Why TSA, Wars, State Defined Diets, Seat-Belt Laws, the War On Drugs, Police

[Windpower]

Brutality, and Efforts to Control the Internet, Are Essential to the State




Whenever justice is uncertain and police spying and terror are at work, human beings fall into isolation, which, of course, is the aim and purpose of the dictator state, since it is based on the greatest accumulation of depotentiated social units.

~ Carl Jung


The title of this article encompasses topics that arouse attention and criticism among persons of libertarian persuasion. The discussion of such matters usually treats each issue as though it were sui generis, independent of one another. Most of us respond as though the woman who is groped at the airport has no connection with the man who is tasered by a police officer; that the person serving time in prison for selling marijuana is unrelated to the men being held at Guantanamo. The belief that one person's maltreatment is isolated from the rest of us, is essential to the maintenance of state power.

more here

http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer237.html

[Native_NM]

Fire the TSA and profile. 

Bring home the troops.

Stay out of my kitchen.

If you are dumb enough to NOT wear seatbelts  I'm smart enough to let you clean the gene pool all by yourself. 

If it were a serious war it would focus on the supply at source.  We send armed drones and cruise missiles flying for less;   A dozen C-130's and some Agent Orange could wipe out over half of the cocaine and heroin supply in just a few "raids".  Smart Bomb a few meth labs and the suppliers would think twice.  It's not a war, it's an Ad Campaign.

Police, yes.  Paramilitary force, no. 

[Texas Tornado]

Fire the TSA and profile. 

Bring home the troops.

Stay out of my kitchen.

If you are dumb enough to NOT wear seatbelts  I'm smart enough to let you clean the gene pool all by yourself. 

If it were a serious war it would focus on the supply at source.  We send armed drones and cruise missiles flying for less;   A dozen C-130's and some Agent Orange could wipe out over half of the cocaine and heroin supply in just a few "raids".  Smart Bomb a few meth labs and the suppliers would think twice.  It's not a war, it's an Ad Campaign.

Police, yes.  Paramilitary force, no. 

Oh My I like how you think

[rwanders]

Quote from NM

"If it were a serious war it would focus on the supply at source.  We send armed drones and cruise missiles flying for less;   A dozen C-130's and some Agent Orange could wipe out over half of the cocaine and heroin supply in just a few "raids".  Smart Bomb a few meth labs and the suppliers would think twice.  It's not a war, it's an Ad Campaign."

Spraying marijuana and coca fields was tried and failed due to difficulty identifying the thousands of small fields in south and central america. Also, the toxicity of the agents used was causing too much collateral damage to people and other crops. Countries targeted protested loudly, as we would if someone was spraying poison on our population. In addition, agent orange and related efforts were not particularly effective and many GIs suffered long term and fatal consequences from exposure---had one friend who is now dead from multiple cancers due to agent orange exposure in viet nam.

If we knew where the meth labs were at, maybe we could do that but, most meth labs are very small and locations are short-term and/or located all over US-----want us to bomb your neighbors house?  Most meth in this country is "homegrown" and not the product of big foreign labs.

I don't have any easy solutions to the drug culture----those that do tend to be simplistic and most have been tried and failed. Despite great efforts and heavy costs the govt was unable to win the earlier war on alcohol and we still pay on ongoing price for providing a huge market for the mafia and other crime families----they were small time neighborhood thugs until we handed them a financial bonanza that bankrolled their expansion and influence.

Draconian penalties for simple possession, especially of marijuana, was an expensive failure and did not make even an inconvenience for users or suppliers. Few jurisdictions now do more than ticket small holders for civil fines. In 1974 Alaska, through a Alaskan Supreme Court ruling, made possession of small amounts for personal use legal-----the sky has not yet fallen. Subsequently the legislature recriminalized possession but state does not prosecute to avoid court striking it down. Law was a purely political act to satisfy part of the electorate by a little posturing. Despite dire predictions of catastrophe due to the 1974 court ruling, Alaska and their pot smokers seem to coexist without much difficulty. Commercial growing operations and sellers are still pursued though it does not result in any scarcity for those seeking to buy---it does keep the prices and profits high  for the trafficers though----they thank us for that I am sure.

For most of our history drugs of all kind were legally sold and used----some lives were surely badly affected but, the great majority of us managed to resist their temptations and the republic did not fall. Of course, a lot of nice jobs in the DEA and state and local governments might go away. And drug dealers may suffer a great drop in revenue.

[Native_NM]

It's a tough call.  I did read that there are a couple of regions that account for the majority of the poppy and coca.  I think if we really wanted to eradicate the supply we could.  A government with the resources to extract the fingernail clippers from our luggage could eliminate the supply of poppy blowing in the wind. 

I don't disagree with the collateral damage or political implications. But war is hell.  What we have now hardly counts as a war in the truest sense. 

[StinkerBell]

Fire the TSA and profile. 

Bring home the troops.

Stay out of my kitchen.

If you are dumb enough to NOT wear seatbelts  I'm smart enough to let you clean the gene pool all by yourself. 

If it were a serious war it would focus on the supply at source.  We send armed drones and cruise missiles flying for less;   A dozen C-130's and some Agent Orange could wipe out over half of the cocaine and heroin supply in just a few "raids".  Smart Bomb a few meth labs and the suppliers would think twice.  It's not a war, it's an Ad Campaign.

Police, yes.  Paramilitary force, no. 

Ditto!

[peternap]

Ditto!

Ditto except for the seatbelt thing.

[rwanders]

 
I can understand the frustration of all those who have watched the everlasting "war on drugs". It actually began in 1935 a few years after the "war on alcohol" was mercifully ended. That's when all the surplus revenue agents and the vast bureaucracy that developed during prohibition was suddenly a great moral force for good in need of a new crusade. Not a conspiracy---just a bureaucracy doing what they do best---perpetuate themselves and get bigger if at all possible.

Reefer, Weed,or Smoke was tapped to become the new "evil drug" , a new and powerful threat to the public. The crusade was kicked off by the release of "Reefer Madness" to publicize a threat that had been used for literally centuries. Luck was with the new crusaders. Marijuana was then almost exclusively a drug used by "colored folks" and a few dissolute white folks like musicians and other bohemians. This happy situation made it easy to portray it like it was in their ridiculous propaganda films and there was no resistance by the voters to the new "war". Only the lower classes would be the foes for the old revenuer army----a truly serendipitous opportunity---no upper class users like the ones filling the old speakeasies---at least not until the 60's, 30 years into the war.

The war has now been fought for 76 years. Drugs of all kinds are available, abundant, stronger and numerous new chemical delights are designed, marketed and readily distributed and used with relatively little risk of prosecution. The illicit drug business is almost assuredly the very biggest component of the un-taxed underground economy in the US. The compensation of its' CEOs make even the Goldman Sachs executives green with envy.

Over the 76 years we have constantly been assured that if we only spend a little more money, build a few hundred new prisons, grit our teeth and just keep on keeping on,victory will be just around the corner. We're the ones who have been drugged---by our righteous indignation, our arrogance towards the "lower classes" and our faith that we can impose on the drug market what we completely failed to do to the alcohol market.

Can anyone explain to me why doing more of the same will be successful after 76 years of more of the same has been an incredible complete failure by anyone's measure?  Am I missing something?

[MountainDon]

One of the planks of gary Johnson's bid for President 2012 is centered on the failed war on drugs. Quite controversial. He doesn't stand much chance but I'd vote for him. Best governor NM ever had IMO.

[Texas Tornado]

I suggest that we make it all legal...Should put the goberment out of buisness...They hate competition..

[Don_P]

To put a little bit of conspiracy theory into that rwanders, I'm just parroting something I've heard and have not researched it, but the timing is about right. Hemp became reefer, something to be stamped out, at the same time synthetic fiber was being introduced. I do feel that by labelling people who are not bad as criminals they then haven't got a thing to lose by living up to our expectations.

[Native_NM]

The argument for the legalization of drugs should not be confused or intertwined with the effectiveness of the "war on drugs". 

I'd also vote for Johnson, as his ideology most closely matches mine: fiscal conservative, limited government, social liberal in the areas that matter to most people. 

[ScottA]

To put a little bit of conspiracy theory into that rwanders, I'm just parroting something I've heard and have not researched it, but the timing is about right. Hemp became reefer, something to be stamped out, at the same time synthetic fiber was being introduced. I do feel that by labelling people who are not bad as criminals they then haven't got a thing to lose by living up to our expectations.

In much the same way alcohol became demon rum before it was outlawed. If you look at at the past you'll see a great many things that have been outlawed and made legal again later on. How do you justify the lives ruined and lost for a cause when that cause is later ruled to be wrong when the times change? They need to get away from making people into criminals. There are enough criminals already without needing to invent them.

[rwanders]

To put a little bit of conspiracy theory into that rwanders, I'm just parroting something I've heard and have not researched it, but the timing is about right. Hemp became reefer, something to be stamped out, at the same time synthetic fiber was being introduced. I do feel that by labelling people who are not bad as criminals they then haven't got a thing to lose by living up to our expectations.

There are several varieties of hemp, or marijuana. The variety used for hemp fibers is so low in THC that you would have to smoke the worlds biggest joint to even begin to get high. The variety used as marijuana is not a good source of fiber so the old story quoted above is just that---an old story.

Though hemp fibers can be used in clothing, almost 100% was used for rope and artificial fibers are so superior hemp ropes are now a tiny part of that market. When we stopped hanging people hemp rope fell on hard times----lol

[Don_P]

And another good conspiracy bites the dust 

[Windpower]

Quick show of hands

Did anyone actually read the article at Lew Rockwell

just look at the posts on the front page here:

As we sink deeper, they try harder to maintain control 

This is A NEW LEVEL OF A POLICE STATE 

Rat and mouse poison 

[Native_NM]

I read it. 

[rwanders]

Quick show of hands

Did anyone actually read the article at Lew Rockwell

just look at the posts on the front page here:

As we sink deeper, they try harder to maintain control 

This is A NEW LEVEL OF A POLICE STATE 

Rat and mouse poison 

Windpower, I did read Lew Rockwell (or at least most of it). I did skim parts where he began to repeat, in good professorial manner, his points. Not a criticism, just an observation.

After reading and trying to digest his thesis, I finally came to my final question; So what do we do about it?  

Prof Rockwell seems to want us to perceive every "threat" addressed by government as a ruse to achieve and maintain their power over us.  Perhaps I missed where he distinguishes between legitimate threats to us as either communities or individuals and the ruses.

Again, I have not studied his article in depth.  My perception is that he has taken a philosophical position based on  libertarian/anarchist ideology and pushed it past its' boundaries to absurdity. All, I repeat, all philosophical doctrines can and are put to that stress test----it is a very good method to bring the weaknesses and underlying assumption to the fore where they can be discussed---all systems have them, that's why philosophers never have reached any lasting conclusion.

If one accepts his premise and follows it into its ultimate state of complete paranoia, it is particularly telling that paranoid people are easily led---all you have to do is keep pointing out new threats for them and what better "threat" then the government. They do exercise a lot of power, but at least so far we have been fairly successful at regularly changing out those who wield the power.  Yeah, I understand that they are all part of the conspiracy----but I do wonder if they've agreed on who the final dictator will be? Quite a trick---joining in a vast conspiracy which requires you to conspire at your own undoing and enslavement with everybody else.

Of course we relinquish some part of our personal independence with each layer of government, with each law or regulation---if I was living on a deserted island like Crusoe and didn't have to deal with other humans I would have no need to make those compromises. However, when Friday showed up, Crusoe needed to adapt to life with others.

Personally, I might enjoy being the only captain of my ship, retaining total control over all I survey
but, It may get dicey when a group of us ubermensh meet up and we all claim total authority---we could all wage our own little civil wars.

This unfortunate destination of anarchic principles have made it very difficult for anarchy to sustain itself past its' bomb throwing idealists of the early 20th century. Interesting that they thought the best way to demonstrate the benefits of anarchy was to try and create the chaos they thought would save us from the evils of authority. I support many libertarian issues but, taken to the absurd, they reveal their imperfections.

I probably have it all wrong. if only we had some authority to show us the correct line of thought.
 

[firefox]

I probably have it all wrong. if only we had some authority to show us the correct line of thought.

I am sure your mother would just love that sentence
Bruce

[rwanders]

I probably have it all wrong. if only we had some authority to show us the correct line of thought.

I am sure your mother would just love that sentence
Bruce

Hey!  was I just insulted?  Especially humbling when you can't figure out if you have been slapped down.   Get carried away sometimes and manage to fit both feet in my mouth. It was only my feeble attempt to be clever and sarcastic. Have faith that Windpower will let me know if I have booted it.

RW

[Windpower]

"After reading and trying to digest his thesis, I finally came to my final question; So what do we do about it?"


I just skimmed the rest of your post after this quote, RW 


I agree this is the crux of the phenomenom we are living through. "What do we do about it ?"

note this post this morning

http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=10793.0

Had I been a student in that kind of school stunt 45 years ago when my dad was alive there would have been a few people responsible with (at least) bloody noses. And I am sure others would have joined into the frey or at least cheered him on.

I am not saying that is "what do we do about it" I am just pointing out that the level of direct action that was considered "normal" has undergone a sea change in the last 40 years.

The average level of response from adult people to outrages of this sort is childlike.

This is by design.

Oh, and the author is Butler Shaffer, btw not Lew Rockwell

[rwanders]

Windpower, I imagine there is at least some objective truth hidden in the Pro Libertate propaganda post you attached----I continue to be amazed that you do not apply the same BS detector to blogs published by those with such obvious axes to grind. It appears that you are always willing, no, eager, to accept any assertion by anyone as long as it is directed at authority of any kind. Yes, authorities lie sometimes, spin sometimes, exaggerate and distort reality often----so do others----especially those with fringe ideologies and blogs to sell---like the Pro Libertate publisher. You are an intelligent man--just why should I accept him as some kind of unbiased teller of truth rather then as just another internet BS peddler. You gotta believe something I guess but, swallowing anything as long as it tastes like your favorite kool aid contradicts your self-image as a guy who sees the world as it really is.

I don't know how much of Pro Libertate is unvarnished truth and how much is unvarnished BS but, I have noticed in life that strong words often reveal a weak argument. Fevered rhetoric is not required to prop up accurate information but, I'm sure it helps sell internet diatribes to those anxious to read what they need to believe.

This is a big world. Lots of bad and/or ridiculous things happen. Sometimes they are criminal, more often just stupid things done by silly people. There are enough of both every day to allow those inclined to any world view to find fodder for propaganda or just foolish stuff to sell to those sharing their views.

We all believe what we want to believe-----ideally, some intellectual honesty is applied to it all to prevent one's falling through the looking glass. I try and probably fail more often then I know.

Your Friend,  RW

[firefox]

No, you haven't been insulted!
I just figured that your mother was the appropriate person
to establish the correct authority.
I was just pulling your leg 
Bruce

[Windpower]

A couple more news articles about this event

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20110513/cm_ac/8463439_illinois_school_terrorizes_students_with_fake_gunman_drill

http://www.journalstandard.com/news/education/x2132689378/Orangeville-superintendent-Otto-resigns-from-office



I guess there were a couple things that 'got my attention' about the school 'drill'

first, the school is only 50 miles from my home.

second, being a regular listener to radio news local and international (BBC) I was surprised that I had not heard anything at all about this outrageous abuse of students in a town very close to home on local stations. It would seem to me that it was a relatively big story for a small place as the Superintendant of the school board resigned as a result of parental outrage.

third it was not just some 'stupid thing done by a silly person' it involved the Sheriffs department and apparently all of the teachers as well. No one stood up and said  'this is a bad idea ?' incredible !

Also it seems to me that wielding a firearm and threatening a child with murder is a felony in Illinois.

and to those that say "schools have fire drills all the time"

A: the students know it is a drill and B: they don't routinely set the school on fire or fill the school with smoke for more realism either.

But back to the point "what do we do about it ?"

the 'it' being, IMO, an increasingly tyranical society and and increasingly dumbed down and docile public that acepts these outrages from the TSA, FDA, DHS, Police brutality, etc etc etc

[archimedes]

Windpower, I imagine there is at least some objective truth hidden in the Pro Libertate propaganda post you attached----I continue to be amazed that you do not apply the same BS detector to blogs published by those with such obvious axes to grind. It appears that you are always willing, no, eager, to accept any assertion by anyone as long as it is directed at authority of any kind. Yes, authorities lie sometimes, spin sometimes, exaggerate and distort reality often----so do others----especially those with fringe ideologies and blogs to sell---like the Pro Libertate publisher. You are an intelligent man--just why should I accept him as some kind of unbiased teller of truth rather then as just another internet BS peddler. You gotta believe something I guess but, swallowing anything as long as it tastes like your favorite kool aid contradicts your self-image as a guy who sees the world as it really is.

I don't know how much of Pro Libertate is unvarnished truth and how much is unvarnished BS but, I have noticed in life that strong words often reveal a weak argument. Fevered rhetoric is not required to prop up accurate information but, I'm sure it helps sell internet diatribes to those anxious to read what they need to believe.

This is a big world. Lots of bad and/or ridiculous things happen. Sometimes they are criminal, more often just stupid things done by silly people. There are enough of both every day to allow those inclined to any world view to find fodder for propaganda or just foolish stuff to sell to those sharing their views.

We all believe what we want to believe-----ideally, some intellectual honesty is applied to it all to prevent one's falling through the looking glass. I try and probably fail more often then I know.

Your Friend,  RW

Wise words indeed.