The Story of Your Enslavement

[Teaser Rate]

Hi everyone, first post.

I watched the video and I don’t really see much truth or substance behind it. It seemed full of sensationalist “us vs them” fallacies and self-pitying “I would be happy if not for the evils of government” conclusions.

Every political movement has an intellectual and a sensational wing (see Michael Moore vs Noam Chomsky) and I think libertarians would be well served to stay away from sensationalism because entire ideology hinges on people being able to put facts before emotions.

Emotional arguments for things such as welfare and foreign aid can only be defeated by the cold facts that they don’t work, not by emotional counter-arguments that we’re all sheep being farmed by some monolithic entity.

 

[TheConstitutionLives]

What is the last thing he says in the vid? I couldnt make it out. Guess im getting old. "wake up. See the farm .............". Thanks in advance.

 

[MN Patriot]

Hi everyone, first post.

I watched the video and I don’t really see much truth or substance behind it. It seemed full of sensationalist “us vs them” fallacies and self-pitying “I would be happy if not for the evils of government” conclusions.

Every political movement has an intellectual and a sensational wing (see Michael Moore vs Noam Chomsky) and I think libertarians would be well served to stay away from sensationalism because entire ideology hinges on people being able to put facts before emotions.

Emotional arguments for things such as welfare and foreign aid can only be defeated by the cold facts that they don’t work, not by emotional counter-arguments that we’re all sheep being farmed by some monolithic entity.

Welcome to the forums!

Maybe you don't see the farm yet. I see it every payday, in the tax payroll withholding. That is essentially our slavery. The government forcibly takes a substantial of our earned wealth from us on a regular basis. Then they (the politicians, bureaucrats, etc.) redistribute the wealth we create.

Some people aren't enthused with facts. Some people would rather be slaves than free. People have different value systems. If this video wakes some people up, all the better.

 

[Teaser Rate]

Welcome to the forums!

Maybe you don't see the farm yet. I see it every payday, in the tax payroll withholding. That is essentially our slavery. The government forcibly takes a substantial of our earned wealth from us on a regular basis. Then they (the politicians, bureaucrats, etc.) redistribute the wealth we create.

Some people aren't enthused with facts. Some people would rather be slaves than free. People have different value systems. If this video wakes some people up, all the better.

Thanks,

I understand the metaphor of the farm, but I think it's flawed because there’s no farmer benefiting from our labor or solid fences keeping us locked up; the only people we are slaves to is ourselves.

I think the best way to maximize liberty is with a message of personal empowerment, the idea that people can trust themselves to run their own lives and don’t need anyone’s help to be successful and compassionate people. As such, I find the practice of aggrandizing the state in something bigger and more malevolent than it actually to be counter-productive.

Besides, emotional arguments in favor of libertarianism are always going to be thumped by ones favoring welfare and war.

 

[MN Patriot]

Thanks,

I understand the metaphor of the farm, but I think it's flawed because there’s no farmer benefiting from our labor or solid fences keeping us locked up; the only people we are slaves to is ourselves.

I think the best way to maximize liberty is with a message of personal empowerment, the idea that people can trust themselves to run their own lives and don’t need anyone’s help to be successful and compassionate people. As such, I find the practice of aggrandizing the state in something bigger and more malevolent than it actually to be counter-productive.

Besides, emotional arguments in favor of libertarianism are always going to be thumped by ones favoring welfare and war.

The farmers who benefit are big business/banks/politicians. A substantial portion of our wages are stolen from us, which keeps us perpetually in debt and a wage-slave of the big corporations.

Yes, I agree that portraying government as inherently evil (and many here tend to think that it is) is lost on many people. It is a totally foreign concept to government worshipping liberals who think taxes and laws and regulations will solve our problems, as long as it is a Democrat passing the law. Anyone who suggests government is evil is a heretic according to them.

If emotional arguments win, then we need to craft our arguments to be emotional winners. They should still be based on reality, though.

 

[Romulus]

This is more powerful than the OP, IMO.

YouTube - True News 13: Statism is Dead - Part 3 - The Matrix

 

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

Another great vid from Stefan.

 

[Teaser Rate]

The farmers who benefit are big business/banks/politicians. A substantial portion of our wages are stolen from us, which keeps us perpetually in debt and a wage-slave of the big corporations.

Yes, I agree that portraying government as inherently evil (and many here tend to think that it is) is lost on many people. It is a totally foreign concept to government worshipping liberals who think taxes and laws and regulations will solve our problems, as long as it is a Democrat passing the law. Anyone who suggests government is evil is a heretic according to them.

If emotional arguments win, then we need to craft our arguments to be emotional winners. They should still be based on reality, though.

The people who benefit from unintended consequences of government programs do so through the consent of the majority of people, this is very different from a slave-master relationship. If enough voters could be convinced that something the government does is harmful or unnecessary, then it would be cut, along with the taxes required to pay for it.

I don’t really see where the perpetual debt and slavery comes from.

 

[Romulus]

Of course that has been the goal, to get slave to love their servitude. Then they'll never be convinced a master even exists. The objective is to show them the master does exists and they do serve.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

The people who benefit from unintended consequences of government programs do so through the consent of the majority of people, this is very different from a slave-master relationship. If enough voters could be convinced that something the government does is harmful or unnecessary, then it would be cut, along with the taxes required to pay for it.

I don’t really see where the perpetual debt and slavery comes from.

There is the flaw in your reasoning. The majority of people DON'T VOTE(see Francis Fox Piven and Richard Cloward). Even if they did, the system is rigged in favor of establishment candidates. Further, the notion of voting falsely assumes that the majority is necessarily right, which it more often than not isn't.

 

[Teaser Rate]

Of course that has been the goal, to get slave to love their servitude. Then they'll never be convinced a master even exists. The objective is to show them the master does exists and they do serve.

Who are the masters?

The businessmen whose profits are generated by our consumption?
The government representatives whose political capital is generated by our votes and support?

There is no “us vs them”, no hidden mastermind pulling the strings; just a group of people who’ll accept an inefficient and often corrupt government because they aren’t ready to embrace freedom over (the appearance of) safety just yet.

You get them over that hump by making them realize that life is not that scary, and that they don't need government to hold their hand every step of the way, not by calling them sheep trapped inside an evil system.

There is the flaw in your reasoning. The majority of people DON'T VOTE(see Francis Fox Piven and Richard Cloward). Even if they did, the system is rigged in favor of establishment candidates. Further, the notion of voting falsely assumes that the majority is necessarily right, which it more often than not isn't.

I’m familiar with the argument that people are too stupid/ignorant/apathetic to vote for their own best interests but I don’t see how that view is compatible with the notion of personal liberty.

If people can’t be responsible enough to decide their own governance, how can they be responsible enough to educate their own children, give to the poor or protect their own land?

I guess that point is why I see democratic change as the only way to reach a more liberty-oriented society. If people aren’t ready to give up on the comforts of big government, then they’re just going to latch on to something else if it's taken away from them.

 

[purplechoe]

good video... Animal Farm meets 1984...

 

[free1]

A must see!

 

[Baptist]

I've included this video in the wakeup CDs I pass out. So far the response has been good it provokes thought amongst people.

 

[MN Patriot]

The people who benefit from unintended consequences of government programs do so through the consent of the majority of people, this is very different from a slave-master relationship. If enough voters could be convinced that something the government does is harmful or unnecessary, then it would be cut, along with the taxes required to pay for it.

I don’t really see where the perpetual debt and slavery comes from.

Perpetual debt from the Federal Reserve System, which has monetized debt.

Then there is consumer debt, such as credit cards, etc, but primarily the income tax deduction of home mortgage interest, which encourages people to be in debt. There are numerous articles about how it is advantageous to remain in debt because of the tax break you get.

Income tax is slavery. Why should government have first dibs at your paycheck? What has government done to earn your money? Why should government be able to automatically take a substantial percentage of your earnings?

People unknowingly consent to many things, does that make it right? People go through life with little consideration of their choices and actions, and how they unwittingly consent to things in the fine print. Like signing up for income tax deductions when they first get a job somewhere. Although I don't follow this approach, there are people who don't sign up for tax payroll deduction because of their interpretation and understanding of income tax law.

A simpler method, so that we don't have to all be tax attorney's, is to have liberty candidates propose outlawing payroll tax withholding, and require each worker to write a check once a month to federal, state, Social Security, etc.

 

[free1]

Perpetual debt from the Federal Reserve System, which has monetized debt.

Then there is consumer debt, such as credit cards, etc, but primarily the income tax deduction of home mortgage interest, which encourages people to be in debt. There are numerous articles about how it is advantageous to remain in debt because of the tax break you get.

Banks used to be safe places to keep your gold and silver, they were secure wherehouses.

Then they started giving out certificates for the gold you kept there.

People started trading the certificates because it was easier then going in, getting the gold, then giving that to the other guy.

Bankers realized they could create more certificates than the gold they had in the vault. And unless everyone in town came in to get their gold all at once, no one would ever know.

Bankers are greedy. People learned that lesson the hard way after a few banks failed.

How the hell can a bank fail? It's just holding your gold right?

If it goes out of business, it just gives your gold back and then closes up. It doesn't "fail".

Now apply that same logic to today's situation.

The Fed isn't "federal", and it prints "certificates" out of thin air (what you call money).

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Who are the masters?

The businessmen whose profits are generated by our consumption?
The government representatives whose political capital is generated by our votes and support?

There is no “us vs them”, no hidden mastermind pulling the strings; just a group of people who’ll accept an inefficient and often corrupt government because they aren’t ready to embrace freedom over (the appearance of) safety just yet.

You get them over that hump by making them realize that life is not that scary, and that they don't need government to hold their hand every step of the way, not by calling them sheep trapped inside an evil system.



I’m familiar with the argument that people are too stupid/ignorant/apathetic to vote for their own best interests but I don’t see how that view is compatible with the notion of personal liberty.

If people can’t be responsible enough to decide their own governance, how can they be responsible enough to educate their own children, give to the poor or protect their own land?

I guess that point is why I see democratic change as the only way to reach a more liberty-oriented society. If people aren’t ready to give up on the comforts of big government, then they’re just going to latch on to something else if it's taken away from them.

Brief summary-since the majority is almost always too ignorant/apathetic/lazy/evil to favor liberty, it is best not to give these parasites the weapon of mass democracy to use against the rest of civilization.

 

[free1]

I've included this video in the wakeup CDs I pass out. So far the response has been good it provokes thought amongst people.

A wakeup CD, great idea!

 

[Reason]

I've included this video in the wakeup CDs I pass out. So far the response has been good it provokes thought amongst people.

What is the list of videos on the CD's you've been using?

 

[Teaser Rate]

Perpetual debt from the Federal Reserve System, which has monetized debt.

Then there is consumer debt, such as credit cards, etc, but primarily the income tax deduction of home mortgage interest, which encourages people to be in debt. There are numerous articles about how it is advantageous to remain in debt because of the tax break you get.

Income tax is slavery. Why should government have first dibs at your paycheck? What has government done to earn your money? Why should government be able to automatically take a substantial percentage of your earnings?

People unknowingly consent to many things, does that make it right? People go through life with little consideration of their choices and actions, and how they unwittingly consent to things in the fine print. Like signing up for income tax deductions when they first get a job somewhere. Although I don't follow this approach, there are people who don't sign up for tax payroll deduction because of their interpretation and understanding of income tax law.

A simpler method, so that we don't have to all be tax attorney's, is to have liberty candidates propose outlawing payroll tax withholding, and require each worker to write a check once a month to federal, state, Social Security, etc.

1-A central banking system does not cause perpetual public debt. Virtually every country on the face of the earth its their own version of the Fed and not all of them are insolvent.

The problem of the Fed having to monetize debt comes from irresponsible fiscal policies and a lack of independence, not from the system itself.

2-I agree that government policies do incentivize home ownership and that more people should be renting instead of buying, but going in debt for a sound investment is not a negative thing if a borrower’s financial situation is stable. (may that be for buying a new home, expanding a business, etc.)

Taking on debt it not bad thing in itself, taking on debt which you cannot pay back without artificially low interest rates is.

3- The rationale for an income tax is the same as the rationale for any sort of tax. Society requires some sort of governmental structure to operate and it needs to be founded through taxation.

I agree that income tax is a poor way to collect taxes, but I’m not quite sold on the “all taxation is theft” argument quite yet.

4-You proposal seems to be a little unnecessary since every pay stub already covers all those expenses. It would make everyone’s lives more complicated and would encourage further tax evasion, leaving honest people to pay more.

Brief summary-since the majority is almost always too ignorant/apathetic/lazy/evil to favor liberty, it is best not to give these parasites the weapon of mass democracy to use against the rest of civilization.

You can either bring people on your side by persuasion or coercion. The idea that people can’t be persuaded into voting for more liberty-oriented candidates seems to be very statist in nature as it implies the necessity to use coercion.

That or you’re an advocate of a free-state project. Which is fine I guess, but it always seemed to me that separating yourself from the rest of the world is a bit like conceding defeat.