Sneak Peek 1: Don't Be Tread On: Propaganda, False Paradigms, and Civics

8/9/2019 Sneak Peek 1: Don't Be Tread On: Propaganda, False Paradigms, and Civics

1/16


2/16

A well instructed people alone can be permanently a free people. -James Madison


3/16

Foreword by:

To Be Announced Coming Soon


4/16

Mission Statement:

When in the course of human events, if people should doubt their influence over their community, it

becomes the duty of We the People to persevere. It is my entire intention of this piece of work to

inspire those close to me to understand the political nature of the founding of our nation, to understandthe wisdom passed down among centuries, and to feel as strong as the founding fathers in the

importance of throwing off tyranny and participating in a self-governing republic.

Our nation, being over 230 years since the Declaration of Independence, has seen several

revolutions throughout its course, some ever so dangerous. From the Industrial & Banking Revolutions

of the 20 th Century to the Civil War, the outlook of our nation has, at times, looked grim. We have

always overcome the challenges of a growing nation, however, and today is no different.

It is up to a small minority of us to realize the dream laid forth by Thomas Jefferson when he

penned the Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America. It is a dream that has

transcended changes in relations between gender, race, class, and social differences between the people.

If there has ever been a time in which import must be placed on the values that our nation's laws are

based upon, it is today. Our processes for overcoming tyranny have been all but politically destroyed

by our modern media, the corruption within our governing systems has become so rampant that to

most, despotism is clearly out in the open and a large segment of the populous have lost hope that we

could ever restore the rule of law and liberties, returning individual freedom and a government of, by,and for the people.

It is my hope that this reading material will restore that hope with an understanding that the true

American Dream is that anything is possible, and with the right steps of action and education, we can

displace the corruption and tyranny with a government of honest necessity.

As you read, understand that each chapter will be on a specific topic which may be influenced by

several ideas, paradigms, and facts that span different problems. This means I will have to divide

examination of the legitimacy of a paradigm or idea into different chapters.

I hope to challenge at least one of your paradigms, pushing yourself to argue against my points, as I

contrast the common views of history and law with the constitutional outlook and interpretation that

would enable a free society.


5/16

A REPUBLIC......If You Can Keep It

Chapter I

Though the US Constitution guarantees Republican forms of government, in 1913, a remarkableyear for which Tyrannical forces claimed several victories over the Republic of the United States of

America, the word Democracy became the new buzzword slogan of our nation.

I will explain minority rights in this chapter in detail, but lets begin by understanding the unusual

progression towards Communism. In 1913 Two amendments to the US Constitution were ratified, the

Sixteenth and Seventeenth.

The Sixteenth Amendment: The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes

from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to

any census or enumeration.

The Seventeenth Amendment: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators

from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The

electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch

of the State legislatures. When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the

executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, that the

legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. This Amendment shall not be so

construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the

Constitution.

The Sixteenth Amendment re-introduced the idea of taxation through the idea of an Income Tax.

The Seventeenth removed the States' government's right to be represented in the Federal Congress by

removing their ability to appoint Senators, instead giving that ability to majority popular election.

It is a very noble thought that the people know what is best for their State, however, that is the point

of the House of Representatives. The House shall represent the people, and the Senate shall represent

the States. This was the intent of the original Constitution. What has happened since is a complete

violation of minority rights, state's rights, and huge growth in Washington power in the name of giving

the Mass Public a bigger voice.

I am often reminded of the scene from the movie Men in Black with Will Smith and Tommy Lee


6/16

Jones, when discussing why the government keeps secrets from the people, Agent K, played by Jones,

describes perfectly why Democracy, or Majority Rule does not work.

Agent J (Smith): People are smart they can handle

Agent K: A PERSON is Smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it.

The masses can be persuaded to act in the interest of the masses, which can be detrimental to the

regional, community, or family interests of the persons within the mass. This becomes ever so

dangerous in our modern time where most persons' values are in many ways related to the media or

religious influences that they consume. A person can clearly be motivated to sacrifice what is right, for

what they perceive is best for society.

Early in my interest in the political, I was once in a debate with a friend over the use of the

Confederate Flag in modern times, and the subject of the intelligence level of the southern slave owners

came up, to which I foolishly and ignorantly claimed that they may have falsely believed Black Persons

were no more human that common pets.

Rightly so, I was reminded of minority rights when his answer to such a statement was the fact that

there was a very large Abolitionist movement who were not ignorant to such things, and that the

majority could have come to the conclusion of the immoral act of enslaving another human on his own.

This is possibly the best example as to how there are times in our society when a minority of the

people know the better path for society than the masses and I truly believe that war was not needed

because when it comes to freedom, a small insistent minority in the right will always prevail over

systems of injustice. I will definitely get back into Civil War motivations several times in later chapters.

Just understand that many of our views as a society on minority rights, when applied to political

minority belief structures, there is clearly a standard by which there is room for improvement.

The most common parable is the one that states Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding on

what to have for dinner. The sheep will always be a victim unless and until it can persuade one of the

wolves to reject his natural programming and eat vegetarian. Ultimately nobody's interests are truly

served, as there is not adequate representation for everyone's diet. Ultimately there is no longer

freedom of the different parties to choose their own appropriate diet without another party infringing on

their rights. The critic will state that the problem is that the wolves are carnivorous beings, with only

blood on their mind, I can only answer that if the sheep is part of the community, then rationale shall

overcome and the wolves shall find another suitable meat to feast upon. This is conflict resolution

through suitable sacrifice. This is how neighbors and government should approach problems.


7/16

Give me my rights!

Chapter II

The most common misconception of government, especially the United States government, is that agovernment is there to give you your rights. This is not true on a very specific level. On the contrary,

government is there to ensure that you as an individual are able to give yourself and exercise your own

rights.

The word Rights has become an interesting paradigm. People believe that the word Rights

means something you deserve as a citizen or a person. When we look at our history as a nation,

however, we begin to learn that rights are something even deeper.

Rights are something slightly esoteric. Rights have an underlying religious context. Not that you

have to be a Christian, not that you even have to believe in God, but in order to believe in rights, you

have to believe in the authority of the creation of the human spirit. When you were born, you were

given the gift of humanity. Upon your creation, you were given the abilities of a human and the

responsibilities thereof. The abilities to reason, communicate, feel emotions, and have ambitions are

things shared by all humans, and as such, any government that would dare infringe on those abilities

are infringing on your rights to represent your ideals. Rights are simply the ability to utilize these

abilities in your community and to your leaders.Excerpt from the Unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America:

We Hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by

their Creator with certain unalienable rights. That among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of

Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just

powers from the consent of the governed.

These words are often quoted, but rarely examined by the everyday person. So we have a society

where people claim to have all kinds of rights because they feel that they deserve certain privileges,

and some segments of the population do deserve these privileges, however, you need to examine if

something has to do with your individual liberty to exercise the abilities given to you upon your

creation as a human being. The Right to health care argument, The Right to choose abortion

argument, Gender/Racial/Special interest rights. These things are either based upon something that

would be provided externally, or they are beliefs that are not based upon abilities of humanity, but upon


8/16

differences within humanity.

Unlike most Libertarians, I am not entirely against the idea of welfare. Outside of the main

problems of the lack oversight of the system, I do believe that if our government was truly of the

people, and the people all did their civic duty, then we could possibly have a noble enough system

where social programs could be efficient. The problem with modern society, however, is that the rightto life becomes extended upon one's community to sustain, not empower that person's right to life.

Charity and stewardship on one's community is indeed a necessary moral duty, a moral value that we

should begin to instill in our future generations, not something that should be enforced through law and

force. I find it very sad the number of people that aid in funding UN-backed charities while ignoring

the homeless, poor, and handicapped in their own back yards. We tend to forget about domestic charity

issues due to our dependence on government to properly manage domestic social programs. We need

to realize that our trust in the federal two-party government's debt spending system to efficiently filter

our money in a charitable manner to the needy in our society either needs a huge spotlight on auditing

or realistic plans to help the needy get on their feet so that we may begin to draw down the scheme that

these bankers and politicians use to make you feel noble when they demand their payment.

Rights cannot be given by anyone other than your creator upon creation. Several politicians are

currently debating whether to give rights to terrorists. Most of these people claim to be Christian

Conservatives. No god-fearing person should ever claim to exercise the power of the Creator. If these

people believe that they have the power to either give or deny rights of another human being, then they

are rejecting the idea of the Creator being the originator of rights, as stated in the Declaration of

Independence, which means they either do not respect the Declaration, or they do not respect the

Creator.

Which brings me to the idea of Permits, Licenses, and Statutes. I have been asked on several

occasions my opinion of the National Rifle Association. The NRA supports Conceal & Carry permits

when it comes to carrying a weapon. This essentially begins to remove self-defense as a right, and

make it a privilege maintained by the state. This also empowers the state with the power to deny one

individual his or her ability of self-defense, while allowing the arming another person. This is not

equal protection under the law. The problem with crime in our society is not the arming of criminals, it

is the imbalance of armed criminals to armed persons willing to defend their self and their community

against criminals.

The pro-gun control crowd would rather select officials to be trusted to be armed on behalf of


9/16

the population. This gives a selected group of people rights above everyone else, which history has

shown that this power only serves tyrants' ability to oppress an unarmed populous, while enabling

criminals to take advantage of these security and police officers' response time. In fact, the police even

admit that their responsibility is not to interrupt crimes in progress, and that they have no duty to

actively defend you or your property. The police are there to deter and investigate crime, which theydo less and less in modern times of city and state funding priorities that have pushed police into

becoming a fine-issuing taxation agency.

The same can be true for the freedom of speech and press. If we only have a small number of

official trusted news services, how can we ever be sure that these mouthpieces are telling us the whole

and proper truth? FCC permitting has narrowed down the opinions and beliefs allowed in modern

media, and the Federal Government has been discussing the possibility of licensing the ability to have a

website.

Will you be convinced to get a permit to communicate? To protest problems you're having with the

same government you're asking for a permit from? It's clear that there is absolutely nothing about a

right that requires you to ask someone else to exercise, enable, or permit you to animate your humanity.

The proper role of government is to punish those who would infringe and take away your ability to

have your rights. The discussion on rights of terrorists is resolved when you think that proper

punishment is the removal of rights, and that until that point, a human has due process guaranteed as a

right by our form of government. Again, this has nothing to do with being a citizen, nothing to do with being tough, this is about recognizing that even terrorists and foreigners have a creator, and as such,

retain their human rights.


10/16

Political Spectrum Analysis

Chapter III

Whenever I look at political discourse in this country, I see only one tactic: Divide and Conquer.Everyone seems to want to gain political points by making you think that they are the furthest thing

from your dislikes. Hate is a strong emotion and sadly it tends to motivate people. Modern election

coverage tends to amplify the few small somewhat insignificant differences between candidates, and in

several races, you find out that the candidates positions are more similar than they would like you to

believe. Those differences are usually based on out of context quotes, and ironically those quotes are

usually from communications with some special interest where that person had to speak from a safe

manner instead of candidly about their position.

This is why this nation suffers from not my candidate syndrome. Everyone knows that the system

is corrupt. The lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, it becomes the big joke. However, as soon as you put

support behind a candidate and their position, their promises, you tend to not want to believe that you

are making a bad choice. Which brings me right back to attack campaigning. If you can be made to

believe that the other guy is more corrupt, you can also be convinced to overlook flaws in your

candidate out of fear of what the opponent might bring to your community. Mainstream candidates

will always want to hold office for the influence, the fame, and the power to be above their peers in the

community. They will seek any funding, especially from corrupt sources. They are nothing more than

paid actors put there to obfuscate language in an attempt to make their opponent politically nonviable.

Why are these tactics so prevalent in politics? Simple. If one can make you believe that a person or

their platform is alien, foreign, and threatening in comparison to your beliefs, then you won't unite with

your peers against corruption as a whole, instead you will be distracted arguing about which beliefs are

more alien and threatening to your community.

This concept in partisan politics is known in grassroots circles as the False-Left-Right Paradigm.

While this tactic is indeed not limited to the left-right political spectrum, it is the primary manner in

which we view political divisions in modern times. People view politics on a sliding scale from left to

right with moderates in the center.

The problem with the False Left Right Paradigm is that the entirety of people who believe our

government can work, and trust that their vote will go to good use, have many issues they care about,


11/16

but they are all rooted on one principal. Prosperity.

Whether you feel an idea should be prosperous, or a segment of the community, or having the rule of

law be prosperous. We all strive for the same thing, a peaceful, positive way in which our ideals and

values can be represented and respected by our government. Why then, do we fall for these divisive

tactics? Fear.

I remember that months prior to the 2008 election, many grassroots folks, people who were aligned

with Democrats especially, were quoting Ben Franklin to make a point about the war on terror and the

Civil Liberties rollbacks involved:

Those who sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither.

This is a statement about Fear. Yet persons with these same beliefs about the war on terror, were so

afraid of the consequences of an election outcome where the Republican Party would continue to run

the country, that they blindly followed the mainstream opposition party, not actually listening to the

policy positions or talking points, acting mostly disappointed when the people they elected did not truly

represent them.

One thing that the 2008 election did teach me, however, is that we do, even in contrast to our peer,

have very fundamental differing beliefs in which issues are priorities. We could agree on 90% of the

issues with a person, but become very upset with the beliefs in prioritization order in which they feel

the issues need to be addressed.

This creates a very real grassroots left-right paradigm. I like to think of the political spectrum as a

circle, with globalism on top and individual liberties on the bottom. As you reach the upper echelons of

power left or right side, you increase into more government controlled structures. I sometimes have

debates on the differences between Fascism (right wing tyranny) and Communism (left wing tyranny).

People want to debate that one is somehow better than another. They really actually merge into

totalitarianism.

The following is a visual as to how I view the very real left-right paradigms that we face in today's

society.


12/16

When society is organic, capitalist, and republican, markets, government, finance, and media all

work independently of another. Under Fascism, Finance winds up gaining power over the rest of the

societal structures, essentially creating a government run by private corporate bidding over the people.

Under Communism, the opposite happens, with the same result. The Government takes over business

and media, yet still creating that monopolistic power grid mentality over society.

Some would argue, that a communist society for, of, and by the people could exist and serve the

population well, and I could agree in principle, if we could keep it grassroots, and with plenty of

oversight. However, practice has shown that power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and

whenever you centralize that power in very few hands, it will be used for the people wielding the

power or influencing the power, and it becomes very easy to make promises to the people, with nointention of fully following through, just long enough for the people to trust your agenda and install

tyranny into government. Essentially, when you have a government that can give you anything you

want, you also give them the power to give their selves your share, and take what you deserve. As

famed philosophic economist Alexis De Toqueville said, The American Republic will endure until

congress discovers it can bribe the people with their own money. Ultimately, communist systems can


13/16

be too tempting for the population to become lazy in their oversight duties when their wants are

somewhat satisfied. This opens the door for despotism.

The right wing would make you believe that they are for small government. Again, practice has

shown that this is not the case. The mainstream Republican party has shown time and time again, that

it has very little objection to private corporate influence over government, and government influenceover market enablers. This allows for empire-like mentality when war is profitable, and Republicans

are falsely led to believe that being patriotic means supporting war endeavors no matter what the cost

to our Republic is.

All of these false paradigms are symptoms of the greater society mentality. What I mean by that,

is that they believe that the ends justify the means when it comes to allowing a bit of bad policy if the

end result is one of increased profit or security for the causes that the individual feels strongly about.

Ultimately, these are all noble ideas, however History has taught us that we should moderate the

spread of noble causes, for there are always unintended side effects, and that we need to light a fire

under the lessons of our forefathers and encourage every person no matter their position in life, to

become educated on our intended form of government, how to preserve it, and how to exercise their

rights. It will not be until after a populous uprising, will we be able to trust our Government to provide

top-down solutions without injecting massive corruption.

The best way to understand the true political spectrum is to realize that typical right causes are

Liberty and Capitalist based, whereas typical left causes are Justice and Social based. And

then you have parallel scales going up both left and right from the individual, to their family, to their

community, to the nation, to globalism. There is the old saying Think Globally, act Locally. This

holds true for Government also. Whenever you hear someone use the talking point Global problems

require Global Solutions understand what they are advocating. Uniformity. True global solutions are

solutions that can be picked up on a different grassroots level in every community.

Refer to Figure 1, as it shows 4 people. Person A is a Democratic Party Elitist. Person B would

be a mainstream Republican Elitist. Person C is an activist for Animal rights and Gay rights. PersonD is an activist for free markets and the Constitution. The great swindle is to use Media and

Government to make Person C believe they have the most in common with Person A, and make

person D believe they have the most in common with person B, based purely on the type of issues

they tend to focus on, and not the type of solutions. Thus creating enemies and battles at the Grassroots

levels of politics.


14/16


15/16

The Medicine is the Poison

Chapter IV

Delving further into the evidence that Globalism is not the answer, I just wanted to toss this quick chapter in here. There has been several instances where influencing society on an international level

has had severe side effects. I'm not saying every decision was entirely wrong, I'm just saying that

rarely are the results as positive as the people are sold on.

NAFTA and other free trade deals are responsible for starving Haiti and many other nations. The

IMF, BIS, and World Bank are responsible for many of these trade deals. The credit collapse of 2008

hit worldwide because of the world trade and the economic blending of nations. We have an economic

system right now that has been globalized over the past century, by hook or by crook. Some nationswere bullied into opting into the global banking schemes, and are now being held hostage of the high

interest loans that those nations own the western world. (For more information about these facts, I

suggest the book Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins)

Pollution is a problem that has global effects. However, the solutions being proposed by the

mainstream are not only being proposed by those who run the problem industries, but also have

massive population control, massive investment and profit, and government takeover elements. If

anyone truly believes that creating a market by which corporations can leverage a profit margin willslow pollution, that person is ignoring the history of everything we know about the huge banks and

corporations.

The truth is, in 2008 when the United States Congress passed the $750 billion financial bailout, they

issued enough debt wealth that they could have provided a massive portion of the population with Solar

Panels or other green technologies, which would have not only made us more energy independent,

giving us more money off our utility bills to spend into the economy, but would have created at least

temporary green jobs in those factories.

Instead, the money went to the banks and investment firms who set us up for failure, enabling them

to buy out healthy parts of their industry, giving them larger shares of the markets, all while Congress

and global economic summits discuss giving central banks and the international banking communities

more power over local economies.

Time and time again, the proposed cure is to feed us more of the poison. Please start recognizing


16/16

when those who wreck our Republic claim to have the solutions for fixing it. Especially when that

solution is either controlling or globalist in nature.

The tyranny of this paradigm is deep. Some of these issues are commonly, in government oversight

movements, known as Problem-Reaction-Solution.

The Problem-Reaction-Solution issue is one where those who either have, or seek political power,

have an intended action in mind. Some examples of these actions are changes in laws, discrediting

opposition, or expansion of war. These actions always require a paradigm shift of the public. It

becomes easier to sway the public to accept these changes when they perceive a bigger problem, so

those in power either fund or create a problem to exploit through the media. These problems could

potentially be dangerous and real, or minor and exploited, or completely fake, but the establishment

will exaggerate these problems in the media until there is a massive public outrage that matches the

desired paradigm, and the people demand action be taken. That is when those in power offer thedesired changes as the solution as the savior of the people, creating not only their intended endgame,

but also earning further trust of the people in the meantime.

The people's trust of the news is like an Aladdin's Lamp for the elite. All they have to do is

wish for something, and rub it in.

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	nerfmild
View:	216 times
Download:	0 times

Sneak Peek 1: Don't Be Tread On: Propaganda, False Paradigms, and Civics

Documents