28th Amendment – Some Final Thoughts

It’s worth pointing out what you can and cannot do with the law, the constitution and its amendments being the most fundamental law of the political entity known as the United States of America.

We are imperfect and so is any law we make.  The law cannot, as a general rule, redistribute wealth, or ensure that wealth is distributed evenly.  Nevertheless, the law should result in the fair distribution of wealth if the law is wise and just.  This fairness should be thought of as a by-product of good law, not its conscious purpose, the reason being that explicit opinions on how wealth is to be distributed will vary widely and cannot be embodied in a law without favoritism.  Picking and choosing between competing ideas about wealth distribution is as impossible for the law, practically speaking, as it is undesirable in any event.

As matters stand the law has failed this test completely and this is the problem that must be addressed.  The proposed amendment is an effort to recognize this failure and correct it as best that can be done.  It is not the source of the failure, and it is a very imperfect solution to an otherwise totally insoluble problem.

The “jubilee” is a one time departure from the principle I just described:  it is an explicit wealth transfer from one group – creditors – to another group – debtors – unlike anything that has taken place in modern times.  It will unfairly benefit some and unfairly penalize others, though again as a practical matter and under the circumstances the injustice will be collectively minimal, since not only debt but unpayable debt is nearly universal.  Nevertheless, it will cancel this debt once and only once.

Let there be no mistake:  it is shameful that a jubilee has become necessary.  It is an admission that collectively we have screwed things up, and that only this dramatic adjustment will reorder things in a way that a semblance of rational life can resume.  Many of us like to blame the “banksters” for the problems we are experiencing.  This is vain, in both senses:  it is a pointless and unjust judgment upon others; and it is a haughty and unwarranted absolution of ourselves.  We are all collectively guilty.  Some more than others, perhaps, but at this point that is immaterial.

The other big idea behind the amendment is the restoration of an explicit legal gold standard for the dollar applicable to everyone equally, something that has not been in place since at least 1933.  A gold standard has many fervent proponents and many fervent opponents.  It’s what politicians call a “divisive” idea.

I favor a gold standard primarily because it constitutes the government’s assent to natural law, its assent that it must conform to natural law and will not attempt to legitimize its own defiance of it.  Its agreement that it is not the sole arbiter of its own conduct.  Its recognition that its “sovereignty”, while  perhaps nearly or even practically boundless, is not absolutely boundless.  Its renunciation of the worship of power.  Conversely – and this is my view – a government’s refusal to define its monetary unit of account amounts to an explicit statement to the contrary of all of those principles:  that the government does not assent to natural law; that it will defy natural law at will; that it is the sole arbiter of its own conduct; that its “sovereignty” is in fact boundless; that it worships power.

In other words, a government that refuses to be bound by any definition of its monetary unit of account is necessarily and explicitly a tyrant.

And that, really, is the only thing a gold standard does in concrete terms:  restraining the government.  It does not restrain individuals, who will continue to practice virtue and vice.  It does not by itself assure a fair distribution of wealth, although it makes that more likely since the referee in the wealth game – the government – may have the desire to weigh in on one side or the other but will not have the ability to do so, at least not while it maintains a pretense of neutrality.

The gold standard is not a panacea for every economic ill; but at least in my view economic ills multiply and eventually overwhelm without it.

The 28th Amendment I have proposed, even if a lot of people agreed with it – a dubious proposition in itself – is extremely unlikely to ever occur.  I consider that tragic, because in my view it is the only solution to the problems we face that does not involve social degeneration, violence, civil unrest, revolution and destruction on a massive scale.  These were the characteristics of the 20th century.

My hope is that the 21st century will be different, and I have offered this amendment, gratis, as the best contribution to that result that I am capable of.  It is an outgrowth of the discipline of economics certainly, but at base it is the product of a lawyer’s mind.  This seems fitting:  among the most deplorable and unjust hatreds commonly lurking in the collective and individual mind is the one directed at one’s own lawyer.

It seems we will never outgrow ritual sacrifice and scapegoating.  Maybe we’re not meant to.

 

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under financial crisis

4 responses to “28th Amendment – Some Final Thoughts

  1. fiat justitia et pereat mundus

    What Constitution?

    Bankster history 101 (which is where these people come from):

    http://www.scribd.com/full/37179258?access_key=key-1cuxpp2jlyrgxlh33vds

    The first chronological incident tying these families together, to my knowledge, starts with the passage of the Fed Res Act in 1913, the murder of Sen Louis McFadden, and Rockefeller corrupting Delaware functionaries in order to allow his corporation to exist; prior to that time corporations needed to show they would serve the public interests and were not perpetual. (these are not that secret and can be found with a simple search)

    The next incident is the ethnic cleansing carried out in the US during the 1920s which the US supreme court approved (in a rigged case):

    Carrie Buck v. James Hendren Bell, Superintendent of State Colony
    for Epileptics and Feeble Minded
    Citations 274 U.S. 200 (more)
    47 S. Ct. 584; 71 L. Ed. 1000

    The ruling was written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. In
    support of his argument that the interest of the states in a “pure”
    gene pool outweighed the interest of individuals in their bodily
    integrity, he argued: We have seen more than once that the
    public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It
    would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap
    the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not
    felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being
    swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if
    instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to
    let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who
    are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that
    sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting
    the Fallopian tubes.

    Holmes concluded his argument with the infamous phrase “Three
    generations of imbeciles are enough”.

    They were unable to carry out the thorough, documented process for lack of database technology. Prescott Bush, Carnegie, Rockefeller foundations were all behind this.

    Edwin Black, jewish researcher of the German ethnic cleansing in the 1940s, found their older history when he found the IBM Nazi connection. IBM’s database technology was what allowed the Germans to ethnic cleanse you, your sister, brother, cousins etc. That is why the earlier one failed. He wrote a couple of books including Nazi Nexus and War on the Weak. Here’s a chat about War on the Weak:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9014940408212321489#

    This man also states that there was a connection between the Rockefeller foundation and Mengele’s overseer. It’s in one of his chats. See, it wasn’t just a business connection between Thyssen and Bush; it was part of a much larger ethos and yes, conspiracy.

    They were also behind a coup attempt in 1933:

    During the 1950s Prescott Bush ran for the US senate and lost when a last minute rumor linking him with the old Birth Control League (yes, you heard correctly: the BIRTH CONTROL LEAGUE which is shy George HW Bush was called “rubbers” as in condoms when he was in Congress in the sixties pushing this:

    Congressional record in the
    1960’s:

    Population Task Force

    Among Bush’s most important contributions to the neo-Malthusian cause while
    in Congress was his role in the Republican Task Force on Earth Resources
    and Population. The task force, which Bush helped found and then chaired,
    churned out a steady stream of propaganda claiming that the world was
    already seriously overpopulated; that there was a fixed limit to natural
    resources and that this limit was rapidly being reached; and that the
    environment and natural species were being sacrificed to human progress.
    Bush’s task force sought to accredit the idea that the human race was being
    “down bred,” or reduced in genetic qualities by the population growth among
    blacks and other non-white and hence allegedly inferior races at a time
    when the Anglo-Saxons were hardly able to prevent their numbers from
    shrinking.
    Comprised of over 20 Republican Congressmen, Bush’s Task Force was a kind
    of Malthusian vanguard organization which heard testimony from assorted
    “race scientists,” sponsored legislation and otherwise propagandized the
    zero-growth outlook. In its 50-odd hearings during these years, the task
    force provided a public forum to nearly every well-known zero-growth
    fanatic, from Paul Ehrlich, founder of Zero Population Growth (ZPG), to
    race scientist William Shockley, to the key zero-growth advocates infesting
    the federal bureaucracy.
    Giving a prestigious congressional platform to a discredited racist
    charlatan like William Shockley in the year after the assassination of Dr.
    Martin Luther King, points up the arrogance of Bush’s commitment to
    eugenics. Shockley, like his co-thinker Arthur Jensen, had caused a furor
    during the 1960s by advancing his thesis, already repeatedly disproven,
    that blacks were genetically inferior to whites in cognitive faculties and
    intelligence. In the same year in which Bush invited him to appear before
    the GOP task force, Shockley had written: “Our nobly intended welfare
    programs may be encouraging dysgenics — retrogressive evolution through
    disproportionate reproduction of the genetically disadvantaged…. We fear
    that ‘fatuous beliefs’ in the power of welfare money, unaided by eugenic
    foresight, may contribute to a decline of human quality for all segments of
    society.”

    During hearings on the Social Security amendments, Bush and witness
    Alan Guttmacher had the following colloquy: Bush: Is there any
    [opposition to Planned Parenthood] from any other organizations or
    groups, civil rights groups?
    Guttmacher: We do have problems. We are in a sensitive area in
    regard particularly to the Negro. There are some elements in the
    Negro group that feel we are trying to keep down the numbers. We are
    very sensitive to this. We have a community relations department
    headed by a most capable Negro social worker to try to handle that
    part of the problem. This does, of course, cause us a good bit of
    concern.
    Bush: I appreciate that. For the record, I would like to say I am
    1,000 percent in accord with the goals of your organization. I
    think perhaps more than any other type of organization you can do
    more in the field of poverty and mental health and everything else
    than any other group that I can think of. I commend you.

    This is an excerpt of Bush’s unauthorized biography:

    http://tarpley.net/online-books/george-bush-the-unauthorized-biography/

    They killed Martin Luther King as his family’s wrongful death civil suit against the CIA et al jury said in the late nineties. No MSM covered it. They also killed Malcolm X, JFK and a lot of other people. A credible JFK investigation : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srstQVfVNEM

    List of people they’ve murdered (google their names and their stories will come up):

    Congressmen Larry McDonald, Sonny Bono and Larkin

    USMC Colonel Sabow
    Pulitzer Prize winner Gary Webb
    Journalist Danny Casolaro
    Ex-mil intel Steve Kangas who wrote the great “Origins of the Overclass” : http://www.scribd.com/full/23098198?access_key=key-gfuw42onruwfrrhw413
    US Special Forces Colonels Edward P Cutolo, Baker, and one other whose name escapes me (all in the same incident).
    Here’s International Committee of the Red Cross investigator David Guyyat on this incident and background info:
    http://www.scribd.com/full/23098845?access_key=key-1zc7ubdmfbsl0rixgkfp

    As you can see, they are the real drug cartels and here’s a good recap of what is known about their activities:

    Here’s where he first came to light when opposing CIA director Deutch ( a Bush stooge) in a LA townhall after Iran Contra came to light (Ricky Ross is an interesting figure in this case)

    Dois Gene “Chip” Tatum who wrote the Tatum Chronicles (very interesting) and whose testimony you can find on YouTube in an interview with 30 year FBI veteran Ted Gunderson (the ones on the beach have more info):

    http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=search_videos&search_query=tatum+%22Ted+Gunderson%22&search_sort=relevance&search_category=0&page=

    This man’s testimony confirms the accusations: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=search_videos&search_query=beau+abbott&search_sort=relevance&search_category=0&page=.

    Anyways, a good recap in written form of the decades long CIA drug trafficking is Rodney Stich’s Drugging America: A Trojan Horse:

    So, the old Birth Control league became Family Planning after WWII when eugenics became taboo. Margaret Sanger was their shill. I and many others believe the “war on drugs is really their new ethnic cleansing technique:

    The “war on drugs” results:

    http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php?name=Web_Links&l_op=visit&lid=152

    How it is done:

    The overall picture:

    http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=search_videos&search_query=the+new+jim+crowe+alexander&search_sort=relevance&search_category=0&page=

    Keep in mind George HW Bush’s intent while in Congress (see above) for this man above any other is the architect of the modern day “war on drugs” (as opposed to Prohibition which was also their little fascist games). Yet, if you can believe it, he founded the Medellin Cartel with Jorge Luis Ochoa and Pablo Escobar.

    http://www.google.com/search?q=%22allen+rudd%22+%22pablo+escobar%22+bush&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

    Most of the results are on target.

    Ok so now you have some idea of who these people are, where they come from and how they literally get away with genocide. The why is because it’s class warfare and lust for empire. The 1960s Great Society “war on poverty” made them rebel following Ayn Rand’s (a Rothschild concubine) Atlas Shrugged ethos which also fits with their offshoring (gutting) of the US economy.

    Most of the people mentioned on here have YouTube vids and plenty of documentation. Just google them.

    Anyways, if you google all these names and situations, read patiently for weeks, you’ll get the full picture. Oh, here’s another good documentary on the Bushes:

    http://www.google.com/search?q=%22russ+baker%22+bush+secrets&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=%22russ+baker%22+bush+secrets&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=pky&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivo&source=lnms&tbs=vid:1&ei=hubITNDDKMT48AaYvcEb&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CAgQ_AU&fp=30d26a1c0ffaa64e

    Like

    • I am familiar with the allegations regarding the Bushes, the Rockefellers, et al. My point has been that even if they are true they don’t matter at this point.

      Consider the case of Justice Holmes. At about 20 years of age he was in the Battle of Antietam. Carnage like that affects people in different ways. No one disagrees with the intellectual results he later displayed more than I do, but maybe there’s room to understand, if not forgive. The essence of this proposal is forgiveness and mercy, not justice.

      If you want justice – as in every wrong being paid for in full – the world may indeed be lost. I don’t see how jumping into a bottomless pit helps, no matter who you get to push into it first.

      Like

  2. enicar333

    Look at all the talk, cites and quotes. The time for “talk”, is over. It is time for a DIVORCE, irreconcilable. PERIOD. Let us do this amicably.

    I am in Construction. I have a great depth of experience. Sometimes the House can be fixed, sometimes it needs to be torn down. What part of… America cannot be fixed in its present form, do you not understand. Hey, lets do it amicably. No violence necessary.

    Perhaps from a new Perspective… Hey America! I don’t like you and your ways. I disagree. Please leave me alone, let me be. America responds: HOW DARE YOU! WE MUST TAKE ALL FROM YOU! WE WILL VIOLENTLY ABUSE YOU! YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS! … Who is the Bully? Who is non-violent? Who is peaceful?

    Please… just leave me alone and let me be.

    Like

    • Feel free to come here and vent when you feel like it. But remember, I’m just trying to help.

      It sounds like you’ve had some bad experiences and I sympathize. Some of us do what we can, but it’s probably not enough. Don’t be too hard on us, or at least not on me.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s