The Roots of “Anticapitalism”

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

(Originally posted on Mises.org)

In many minds, “capitalism” has come to be a bad word, nor does “free enterprise” sound much better. I remember seeing posters in Russia in the early nineteen-thirties depicting capitalists as Frankenstein monsters, as men with yellow-green faces, crocodile teeth, dressed in cutaways and adorned by top hats. What is the reason for this widespread hatred for capitalists and capitalism despite the overwhelming evidence that the system has truly “delivered the goods”? In its mature stage it indeed is providing, not just for a select few but for the masses, a standard of living cordially envied by those bound under other politico-economic arrangements. There are historic, psychological and moral reasons for this state of affairs. Once we recognize them, we might come to better understanding the largely irrational resentment and desire to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Why Producer Prices (Like Lumber Prices) Are Rising Faster Than the CPI

Chris Calton

(Originally posted on Mises.org)

“Homebuilding rebounded less than expected,” NBC reported recently, “as very expensive lumber and shortages of other materials continued to constrain builders’ ability to take advantage of an acute shortage of houses on the market.”

Why Aren’t There More Free Market Surgery Centers and Clinics?

G. Keith Smith, MD

[This is a transcript of a talk given June 17, 2021, at the Mises Institute’s Medical Freedom Summit in Salem, New Hampshire.]

On behalf of everyone at the Surgery Center of Oklahoma and the Free Market Medical Association, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

Capitalism Isn’t a Modern Invention. It’s Medieval.

David Gordon

(Originally posted on Mises.org)

During the eighteenth century, capitalism in Europe “took off” in a way it had not done before, and as a result the West surpassed all other areas of the world in economic growth. What led to this transformation? Max Weber offers the most famous answer. In The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905), he traces the new system to the Puritans. Before them, though there were rich merchants, substantial savings and investment by private individuals was unusual. The Puritans changed matters. They viewed the self-disciplined pursuit of wealth without indulgence in luxury consumption as a sign that God had predestined them to salvation. 

Why Big Business Ends up Supporting the Regime

Ryan McMaken

(Originally posted on Mises.org)

Policymakers know they hold immense power to regulate and punish firms that don’t play ball. Industry leaders know this too. So it’s likely both sides will indeed end up “playing ball.” 

The Meaning of Market Democracy

The Free Market 24, no. 12 ( 2004)

(originally posted on Mises.org)

The democracy of the market is not the democracy that Plato spoke of in his Republic (c. 370 BC) as “a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a kind of equality to equals and unequals alike,” nor that Aristotle in his Rhetoric (c. 322 BC) chided as “when put to the strain, grows weak, and is supplanted by oligarchy.” It is not that which George Bernard Shaw taxed in his Maxims for Revolutionists (1903) as substituting “election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few,” nor that Hans-Hermann Hoppe exposes in his Democracy—The God That Failed (Transaction, 2001, p. 96) that “majorities of ‘have-nots’ will relentlessly try to enrich themselves at the expense of the ‘haves’.”

How Cognitive Dissonance And Stockholm Syndrome Is Driving Our Love Of Globalism

Written By: Michael W. Howell
Senior Writer and Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
Nov 11, 2019

I am sure this is a topic you have encountered many times when discussing the paradigm shift in American politics that is taking place. As the transformation of the Republic starts to take on its new shape, in a “ready-or-not manner”, many are coming to terms with two main issues that have been holding back, both, society and personal growth – Cognitive dissonance and Stockholm syndrome. In many aspects of our lives, the two are what led us to the failed policies and political system we operate under today. To some, the two are blurred and confused into one. Don’t let this happen to you because cognitive dissonance and Stockholm Syndrome are in fact separate cases.

American Politics: The Cloward-Pivens Way

Written by: Michael W. Howell
Senior Writer and Editor at Fighting the Tyranny

America is 18.5 trillion dollars in debt. Let me say that again. America is 18.5 trillion dollars in debt. How does a global superpower like America rack up over 18.5 trillion dollars in debt? Part of my question I answered myself when I said worldwide superpower and the other reason is by design. Yes, we are going bankrupt as a nation by design.

Financing an empire is expensive, and America is finding that out first hand. With a military presence that reaches globally with over 700 bases in over 130 countries that qualify as an empire. The Romans would have been jealous of this empire. It comes at, a cost though. This is not by far the only contributing factors to why America is so deep in debt. A growing welfare state (mostly corporate welfare), the exhaustive police state, high unemployment, blank checks given to Congress, and most damaging, the Cloward and Piven’s strategy are all to blame.

What is the Cloward and Piven strategy? In laymen’s terms, it is a plan to bring down America from within through collapsing the economy by putting such a strain on the marketplace that it can’t be sustainable. We clearly see that, but is it really happening, and how?

In 1966 the strategy, named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Francis Fox Piven, was first proposed to overthrow capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Coming off the August 1965 riots in the Watts district of Los Angeles, Cloward and Piven published an article titled “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty” in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. It was well-received as The Nation sold 30,000 reprints. The activist community was excited and wanted to put into practice the “crisis strategy” or “Cloward-Piven Strategy,” as it would be called.

In the article, Cloward and Piven stated that the ruling classes used welfare to attack and weaken the poor; that by providing a safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970, that poor people can only advance when “the rest of society is afraid of them.” Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activist should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would “the rest of society” accept their demands.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that early supporters of Cloward and Piven were also Saul Alinsky supporters. It seems like a strategy straight from Saul himself. “Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1971 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one.

The authors noted that the number of Americans subsisting on welfare — about 8 million, at the time — probably represented less than half the number who were technically eligible for full benefits. They proposed a “massive drive to recruit the poor onto the welfare rolls.”  Cloward and Piven calculated that persuading even a fraction of potential welfare recipients to demand their entitlements would bankrupt the system. The result, they predicted, would be “a profound financial and political crisis” that would unleash “powerful forces for major economic reform at the national level.”

Their article called for “cadres of aggressive organizers” to use “demonstrations to create a climate of militancy.” Browbeaten by threats of black violence, politicians would appeal to the federal government for help using bailouts. Detailed and crafted media campaigns, carried out by Operation Mockingbird, leftwing journalists, would circulate the idea of “a federal program of income redistribution,” in the form of a secure living income for all — working and non-working people alike. Local officials would gravitate at this idea, like drowning men to a lifeline. They would apply pressure on Washington to implement it. With every major city erupting into chaos, Washington would have to act. This was an example of what is commonly called Trojan Horse movements — mass movements whose outward purpose seems to be providing material help to the poor, but whose real objective is to draft poor people into service as revolutionary foot soldiers; to mobilize poor people en masse to overwhelm government agencies with a flood of demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to meet. The wave of demands was calculated to break the budget, jam the bureaucratic gears into gridlock, and bring the system crashing down. Fear, turmoil, violence, and economic collapse would accompany such a breakdown — providing perfect conditions for fostering radical change. That was the theory.

In 1967, after Cloward and Piven recruited a radical and militant black organizer named George Wiley, he founded the National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO). Using tactics from Cloward and Piven, his followers invaded welfare offices across the United States. Many followers used violence and often bullied social workers and demanding every penny the law “entitled” them. Two years later, in 1969, the NWRO claimed a dues-paying membership of 22,500 families, with 523 chapters across the nation. The plan was in motion and gaining traction.

Regarding Wiley’s tactics, The New York Times commented on September 27, 1970, “There have been sit-ins in legislative chambers, including a United States Senate committee hearing, mass demonstrations of several thousand welfare recipients, school boycotts, picket lines, mounted police, tear gas, arrests – and, on occasion, rock-throwing smashed glass doors, overturned desks, scattered papers, and ripped-out phones.”These methods proved useful. “The flooding succeeded beyond Wiley’s wildest dreams,” writes Sol Stern in the City Journal. “From 1965 to 1974, the number of single-parent households on welfare soared from 4.3 million to 10.8 million, despite mostly flush economic times. By the early 1970s, one person was on the welfare rolls in New York City for every two that are working in the city’s private economy.” As a direct result of its massive welfare spending, New York City was forced to declare bankruptcy in 1975. The entire state of New York nearly went down with it. The Cloward-Piven strategy had proved its effectiveness.

We are seeing this today in once-booming and prosperous Detroit along with other major cities, which are placing a heavy burden on the city’s and even State’s infrastructure. It is leading to total dependency on the government. This is precisely the goal that the elite are using to bring in the world government that they have been planing. First, America has to be broke and broken. We are broke regarding our economic freedoms. However, we must never be broken, or the strategy will prevail, and the global bankers will win.

We see this election, the strategy being played out as far as self-proclaimed Democratic “Socialist,” Bernie Sanders campaign gaining momentum on platforms such as the black lives matter movement and his “free tuition for all” stance. This is a transparent tactic of divide and conquer and even a heavy burden on the nation’s economy. Methods like the BLM movement help to divide instead of uniting in the differences at hand. I think it needs to be all lives matter, and that way, real dialogue can take place, and real change will rise from the efforts. To keep us divided and at odds isn’t going to solve the problem, only look elsewhere for the solution. Where are many looking to? The government. The very same ones that are dividing us for the eventual conquer.

Bernie Sander’s plan of utopia and euphoria comes at a hefty cost, as well. Economist has placed his “plan” to add around 18 trillion dollars to the debt. Obama has added more debt than all the other presidents combined and brought the deficit to 18.5 trillion dollars, and now we are looking to add another 18 trillion to it? Insanity and irresponsible when logic and math are applied. Where would the extra revenue to fund this come from? Tax increases to which Bernie has already acknowledged we were in favor of.

We are also seeing the attack on the economy in the form of the open borders we now have. This was orchestrated and a ploy as well. Playing on the heartstrings of American’s goodwill and compassion, the elite are using “refugees” as a way to overburden the system and cause the artificial “crisis” that the strategy calls for.

A 2013 ICE document reveals the details and states that over 36,000 criminal illegal aliens were released from our government’s custody while awaiting the outcome of deportation proceedings in that year alone. That is not a refugee problem, but a planned action and is part of the Cloward-Piven plan in attacking the welfare system and economy.

The plan to bring forth globalism through the divide and conquer method is taking shape and through many issues such as racism, conservative issues, socially, and even by religion, they are quickly transferring the problem they created to the solution the public will demand. Another way of defining the times is by getting to know the Hegelian dialectic. A tactic the Cloward-Piven supporters use and have become quite capable of. The Hegelian dialectic incorporates the “problem-action-solution” method that the elite love to use for the division.

They create the crisis, false flag event, or problem that they need to happen to later come in and offer the solution to the manufactured crisis they created. Basically, “control the chaos” mentality.

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

-Rahm Emanuel

In an attempt to call out this plan by name, Rudy Giuliani recognized the effort that the strategy was having when he said, “This wasn’t an accident, it wasn’t an atmospheric thing, it wasn’t supernatural. This is the result of policies and programs designed to have the maximum number of people get on welfare” in a 1997 speech.

It is no secret that our monetary system, set up and controlled by global offshore bankers through the Federal Reserve, is fictitious and fraudulent. The Federal Reserve uses its power and control over the economy, and by controlling the politics of America cannot only manipulate the economy but for global policies that perpetuate the division. And by setting the interest rates, the Fed can offer the solution and appear to be the answer, even though they create the problem.

By controlling the monetary system, the Federal Reserve is then able to control countries through debt. To keep the full agenda steam ahead, they not only start the illegal wars our brothers and sisters fight in but also fund both sides.

“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes it’s laws”

-Mayer Amshel Bauer Rothschild

There are many tentacles at play in the times we are in, but it is essential to know they are all calculated, methodical, planned, and not by mistake. There is a goal or agenda at play, and the more we stay divided, the harder it will be to make a stand against the real enemy. We can defeat the Cloward-Piven strategy once we all recognize the plan and coordinate our efforts collectively.

You can pick up a copy of Anatomy of the Global Agenda from Amazon and everywhere books are sold

Also available is Michael’s new book, The United Deep State of America: A Shadow Government’s Republic

Follow Fighting the Tyranny on Facebook for more articles and news

Anarchy In The U.S.

One of the most rising movements I have seen of late is the voice of anarchy sweeping through the country. We have seen many movements come and go and few actually stick in the minds like the anarchy crowd is drumming up. From the truth movement to the Tea Party to the Libertarian crowd there is little to no doubt that anarchy is not only growing, but here to stay.

This movement is not a new movement, but it is highly misunderstood and misquoted by many. I have found myself guilty in this aspect myself and still, through many social media contacts, am coming to understand what it really entails and the attraction to it. 

If the first thing you think of is punk rock and out of hand youth when you hear the term anarchy  then I can tell you firsthand, you have been misled in understanding anarchy as well. Inside the anarchy crowd is young, old, rich, poor, and the spectrum is wide. Many lifestyles and ideology encompasses this crowd, but the most intriguing and guiding light to the cause is self governing and a voluntary society. 

With the political winds blowing in the direction they are it’s easy to see why this idea has picked up steam and participants. Out of control legislation and a global military that is used for nation building, among other reasons, have been stated for many people turning to anarchy. 

Just like inside all “political parties” there is a wide range in defining anarchy. I think of anarchism as a type of thinking versus rules and laws. I am still grasping the wide spectrum of Anarchism myself though.

The term “anarchy” comes from the Greek word “anarchos” meaning without ruler. Until the 19th Century, the term was actually used in a positive light to describe a political belief, and it was only later that it became used to describe chaos.

Philosophical Anarchism states that the State lacks moral legitimacy, that there is no individual obligation or duty to obey the State, and conversely, that the State has no right to command sovereign individuals. It in return though does not advocate violence to eliminate the State, but calls for a gradual change to free the individual from the oppressive  laws and social restrictions of the modern state.

Many people have made the cross over from the Republican Party to the Libertarian Party under these same thoughts pertaining to self governing and the shrinking of government as a whole. The two ideologies are closely related and often gets brought up in debates between the two participating groups. At the end of the day I believe both parties agree on a voluntary society and individual rights being key in the society we live.

Libertarianism advocates maximizing individual rights and free will while minimizing the role of the state. And Libertarian Socialism takes that concept a step farther by advocating a worker-oriented system that attempts to maximize the liberty of individuals and minimize the power of authority. This is what we are seeing in the Democratic Party through the power play of Unions.

I have found in researching Anarchy defining it is hard to do as far as pinning one whole label on the movement, but the basics include self governing and withdrawal from the State. 

One element inside the Anarchist movement I am seeing more and more of is the Ano Capitalist group which is a political philosophy which advocates the elimination of the State and transfer the power back to the people through open markets, private property, and individual sovereignty. The little research I have done I feel this could play a very important role in today’s times and crony capitalism we are experiencing.  

If you haven’t looked into anarchy, the real meaning of anarchy, I urge you to look into it. If for no other reason than to get a better understanding of the term and all it means. Once you break down the sterotypes we have all had regarding anarchy I think you will see the true meaning and that is that everyone has the right to live as they see fit without oppression from the State. That includes a forced society and turns it into acts through voluntary means and ideas. 

I am looking forward to learning more on the subject and will be engaging in more conversation getting to the heart of the movement. Regardless where you fall in the political spectrum we can all agree that the expansion of government is intruding in our natural right to live our lives the way we want to. From wars that are not declared to a gross spending of our taxes, the current way of doing things is broken with no signs of getting turned around any time soon. 

Written by: Michael Howell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Secret of the TPP Released, Brought to Light

The full text of the dreaded and mysterious TPP trade deal involving 12 countries and encompassing 40% of the world’s economy has officially been released. While little by little, part by part has trickled out like a slow leaky faucet, this is the first time the public has had the opportunity to read it in its entirety. Now the treaty is waiting ratification for the the interested countries. It covers the world’s labor, what has been said to be affordable medications, the environment, the safety of food and product safety, and much more corporate interest.

Ever since the leaky faucet has been dripping at a trickle pace, one of the questions many has had was how it would effect the internet among other issues. Many have said that the regulations are so strenuous that it would lead to internet censorship through heavy and broad copyright regulations. We defeated SOPA and CISPA and now we are facing much the same threat with the TPP treaty. To quote an article that I was reading earlier from truth out news it put it this way. “….. essentially what it does is it forces the United States’ broken copyright system on the rest of the world without expanding protections for freedom of speech and so-called ‘fair use,’ which are basically provisions that prevent copyright from being used to censor or take down legitimate content or criticism or political dissidence from the internet.”

Fair use is a statement that anyone with a social media account, YouTube account, and really anyone interested in sharing information is well aware of. Is this a way to suppress information the government, corporations, and those not “playing by the rules” are going to be using? That is a very real question and could lead to the ongoing attack on the first amendment and another way to calm fears of the corruption we are seeing today.

One of the fears, as far as the internet goes, it is will be used to prosecute and go after whistle blowers instead of protecting the acts of those that “see something, say something.” This is a multi fold problem that could even criminalize journalist using information they obtained from whistle blowers such as Ed Snowden and Bradley Manning. In these cases the information will be hidden and the truth can not be brought to light. That is against the grain of a Constitutional Republic which could be the very reason for this to be included in the TPP treaty. By including multiple countries it would extend the tyranny of the elite and bring prosecution to journalist seeking to expose the corruption.

Couple this aspect of the TPP with net neutrality and you could very easily take the internet out of the free people and have a genuine propaganda machine. Joesph Goebbels would of loved to of had this in his propaganda tool box. Complete and total control of not only the mainstream media but a deafening blow to alternative media as well. One swift blow, one swift silence to millions of voices.

This is really just one of the sickening parts of the TPP and I plan on talking about many other concerns once I have had time to digest and analyze the documents more. Just based on my initial research, some of my fears are now confirmed. Free speech is very important to a free society and we can not just turn that over to our elected politicians or more detrimental, a global agenda involving many nations.

Look for future articles about the TPP in the near future. If my research and the documents presented to us so far are this bad, then we really need to pick up our fight and make our voices not only known, but louder. Let your Senator and Representatives know how you feel. Something tells me they aren’t going to care, but this needs to be our first step.

Written by: Michael Howell

Listen To Me Now, Not Later

Written by Michael Howell
Staff writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny

We are under a massive attack on our rights. This isn’t a theory and it’s not fear mongering. Look around you and think about all the new laws and regulations that are coming at us on every front. Internet regulations, socialized healthcare, Freedom Act, and the Federal Common Core Curriculum to name just a few. What about the expansion of bureaucracies? The N.S.A., T.S.A., Department of Education, Department of Energy, and Department of Homeland Security, once again, just to name a few. How about the expansion of wars either directly or through proxy countries. Everyone can sense that the winds of change are blowing and blowing in a very dangerous direction. Every freedom that past generations have fought for and unfortunately have died for, is under attack. We are living in a pivotal time that will ultimately define how history will be written. Our actions will not only define this generation but how future generations lives will be lived. In freedom, with individual sovereignty. or under oppression and tyranny. That will be our decision to make and time is running out.

Operation Mockingbird: Then and Now

Written by Michael W. Howell
Staff Writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
November 5, 2015

Operation Mockingbird. Sounds like an evil plot among birds, right? I can see a tree full of birds plotting against another group of birds calling their plan Operation Mockingbird. Well, this scenario isn’t that far-fetched just substitute birds for people, keep the plotting, and think of the tree full of birds as actually Washington D.C. and the other tree as the American people. Maybe before we continue with the silly analogies, we need to define what this operation really is and how it is manipulating what we see and hear.

Here is what many have officially defined as Operation Mockingbird. It is a government program that used C.I.A. personnel to infiltrate media organizations, and their objective is to control the way we hear the news, receive the story, and even react to the report. Their goal is to discredit alternative media and place the focus on the mainstream media, which they control, run, write for, and present. How did this deception get conceived, and is it still going on today?

Let’s define what it is, and then we will look at is this program still active today. What we do know for sure is that Operation Mockingbird was a secret program of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (C.I.A.) to manipulate the media as stated above. It got its roots in the early 1950s and was initially started by Cord Meyer and Allen W. Dulles. When Dulles became head of the C.I.A., the program was taken over by Frank Wisner. Their objective was to recruit well known and respected journalist into their system to tell the C.I.A.’s views through a “legitimate” news source. They are even attributed to some student and culture organizations, buying news and magazine businesses, and significant news outlets worldwide.

What would be their point in doing this? The answers here are numerous, so I will touch on a couple. One, and probably the main reason, is to control political opinions and help create the division among us. Why would the C.I.A. want division between us? To implement the Cloward and Piven strategy, but I will touch on that strategy in another article. For time’s sake, let’s just say they can’t carry out their global agenda with a united populace. They need us divided and dependent on them, their system, their goals as the answer. Think of it as them creating fictitious chaos so they can come in with the solution and appear to be the answer to all our problems.

Well, how do we know where to get our news from and who is the reliable source? This is a question I get asked many times. The answer is really multi-layered and needs to be addressed. It is evident and apparent that mainstream media is under the influence of this operation even to this day. So, that really leaves us as the news source. We have become dependent on mainstream media to tell us how to feel, or what to eat, and how to dress, or what’s popular in news stories across America daily. We have become misled to the point of confusion while being fed narrative after narrative. Just like if someone came into our home and took it over, it would be our responsibility to take back our house. This issue is no different. After all, they are coming into our home and taking over our thoughts, opinions, and way of life. Well, let’s take it back!

We can do this in many ways. With today’s social media, blogs like this one, and platforms to get our voice out there, this is easier than ever to report the accurate news. It is imperative in today’s time to not post satire articles. This is a massive issue for me and needs to stop. Sure those articles can be witty, funny, and, most times, so far-fetched that it can not only lose the person out there seeking the information but discredit us in general. We mustn’t become what we are fighting when the fight is about disinformation. There are many out there that may not be vocal in their battle, but they are relying on you for their news.

Use social media to inform the unaware and to open up dialogue. This will not only help the information get out there, but will also open up that dialogue we seek to those that may not fully understand what is really going on. Share articles you find informative, accurate, and trustworthy. Build a pipeline of blogs, social media sites, friends, family, that you see to be engaged and aware. Talk the points all the way through to the conclusion to not only get all the facts laid out but to understand the issues better yourself. In summary, learn the lesson then go out and be the teacher. The critical thing to remember is that you were not born awake, and neither was the person you are trying to reach. Meet them where they are at in their understanding. If they are health conscious, then don’t approach them about the Federal Reserve. It will be overwhelming and unproductive. Instead, let them know about G.M.O.’s and the harms of vaccines. Once again, meet them where they are at. Do not use this time to show off how much you know, but instead help them get to where you are in understanding the fact. Baby steps.

Why alternative media and not mainstream media. Well, let’s look at who owns and operates these mega-media sources. Before I go any further, I’m not saying completely turn off mainstream media, just be aware of the global agenda when listening to them and do your own research. Always do your own research. Even when it comes to alternative media.

Take Fox News, for example. They are the biggest and most watch news we have. Who owns them, and what is their relationship to the globalist, or elitist? News Corp, which is the parent company to Fox News, is actually owned by Rupert Murdoch with Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal holding 7% of the operation. When dealing with the global agenda, Saudi is one of the most violent countries even though we refer to them as an ally. They have a horrible domestic policy and, actually, to date, have more beheadings than what we see with ISIS. Saudi has also been implemented and tied to 9/11.

Whenever I engage in talks about Operation Mockingbird, one name comes up every time. Anderson Cooper with CNN. His name is one of the most closely tied to Operation Mockingbird that I have found. There are numerous YouTube videos out there showing him being confronted on this topic, and he always has the same reaction. Dismiss, deny, and belittle the person asking the question. Why? Ask me anything about my involvement in Operation Mockingbird, and I would sit there and talk to you as an innocent person accused of being a part of this would do. There are many, many more out there that I will touch on in another article.

Another way of knowing our media is fake is the content in which they report on. We know our money is printed out of thin air, not backed by anything, and then loaned out, with interest. Why is this not leading off every news cycle daily? Addressing the Federal Reserve, especially in today’s economy, would quickly get an audit, if not abolished completely when the American people really know what our monetary system is about. Ironically, but by design, the Federal Reserve, or The Fed, is controlling the news through financing the leading players and owners of the media.

How about undeclared wars? Why is this no leading the news cycle daily? We are a nation, in general, proud of our military and unite anytime we have to send our men and women overseas, so why not report on how these are illegal wars and not declared by Congress as the Constitution demands. Let’s not forget the troops swear an oath to the Constitution as well as the politicians sending them to war, so why are we not demanding they follow the document they swear to? Because many don’t even know what the Constitution says. That, too, is by design.

Look at the partisan platforms of the media outlets today. Depending on your political leanings is where and how you receive your news. If you are a Republican, you watch Fox News. Democrat, MSNBC, etc. Why and how did we allow this to happen? The media needs to be neutral. They need to tell us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. When they take on a partisan stance, they are helping perpetuate the division and even protecting the very elements they are supposed to be calling out. It’s not by accident that corruption has hit an all-time high, and reporting on corruption has hit an all-time low. It’s because of Operation Mockingbird.

It is very evident and apparent that this C.I.A. program is not only still around, but thriving stronger than ever. We have the power to take it back, and we should take the moral authority to do just that. We are in dangerous times globally, and what gets reported needs to be the truth, regardless of who it offends. We can do this, and we can win. Only when we seek the truth and not partisan politics is when we will be free and informed. So get out there on your social media sites, blogs, radio shows, and activism activities and spread the truth. Spread it loud, spread it proudly, and spread it gently. We will win by being the change we want to see. Let’s start with posting facts, not satire. Learning the lessons and then going out and being the teacher. I am reminded this 5th of November that truth is what set people free in the now infamous movie V for Vendetta, not partisan politics.

I look forward to seeing you out there and learning from you all. Let’s be the peaceful end to Operation Mockingbird.

Click here to visit the Fighting the Tyranny Liberty Store

Pick up your copy of Anatomy of the Global Agenda from amazon or your favorite online store.

Be sure to follow Fighting the Tyranny on Facebook and Twitter

Big Pharma and Firearms

Written by: Michael W. Howell
Senior Writer and Editor for Fighting the Tyranny

At first glance, you wouldn’t think these two have anything in common. And you would be right to believe that mainly since they shouldn’t be grouped in together. However, the two are more closely linked than you would think. Well, that’s not a fair statement. The more accurate statement should read something like this, “Big Pharma and guns are linked when it comes to mass shootings.” There that’s the most precise way of tying the two together. What do I mean? Let’s look at several things.

What do the majority of mass shootings have in common other than they occur in gun-free zones? Well, we are finding that the gunmen are also on psychotropic medicine, which significantly influences their decision making. Am I blaming the drug industry alone? No, of course not, but they can not be overlooked as we see a mass increase in prescribed medicine to the public. We are in a time where Big Pharma and their influence is significant in power. Just look at the television on any given night and count the pharmaceutical commercials pushing their products in the disguise of a more full life, a more productive life. Now during that same commercial count, the number of side effects vs. the cause the drug is supposed to be treating. It’s mind-boggling the number of side effects of using the medicine vs. the symptoms that initially brought you to the need for the drug in the first place. In some cases, it’s almost worth it to have the symptom and not the side effects of the prescribed medication.

While I am not, and do not claim to be a doctor or even a novice when it comes to medicine, I can not ignore the damaging effects that are plaguing us today with prescribed medication. I always say, “If you go to your doctor and the first thing he doesn’t ask you is about your eating habits, then leave immediately cause that should be the first question of a health care physician.” It just seems like the first and only step nowadays is to check vitals, run some tests, and finally prescribe the remedy through a magic pill. Why not look into the root of the cause like what we put into our bodies? We have a very complicated immune system that is designed to flush and fight many attacks that invade our bodies, but like anything else, we need to take care of the immune system.

Now I am not against medicine at all. I see its benefits when prescribed and administered correctly. I just want the doctor and healthcare industry to be responsible for their patients, not Big Pharma. And unfortunately, the latter seems to be the norm. I could write a whole article on Big Pharma, but that is not the purpose of this article. I want to address the concerns I have of the gun confiscation that seems to be looming and all aspects of the “mass shooting” epidemic we seem to find ourselves in today.

So back to the issue…Big Pharma vs. guns. First, why do I feel like there is a gun confiscation looming around the corner? I see the United Nations, along with the democratic party looking at every chance to pass new laws, regulations, and sanctions on the right to bear arms. Republicans aren’t exempt. While they seem to be vocal, they are not really pushing the 2nd amendment like we need them to. It is a coordinated effort, and the talk on Capitol Hill seems to back up my suspensions. Can gun control really make us safe? No, it can not. It will only lead to more victims because criminals will never lay down their weapons regardless of what law(s) are passed. After all, isn’t there a law already making murder illegal? Of course, there is, and because they are criminals, they will not abide by it. So any kind of gun control is only going to disarm law-abiding citizens and make us a helpless victim to intruders of our family, home, and property.

How can we protect ourselves and still have a society that feels safe going to the mall? To school? Or even a movie? The evidence is overwhelming in support of a good guy with a gun stops or drastically reduces the impact a shooter makes. Isn’t that why we call the police when this sort of thing happens in the first place? Because we believe he is a good guy with a gun? So, it is elementary to dismiss the firearm as the problem when one takes agendas out of the way and looks at the evidence provided. One more point to make as far as guns being the problem. If arms were the problem, then no one would leave a rifle range alive, or even a gun show. However, the opposite, in fact. These shootings do not happen at rifle ranges or gun shows. They occur in gun-free zones. Where self-protection isn’t allowed.

How does Big Pharma fit into the equation? C.C.H.R. International wrote this in one of their articles – “At least 35 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 169 wounded and 79 killed (in other school shootings, information about their drug use was never made public—neither confirming or refuting if they were under the influence of prescribed drugs). Another article written by Natural News states the following “Nearly every mass shooting incident in the last twenty years, and multiple other instances of suicide and isolated shootings all share one thing in common, and it’s not the weapons used. The overwhelming evidence points to the signal largest common factor in all of these incidents is the fact that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been at some point in the immediate past before they committed their crimes.”

There are tons more research and studies that all say the same thing in regards to the mental capacity of the individual on these drugs. Would making more gun-free zones help? Would stricter legislation regarding firearms change this? No, of course, it wouldn’t. Circling back to the point I made earlier, it would be treating a symptom and not the cause. When I really started looking into this connection, I was stunned that this wasn’t the first course of action taken before we talked about the tool (gun) that the individual used for their crimes.

Why isn’t the mainstream media reporting these facts at every chance? Remember those pharmaceutical ads I was referring to earlier?  Well, they are also the sponsor of most, if not all, news channels, and as we know, they will not bite the hand that feeds them. Even at our expense. I do agree it is past time to stop burying our dead due to senseless violence, but disarming law-abiding citizens, or even heavily regulating the firearms industry will have no positive effect on the number of victims. Just ask the residents of New York, New Orleans, Detroit, Chicago, where gun laws are the strictest, but gun deaths are higher than the nation’s average.

In conclusion, we can minimize the deadly cost of gun violence by correctly diagnosing, prescribing, and following up with healthcare officials. I am not placing the blame on them solely, but the evidence supports the claim that we, as a society, are over medicated. Watch what we put into our bodies, and what comes out will be benefited. Watch who and how we trust our bodies to and take responsibility for our own health at a level we can control.

Follow Fighting the Tyranny on Facebook

Be sure to pick up your copy of Anatomy of the Global Agenda

 

Do We Really Need a President? Why?

Here is a topic I have heard a lot, especially of late. And I must admit at first it was an easy question for me to answer; of course we do. But do we really need a President and if so, why? How come in a nation of 320 million Americans are we so focused on finding that one person to completely and blindly turn over our lives, so to speak, and entrust that one person will make the right decisions to “govern” us. Do we need to be governed? Is there really one person, along with their administration, that can make the right choices for our individual rights and liberties? No, there isn’t. The proof is in the pudding.

Let’s look at a declining past in order to really answer this question. I won’t take you on a long history lesson, but I must start at 1776. It was an exciting time, a self finding moment and even a time when people collectively would come together to find a way to have structure while maintaining individual rights and sovereignty. The Articles of Confederation was replaced with the Constitution and Bill of Rights and our founding fathers had a vision of self rights with limited government. Sounds great, right? What happened then? Why, when our country was founded on freedoms for all, are we seeing a decline in rights and liberties?  This is where the article could get really long so for times sake I will just say the greed, self interest, and corporatism entered the free people unknowingly.

We are seeing attacks on the very freedoms and liberties that the founding fathers tried to tie down and secure. The 2nd amendment is being usurped by a foreign government, the United Nations, while my fellow citizens don’t even understand what the United Nations really is. It’s an all out blitzkrieg on the 4th amendment whether it is in the form of unconstitutional checkpoints on our roadways, or the acts performed at our airports by the T.S.A., or the N.S.A. spying program on innocent civilians. And of course, it is always in the name of security.

So, how does all this relate to the above question as far as do we need a President? Well the current President has taken away not only our individual sovereignty, but our nation’s sovereignty. That is crucial in the preservation of a Republic. This President can not take the blame alone though. This is a plan that is as old as the Constitution itself. And that plan is globalism. It has been openly called for and very aggressively fought to achieve. Here is where the citizens need to rise and take back their government. In a Republic it is our way of life we protect, not the politicians.

Self governing is at the heart of the question when one talks about Presidents and government. Albeit the smallest form of government is what is needed, but we are seeing an overreach of power with no consequences to the perpetrator. In fact, they are often protected, reelected, and continue the oppression that we use to define as treason. How have we lost our way in such a manner that treason is over looked and even protected and defended?

Could we really self govern ourselves in this day and age? In a time when our monetary system is fraudulent, our wars are undeclared and usually just a result of bad foreign policy that we have come to refer to as blowback. Or in this highly advanced technological age when cyber security is a daily threat. The answer is really quite simple. Yes, we could. The private sector out performs the government sector on every facet of life. Spending, protection, education, agriculture, business, financial, and many other ways that are essential to maintaining a Republic. So, how do we get to that point?

Before we get to that part let’s look at what the government really is. They collect taxes off of the working class in order to pay for programs that not only help the poor, but also programs such as social security. This makes the government the “middle man” in our lives. Often times at a gross over spending and poor oversight. Look at the roads situation. This a a hot topic to many. When I have had this conversation in the past I always get the “who will build the roads argument.” As many of you have as well. Let’s address that point. First off, the government doesn’t and have never built a road in the history of government. What they are suppose to do is get bids from the private sector and the winning bidder will be awarded the contract. Why do we need them to take our money illegally through taxes, sit on it for a while, just to award their friends of their investment partners the contract? We don’t need to. That is something that could and really should be done at the local level, state level if necessary.

This has nothing to do with the President thought. No it doesn’t, but it does show a big flaw in government in general. What point could I make to circle back to the main question in this article which is do we need a President. There are numerous points I could make to show this, but I will focus on one in particular. How about foreign policy? That is a big one as far as the way the world sees us and has gotten muddy regardless which party holds office. And to be frank, I do not see it changing in the future, only expanding its global reach. Take the past few elections for example. Let’s go back to 2008 when the country was tired of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We were on the cusp of exhaustion and weary from burying our men and women. Many of us didn’t really understand why we were at war to begin with. After all, Iraq nor Afghanistan had anything to do with the events of 9/11. Then here comes this smooth talking, smart Senator, who belonged to the opposite party than the current President of the time, and he claimed to be against these wars. He even vowed to end these wars if elected. Long story short, the majority bought it and place him in the White House as the new Commander-in-Chief. Good times coming, right? Wrong. We didn’t get an end to the undeclared, unconstitutional wars we found ourselves in. In fact, we started more of these wars under his administration. Not only that, but the expansion of many programs through executive actions.

The N.S.A. was protected and expanded upon. The T.S.A. was now taking over security jobs in our airports that were once held by the private sector. The Patriot act was replaced by the Freedom Act. And our debt was out of hand through over spending and foreign aid. Not to mention the dreaded N.D.A.A. bill that was signed in 2012. So much has happened during this administration that it is hard to fit in this article so I will just stay on point.

Societies or communities that are self governed are generally doing better and thriving. Every thing from community funded schools to neighborhood watch groups seem to provide a better quality of life and reach their objective better, faster, and with greater results than government programs designed to accomplish the same. I guess at this point it would be better if I asked the question do we need government at all? At the end of the day we all need some form of structure. Minimal and effective, but structure nonetheless.

So, why can’t we provide these services ourselves and still maintain the Republic. We can and we should be taking it back. We need to hold these officials accountable who break their oath of protecting the Constitution. The only thing the government should provide is national defense and an honest monetary system. They have failed on both occasions.

The Federal Reserve is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg and is not open to an audit or even government oversight. And out national defense has become a cash cow for the military industrial complex and have hampered our trade relations with foreign nations. Not only have they failed at their only responsibilities, but face no consequences for doing so.

How would a self government society work and who would make the decisions? Well I do not have all the answers and will not pretend to, but this answer is really simple. We would. We would make the decisions based on our needs as a community, as free people, as a collective group of individual, sovereign citizens. Our foreign policy could be changed through trading and open dialogue. Our monetary system could be changed through trading, bartering, and using value back currency instead of printing money out of thin air, that is backed by nothing, then charged interest on. This is and should be unaccepted to all. It feeds banks at our expense and cuts out the middle class which is the backbone of the country. Entrepreneurial, innovation, creation, and small business is being wasted in this country as many are feeling hopeless do to regulations and over reach from the same people that swore an oath to protect them.

We are heading down a dangerous and slippery slope of world government that will dictate how we live our lives instead of being in charge of our own free will and decisions. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is our responsibility, but we will never truly achieve this until we hold those accountable for taking away our way of life. If not now, when? We have the authority, per Constitution, to change our government. Do we have the will power to change things? Do we have the passion? These are trying times and how we handle them will not only affect us, but those that come after us. Do the right thing and help restore the Republic.

Written by: Michael Howell

Do Corporations Run a Sovereign Country

How are laws written? How does legislation become law? Who writes the laws that we end up being governed by? How do we get a voice in the making, passing, and the implementation of laws? Does the Supreme Court have the American’s interest in judging the laws? Should lobbyist be allowed in the process? These are serious questions that many Americans have and we will look into them closely and try to answer them together.

Let’s start with the birth, or writing of the law(s). How are they written and by whom? Have you noticed that when we look at laws in text form, they are never easy to read, understand, or even, most times, follow? Shouldn’t a law that governs so many be in basic and easy to understand wording? Why the confusion? Seems like we all need our own personal attorney walking around us just to understand laws. This can’t be by design, can it?

Well the answer to that is really obvious and shocking at the same time. Maybe, just maybe, they are written so that we get overwhelmed and lost in translation that we give up on understanding them out of our own frustration and confusion. Ask a friend, relative or co-worker to explain a law and the overwhelming majority can’t even give you anything but talking points at best.

Take for instance The Affordable Care Act, or what is commonly called Obamacare. Do you understand it? Can you explain it? The answer is overwhelmingly no. And why is that? Shouldn’t a law mandating healthcare for all, and enforcing it if you don’t comply through penalties, be easily understood and equally easy to follow? Instead we have such quotes as the famous one made by Nancy Pelosi. “We have to pass it in order to know what’s in it.”

Wrong Mrs. Pelosi. We need to know what’s in it in order to make an informative and calculated decision on whether we should pass it or not. Under any rational stance that would be common sense. Could it be that common sense doesn’t apply in Washington D.C.? I can’t buy that. After all, they are smart, Ivy League educated people in Washington. So what is the real issue then?

To answer this we have to look at many angles. Who wrote Obamacare? Who passed it? And is it fair to the American people? The issue of Americans and healthcare has been around for many years and was even a platform of the then First Lady, Hillary Clinton. So why now the sudden urge and illegal passing of the Healthcare Bill?

The reason the Government got involved in the healthcare business should be a red flag to start with. They are not authorized, permitted, or have any jurisdiction in altering, guiding, or controlling the free markets. With The Affordable Care Act, they do all these things. Then penalize those that don’t comply with a fee. That’s a dumbing  down term they use to really mean tax. And that would be taxation without representation.

So, who wrote obamacare and is it constitutional? The finding in this question is astounding. Before I answer this I want to go back to the original question about who has the authority under the constitution to write laws, pass laws, judge laws, and finally execute laws. The government is broken down into three branches. Refer back to our junior high civics class and we will remember the three branches. The three branches create a check and balance and ultimately a separation of power that keeps the power in the people’s court. Those three branches are the legislative branch, judicial branch, and executive branch. With a breakdown of these three branches we can see how the founding fathers meant for us to be governed. The legislative writes the laws while the judicial branch judges the laws against the constitution leaving the executive branch to execute the constitutional laws. I will have more to say about that in a little later in this article.

So who makes up these three branches of government that was designed to protect us from the powers of a bloated government? The legislative branch is made up of our representatives that we elect to be our voice. It consists of two houses of Congress – the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Senate is made up of 100 members, two members from each state, while the House of Representatives is made up of 435 members. The number of representatives from each state depends on the number of population from each state. Their job, in terms of laws, is to represent the people of their states and to maintain little government and retain state rights and personal sovereignty.

The Judicial branch is where the rubber meets the road so to speak. Regardless what the legislative branch writes into law, it is the responsibility of the judicial branch to judge the laws against the constitution and determine if the law is in accordance with the law of the land – the Constitution. The Supreme Court is head of the judicial branch and is made up of nine members. Eight associate members and one Chief Justice. Unlike a criminal court, they rule on the constitutionality of the proposed law. A decision of the Supreme Court sets precedence, or interpretation of the law.

That leaves one branch left, the executive branch, which sole responsibility is to execute the laws that have been deemed constitution. The President is head of the executive branch and serves a four year term as elected by the public. The executive branch also includes the Vice President and members the 15 major departments of government.

Now that we have established the process and legality of laws, their judging or ruling, and how they are executed or upheld, let’s look at the example I have listed above – Obamacare. The Affordable Care Act originated in the Senate. That is an important fact to keep in mind as I will highlight later. But who authored the legislation? This is a scary fact and has virtually gone unnoticed and without report from the mainstream media or even the officials we elected to protect the constitution.

One man is said to have been responsible for writing 628 pages of the bill while in prison, nonetheless. His name is Robert Creamer. Creamer is a senior Democratic operative who defrauded banks in order to keep his Marxist/Communist community organization afloat by committing 16 counts of bank and tax fraud. Doesn’t sound like an elected official as declared by the Constitution to me? But that’s only 628 pages he has been tied to. What about the remaining pages? Where they written by members of the legislative branch?

We are now finding out that the Affordable Care Act was largely written and approved by a handful of large players in the healthcare industry, insurance companies, and drug companies. That is an example of just how powerful the lobbyist voice is in Washington and just how silenced our voices have become. This happens with many policies, I’m just using one example to illustrate the corruption pertaining to our laws.

So, when Nancy Pelosi made her moronic statement to the nation, could it be because she herself couldn’t understand the bill herself? In the words of Sarah Palin, “You betcha!” And I have to be inclined to believe because of a powerful plan to bring everyone under socialize healthcare, their goal was to secretly institute this policy and keep us unaware of the corruption regarding the policy and the drafting of it.

Remember earlier in this article when I stated the Supreme Court’s responsibility towards law? Here is where we should have repealed the Affordable Care Act based solely on the constitution and not ideology or interior motives. The Supreme Court ruled on June 28^th, 2012 in a 5-4 vote ruling that the Affordable Care Act was indeed a tax. That should have nullified the bill based solely on the fact that taxes must originate in the House. Obamacare originated in the senate, therefore, should have been repealed and taken back to the House. Now there is little doubt that this was agenda driven to get pushed through and made the law of the land, but you have to ask yourself this. Why did your elected official not know this, or if they did, why we were not made aware of the process through our elected voice? This is a clear indictment of how the corporations, through their armies of lobbyist, not only usurped the Constitution, but states’ rights and individual sovereignty. Corporations indeed are controlling policies and running the government for their profit and gain.

Now I have just highlighted one issue, but there are many examples of this. Net neutrality being another example I will write about in the future. And once the TPP becomes more visible that will show more corporate invasion and loss of sovereignty. Big Pharma writes many policies and control the pharmaceutical industries as well. We have been, and will continue to be usurped until we act.

This is the very same thing my grandfather fought against in World War 2 and that being Fascism. Let’s protect their sacrifice and make it known we will not be usurped or controlled by lobbyist or corporations. The tyranny you accept today is the tyranny your children will live under tomorrow.

Written by: Michael Howell