far more dangerous, it is a plague of rival ethical systems and tribal identities. This nation is welcoming people who would make the country their ethnostate in an instant if they had the numbers, and we are giving ourselves away to them. Can America survive a race war? Should we tempt it on the brink of WW3? It seems unwise. 

Over time the war was locked in a stalemate. The divide between the strength of the states was too large, and neither could strike a decisive victory. This is also analogous to the current world situation, war, politics, and the dynamics of strategy have not changed. It is doubtful that either America or China could strike a decisive blow from across the pacific, the only sure thing is that it would be a long and bloody war. After ten years of stalemate and fighting a truce was struck in 421. For a time it seemed like politicians would exhibit learned behavior, but they had only gotten bored. The war started again with the disastrous Athenian expedition to Sicily. It all began when the Athenians became lustful for blood and empire. For a state one war is never enough, the assembly wanted to sacrifice its military for a new colony in Sicily.  As in all democracies, mass psychosis and group pressure prevailed. An invasion of Sicily was prepared, but they underestimated the enemy. The following expedition ended in catastrophic failure, prompting the Spartans to break the uneasy peace. 

    This expedition illustrates a few important ideas about the condition of the democratic state. To begin with, the whole decision-making process of democracies is broken. The court of public opinion is not a court of justice, and neither can it make rational decisions without the ability to do a cost-benefit analysis. For example, the Athenian commander Niceas called for reinforcements when the Syracutions proved too much. The Assembly was hasty to comply, the costs of raising a second army were distributed and not specific to them. All democratic legislatures suffer from the drunkenness of public opinion, but they drown in sunk-cost fallacies. When an expedition is first declared all seems well, but nobody considers the real cost. When it begins to fail the politicians always fall for the fallacy. In their empire, much like America, political ventures have no costs, only sinking! The consequences are distributed and the voters unaccountable, the democratic state is like a kid in a candy shop with a platinum credit card. 

    The idea of rational Greeks is a myth, they were as human and as dead to reality as the rest of the world. Both in terms of their democratic tomfoolery and their pagan religion. The Athenian army was about to evacuate when they saw an eclipse. General Nicias listened to his seers and took this as an omen, but his mistake gave the enemy enough time to block the mouth of the harbor. All escape attempts failed. In the end, some 50,000 men from Athens and its allies were killed. Now speaking of wasteful specialization, America is no better. We still have pointless wars just like this one, but we do even stupider things yet. Social security, welfare, clean energy, and more, the 'expeditions' of congress are bleeding our country dry,  but we suspect nothing of the sort. 

As you might expect, the result of this expedition was political instability and infighting. Democracy is the citizen passing the buck to the best demagogues, and so you would expect the demagogues to do the same and point the finger rather than take the blame. A democracy is always at war with everything, Other states, its own citizens, other politicians, its laws, and finally nature itself. In the case of Athens, there was a series of coups and political putsches. For the part of statists, at least they are consistent, in foolishness that is. Sparta felt threatened by the imperial tendency of Athens, saw an opportunity, and took up arms once more. What the greeks never understood is where real power comes from, from spiritual and material consistency oriented towards the highest definite goals. Honest people know these goals are Christ and the wealth from the free market. 

    When they fought their foe Athens was routed in battle, but the war continued, only more sinking could bring them to the muck where they saw their highest glory. It was only with the Spartan victory in 404 BC that the Delian League was dissolved. With the defeat of an embarrassed Athens, Sparta briefly attempted to emulate them by establishing an empire. Statists never learn, will they? After the war, Athens had to submit to Sparta, more unneeded proof that might makes right and destroys great civilizations. The Spartans established naval power by granting Persian control over Ionia. Wheeling and dealing with your own people away for empire is usual fodder for states, even small ones. Meanwhile, the rule of the thirty spartan tyrants was in full effect in Athens. When America falls I wonder what our new warlords will look like? Perhaps they will be a la Man in the High Castle, or perhaps the very same Jews who rule us now. No matter what, it doesn't matter, they are all the same in the eyes of God. Eventually, they are overthrown. The least we can say of the common man is that he is resistant to tyranny, even subconsciously. 

    In the end, all empires must fall, and power swings on a seven-axis pendulum. In 371 BC spartan power was overthrown by Thebes. By the mid-fourth century, no one city-state was dominant. Politics and wars had exhausted the city-states. Again, the basic error of statism is to believe that power comes from military force, but military power is unstable and built on temporary advantages. The true power of nations comes from their consistency with reality. A nation that is oriented towards truth will have direction and movement towards the good. The first of the two key principles of power is personal transformation by the high spiritual order of Christ. The second comes from the open conduct of economic life, a function of population times cultural innovation plus the potential for free trade. Any nation built on these principles will prosper spiritually and economically. Wars destroy both the economy and civilization of a people.  Rebellion against God and the choice to pursue military strength over the things which truly build a nation destroyed Athens, then destroyed the strength of all other greeks. The resulting weakness of the Greeks meant they would be ruled by the power of Macedonia and would never again enjoy the glory of their independence again. 

We must recognize that wars are dick-measuring contests between states, but they do not build up a nation, they can only destroy a people who are already weak. The present situation of America is analogous to the greek situation after the Persian wars. The great eastern enemy has been defeated, the intervening wars have been waged, the alliances have been forged and the corruption sewn. Sooner or later there will be a conflict, but we know from history that humanity will only remember this coming war with shame. Conflict always rises from the united disunity of federations and the will to power. The solution is not to create one large state, but that is an argument for another day. What we must realize in order to thrive is that the world is already more united in Christ and the market than it ever was under a federation of states. In the future of this country, there are two paths, war, and tyranny, or peace and voluntarism. Of the two, I prefer the latter. Choose consistency, chose for the truth to set you free, not to be dead in slavery to rebellion. 

Western Lit. 1-25: Ethical Sanctions in Proverbs

Write 500 on this topic: "Discuss the relationship between ethics and sanctions in Proverbs 1-7."

    The book of Proverbs is somewhat peculiar in that it is the only biblical book with an introduction. In the opening chapters of 1-9 Solomon provides an overall view of its goals, but also an excellent outline of the rest of the book, thus we will focus on them. The first capter covers the ethical basis for his claims in the entire book, but this introduction is extended to each of the nine chapters. He explains the purpose of the book is to teach his son(s) "Kohkmah" or wisdom in the form of applied knowledge. Attached is the idea of reverence and awe to God, this brings forth a humbled ethical mindset in which the individual totally submits himself to the divine in order to gain blessings. 

    The book follows a series of ten speeches which deliver parallel naritives about ethical living and the approval of the highest father. These books are considered as the wellspring of hebrew literature, including the later psalms and extra-biblical literature. To that effect they do not focus much on much about sovereignty, hierarchy, or inheritance, though these thems are touched on. The real focus of proverbs is to contrast the wisdom of God with the foolishness of evildoers. It does this with examples of the sanctions granted to the adherents. Each diologuge speaks about the blessings and joy that wisdom brings its adherents, but foolishness is seen as self destructive. 

    One of the most salient points goes like this. The incarnation of wisdom offers itself as a blessing to the ones who will receive her. This is the image of a woman standing in public selling her goods to the foolish. However they ignore the excellent deal and instead turn towards her rival, a prostitute, who slays her victims in her dungeon and hides the bodies. All the fools know about this possibility, and dread it, but they choose evil anyway. This is the idea that when the thing you dread strikes you, the wisdom you ignored will haunt you. That your evil desires will reap and eat what they have planned and sowed. These chapters involve negative sanctions for evildoing, but the ultimate sanction is to make your life so miserable that it was if you were dead, suffering, and caring out in agony unable to scream forever, this is the hell man makes of himself. 

    Individuals should follow the ethical system they have discovered as a result of their pursuit of the divine, this will bring positive sanctions to their lives. Evil comes from a neglect of wisdom, your failure to orient yourself and act properly results in greater suffering.

    The book of Proverbs is not only for the king, it is the wellspring of a broad array of ancient wisdom literature. It showed the people that wisdom meant to to receive discipline that leads to insight, Righteousness, justice, and the straight ethical path in life. A good life meant the freedom found in voluntary submission to God, but that foolishness is a way to pour out our life and ruin it. It taught that the wisdom of God brings glory to its adherents and the incarnation of wisdom offers itself freely to everyone and only fools would reject it at their own demise.  It is an commentary on Ethics which reports sanctions as the result of our willful choices in life. 

    It might be useful to recap all of this information. The goal of the text is to teach wisdom, it is taught from the perspective of a king speaking to his son. I'm sure Jung and Perterson would have plenty to ay about the importance of the king and father archtypes here, but nevertheless, it comes from a place of knowledge and genuine advice. The king advises that theives may entice the son to do evil and to act destructivly in the kingdom, but they do not know this behavior is self-anihilating. He teaches that Wisdom is freely available, but it must be accepted and cherished like a good woman, people ignore this offer and instead prefer a 'quick flick' with their desire over what will truly be valuable. The implication is that we should not be ethical simpletons, we should heed the sanctions of the Logos, and strive for a transendently valuable etos rather than an inauthentic and weak one. The book teaches that there are imperative ethical consequences to action, and through imagery and symbolism It fosters a love for wisdom and righteousness. We have to strive for the practical, applied knowledge of ethics, and if we don't we will be cursed to consume ourselves in a pit of death.