You should have mourned 4th of July

The Blog

The US has fallen short of what its founders fought for and has restored the oppression that was protested in the Declaration of Independence.

Today, Americans are subject to illegal searches of their vehicles and personal mail on an almost constant basis. Email may be read at will by the state. This kind of hostile warrantless surveillance, arguably, is the thing American colonists found most offensive and it encouraged them to take up arms against British colonial authorities.

One might have thought the type of lack of representation in the British Parliament might have been avoided by America's newfound liberty after it achieved independence. As it turned out, Americans got even less representation. At the moment, the narrow US "democratic" system is hardly capable of representation of the vast population at all.

Writing on taxation, Thomas Knapp at the Garrison Center noted that fewer representatives exist for each US taxpayer than exist for each British taxpayer, despite "taxation without representation" being a major point of complaint by Americans against colonial authorities. In the US, there is one representative per 600,000. In the UK, one per 100,000.

On this, Knapp advised ahead of 4th of July celebrations, "America, it seems to me, has fallen far short of what she could have been had we actually secured our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and jealously guarded them to this day. Between the fireworks and grilling out, take a moment to shed a tear with me for what might have been and isn’t."

Ecuador threatened for Assange asylum: The BlogWhile the US seems intent on regime change to overthrow its cr... https://t.co/HLFa8d7A6f

— The clubof.info Blog (@ClubOfInfo) July 1, 2016

The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

Democracies kill with your tacit consent

The Blog

Most theories of government taught today suggest that by paying taxes and merely living in a country, a citizen gives tacit consent for the state to do whatever is needed, including for their "national security".

This argument is even extended to warfare and assassinations. "Democratically elected" politicians are more than capable of killing millions of innocent people in wars, and are likely to be even more arrogant about it, reminding us that they won democratic elections.

Politicians like Tony Blair and George W. Bush viewed themselves as "legitimate" rulers, and viewed others like Saddam Hussein as "illegitimate". Nevertheless, their actions arguably killed more innocent people than the Iraqi dictator. Their crimes are rendered even more offensive by the fact they would like to cite "democracy" as an argument for shifting the blame away from their own bloody and arbitrary hands onto their people.

Writing at the Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS) on 10 June, Tommy Raskin counters the view that voters really approve of the actions of even a "democratic" government. He states, "many citizens do not vote for government action but are forced to facilitate it nonetheless. Citizens who endorse losing candidates, for example, still have political obligations. So do the millions of citizens who choose not to vote".

Noting that when the state does something good, it is merely a gift, because it goes out to people who never requested it or specifically donated funds for it but were instead taxed, Raskin concludes that "Simply living under a democratic government does not count as requesting government action". While Raskin's article does not specifically address the bloody conflicts and genocidal actions by western democracies, the anti-statist's comments are useful in uncoupling the people from their rulers when it comes to understanding who should be held accountable.

Raqqa compared with Battle for Berlin: The BlogThe "capital" of ISIS in Syria is being approached rapidly by ... https://t.co/yJwV6t8f9D

— The clubof.info Blog (@ClubOfInfo) June 14, 2016

The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

Are the Panama Papers a conspiracy?

The Blog

Although the "leaks" known as the Panama Papers are considered a big story across the world, some are critical of their value and the true forces behind the story.

UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the tax avoidance exposed therein is only the "tip of the iceberg". Meanwhile, many western publications have obsessively tried to implicate Russian President Vladimir Putin in the tax avoidance scandals resulting from the Panama Papers, despite the complete absence of any reference to him in them.

The Papers are already credited with causing the resignation of Iceland's leader, and of stimulating mass protests urging the British regime's PM Cameron to resign immediately.

There is even a conspiracy theory that Vladimir Putin himself orchestrated the Panama Papers, with the lack of US figures named in the leak indicating a high level form of blackmail by Russian intelligence agencies threatening to bring down the US regime or businesses using the scandal. This, according to the conspiracy theory, explains why Putin is not incriminated in the documents, yet neither are US officials and business figures.

Less ridiculous is the view, propagated by WikiLeaks and various hacktivist-aligned experts, that the Panama Papers are too heavily redacted, and that this has been done to the benefit of the US. The leaks also appear to have been sponsored by US-aligned figures and evidence suggests they are "engineered" to benefit the US. The release of the Papers was not a chaotic act of liberation like WikiLeaks' release of US diplomatic cables causing massive fallout for the US regime across the world.

#AntiControl noted: Everything that is happening with #panamapapers was engineered to do so. The fallout will be a... thx @Ex_Directory1

— Anti-control group (@AntiCtrl) April 7, 2016

#AntiControl noted: Hi. We are tied up on something we got asked to check on with #panamapapers I apologize for th... thx @Ex_Directory1

— Anti-control group (@AntiCtrl) April 9, 2016

WikiLeaks has itself been asserting via Twitter that the Panama Papers exclude US businessmen and officials from any blame because they are designed mainly to destabilize other countries to serve the US regime's hegemony over them. This view later got cited by Putin himself.

'#ArabSpring didn't bring changes, and #Syria is proof': @chamas_zena https://t.co/wpZQMlKgcN pic.twitter.com/n0g4hCnPia

— The clubof.info Blog (@ClubOfInfo) April 6, 2016

The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

Paid $1500 in jail fees, not even guilty

The Blog

Indicating more unfairness in the US jail system, a man was deprived of a large sum of money in jail fees during the time he stood merely accused of a crime.

Thomas L. Knapp relays the story in a column, available at the Garrison Center and also published via the Mesa Independent and Citizens Journal.

The man, who isn't mentioned by name, was acquitted, but not without being charged "$1,500 he was required to pay just to remain in a place he would cheerfully have walked right out of if allowed."

In his conclusion, Knapp comments that as an antistatist, he doesn't believe in the present government prison system - but, while one exists, taxpayers should really shoulder the costs. He asks, "shouldn’t “we” pick up the check for keeping people — even guilty people — in jail if that’s where “we” want them kept?"

Commentary @iwallerstein addresses whether the #left should be #global or #patriotic minded https://t.co/aQS8uufaXK pic.twitter.com/fVMyQyTm1o

— The clubof.info Blog (@ClubOfInfo) March 13, 2016

The clubof.info Blog

Read More »