All governments change, sometimes from good to bad; others
from bad to worse. In time a people's governors shrug off the
needs of the masses, tread them under-foot, and stamp down the
foundations of liberty. These changes often sneak in unsuspectingly
and rob a nation: usually when the watchmen are sleeping at the
walls as it were.
This work is a capstone of sorts to our other works. We took this to The Old Man of the Sea for his advise on it, and he insisted that we must clearly define the Badge of Protest put upon this book. "What kind of protest? How far are you willing to go to reform America?" he asked.
We argue that our legislators are corrupt and cannot be reformed; therefore we need to recall them and then reelect new Representatives on firmer foundations of responsibility. This can be accomplished in many ways, two of which are mentioned in this work. But this does not address the cause behind the corruption. To address that cause, as argued in our other works, we must redress attitudes which have undermined American (and the West's at large) well-being. The first attitude has to do with lying and cheating--might makes right which has preyed upon the wretched masses. In the fourth century B.C. Demosthenes, a statesman who defended Athens against Philip of Macedon, put this into perspective in his Oration on the Crown, Decree No. 107:
Do you think that this was a small help to the poor or that the rich were willing to spend only a small amount to meet their obligations?
First we must defend the poor against the insatiable greed
of the rich. There are many ways to do this, for each nation has
its own peculiar needs; we insist that America form a unified
front to overcome this problem which preys upon towns, cities,
and nations. If they defer acting upon the problem, the down-trodden
masses, as has been the case with many other unjust governments,
should and will rise up against them. Hopefully it will not be
accompanied by a thirst for revenge; but because of the above
observation about the rich a nonviolent pulse for reform seems
In our country we have many who like to pronounce liberties and dedicate their life's works and savings to aid and set free other nations, but when called to account because of the greater abuses in this nation they back away: to cheap for the offering as it were, and dumb on the issues of this book! So these people must be emboldened and comforted into diverting some of their well spent energy for other nations to their own. George Soros what is your answer on this?
Under our political-economic problems is a nation suffering severe
hysteria, of many forms. Ideas which once were the warp of primitive
and traditional societies have been cast away in favor of bogus
theories fostered by Sigmund Freud and others. We show in our
Tiny Book, Validations of Truth, that Freud
pioneered this effort, when he first formulated a conclusion for
his study, then fit data to it; adding confusion, he dared to write against works he never read which books (specifically of religion) fit best in the library of idiots.
Freud, to persuade the masses to follow his ideas of scientifically managing the human psyche, or spirit, decided that he must destroy religion: who had been assuming--both for the individual and a nation--the psyche management responsibility. From this is a collection of 500+ unique psychological niches into which people are stuffed for psychoanalysis or pills--or the individual is left to flounder. The results of this misguided culture are roaming the ruins of our Inner Cities.
Answering those convinced he did not believe in God (the Height
of religion) Voltaire answered, "Of course! You need religion
to prevent the people from stealing from each other!"
This follows the idea that society's spirits need the food of
truth to breed virtue and, with it, order. God is Truth
said Gandhi et al. Be truthful in all ways ! follows
Religions contain a moral play. The play contains philosophies and taboos (bans and remedies against sin). These bans for the most part uphold certain truths: not to kill, rather than to kill; not to commit adultery, rather than seduce another's home; they say not to lie, cheat, and steal, rather than to tolerate those who lie, cheat, and steal; and they sum these virtues up with Mercy to receive mercy be merciful and the Golden Rule : do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Shepherds will add their own detail to these foundations which sometimes evolve into the opposite of the original guide. We mention the opposites, St. Augustine and Martin Luther, in our work Getting to the Promised Land, for instance, who notably provided the essential argument for Hitler's abominable works against the Jews, contrary to Jesus's point of view.
Against Truth, ignorant of the Golden Rule, our leaders are driven by biases like Martin Luther's against one people or another from one shepherd's pulpit after another. With the scape-goating of Jews and other "heretics" such pulpits condemn Moslems, teaching the need to convert Moslems to Christ (meaning, Messiah), when the Koran (IMRANS 3:45) already requires Moslems to accept Jesus as the Messiah! These are just a few examples of leadership against truth, and such misguided biases and idioms, with their idols and sacred cows, often compel America to ignore calls for help from Moslems and others whose lives every day are tragically broken and lost.
Lacking a system of values because of Freud and other false teachers, Americans do what their forefathers taught them not to do. This results in behavior such that no family is safe and most of our youngsters are destined to be raised in violent settings and broken homes. This follows the economic troll of our dog-eat-dog society which breeds two income homes, but hates responsibility to both young and old, and when depression comes following a high divorce rate many unemployed are swept onto the streets to live like a stray, with no family to help them. Topping this our leaders shame their victims, as in Nazi Germany and elsewhere!!
March! Don't cooperate with those who consumed our wealth and returned us poverty (re: Getting to the Promised Land)! Protest our over-heated Stock Exchange where the capital of our factories is traded and gambled away for short term capital gains (re: Against Leviathan ). Boycott products of factories which are daily stolen away from your towns and livelihood! Give hypocrites who teach the Golden Rule and do otherwise the three fingered salute! Protest, make known, the grievances destroying America's life and hopes.
It seems workable; we just need some responsible, internal reform to make it work. How about hiring honest, less expensive, (and a lot more!) representatives for the people?
Down-trodden masses, remember that this nation was born under the flag, Don't tread on me ! Don't crouch underfoot in the street: you have a right, and for the sake of others, the duty, to defend a roof over your head, to earn a livelihood, and to maintain your family! Stand up for yourselves! The Aristocracy who affected your grief know this law. Failing a fair answer from them, the consequences fallen on other tyrants no doubt will soon fall upon their heads. Their system fed by greed, unfairly distributing wealth through persecutions by religion, race, sex, age, and other justifications for greed never lasts!
Americans are treading on multitudes of their own: Homeless men, women, and children, much after the same manner of the Nazis in Germany, the Aristocrats of 1789 France, the tyrants of Sicily, and other fallen crowns. We know those who can best defend liberty in America on behalf of the multitudes of our down-trodden masses are a little motivated to part with a small offering of help: raising a few shelters; but usually the offerings amount to an occasional quarter thrown into a styrofoam cup. Those who permit the despair of our down-trodden masses are those of whom Demosthenes spoke: who were willing to spend only a small amount to meet their obligations . As we saw in Nazi Germany with another group of down-trodden people (the Jews), this kind of response is not enough, and a people are fully obliged to defend themselves against such tyrants and their greed; and others, who can, are obliged to help.
When we speak of a reformation we mean just that. We need a new consensus on government, the economics of a society, and right and wrong. Our democratic heritage is a steady platform upon which that consensus can be achieved. To achieve this we must fire those who have been teaching us that it is okay to lie, cheat, and steal, among other abominations, who themselves have robbed us of our families, our heritage, and our dignity, and then having filled themselves on us, turn to other nations to rob and consume. This is a first step to reformation...
If you look up you will see that Heaven is always changing
(forever to reform the wicked and protect the poor), but Hell
doesn't. Every people at one time or another must choose one
or the other. We urge the need to pursue reform, knowing the
way of reform always brings more equity...
When the French Revolution began in 1789, one of the things
which precipitated it was an enormous deficit the French
Government had incurred as a result of their support--above all
things!--of the American Revolution in 1776! In March 1788 the
Old Regime of Louis XVI and his Bourbon Dynasty was reaching an
end; and as it approached its end it was forced, out of necessity,
to prepare a National Budget--their first and last. The Budget,
claimed Georges Lefebvre, whose work on the subject was first
published in 1939 under the title , Quatre-Vingt-neuf ,
included expenses of 629 million livres [francs--This can be compared
to $629 million in America in 1947, in terms os social effect]
and revenues at 503 million leaving a deficit of 126 million livres..
The deficit (20% of their expenses) includes about the same differential
as the American Budget and its Deficit in 1983, two hundred years
later! In 1983 President Reagan's Budget showed expenses of 808.3
billion dollars against revenues of $600.6 billion, with a deficit
of $207.8 billion ($128.8 Billion of this was owing against the
then National Debt of $1.38 Trillion). The year 1983 trailed
a major event in US history: the highest year of unemployment--1982--
in the United States since the Great Depression. This was
also when the stock market broke through the 2,000 barrier, of
which we discussed in further detail in our work Financial
Institution Credit Watch and its companion, Against
Our deficit in 1983, relative to Louis XVI's problem, was much worse: for our deficit was then in 1983 nearly 26% of expenses! This pattern has continued. In 1992 our deficit was about 25% of expenses ($292 Billion of which was interest to service the now $4.2 Trillion National Debt, which is growing under the guidance of the Clinton administration).
We can't here take the time to recall all of the events and factors
leading up to the French Revolution of 1789-1792. But we can stimulate
your mind with a few interesting comparisons.
First the enormous debt was a boon to some but of course a disaster to the French nation, for in order to service the debt (make the annual interest payment against it) Louis XVI had to borrow more and more money, increasing the debt, and making the lenders who were already holding paper on the debt a bit nervous.
Pressure from the Aristocracy mandated increasing taxes to service the debt; but at the time the French people were already over-burdened with taxes of all kinds, and the addition of more taxes would take its toll of more government intolerance and human suffering. At the time the French were leading the world on ideas on Liberty and though they were governed by a long standing monarchy, they enjoyed rights and privileges not known to their neighbors and only comparable to the newly founded Republic of the United States of America. Where the French sense of liberty then and the American new government parted were in the attitudes towards a divine nobility who inherited titles and estates because of their bloodline. While the American colonies despised such privilege, over time we find that whereas the titles of divine favors have passed, the practice of keeping the wealth and power of the nation within a privileged or patrician class seems to have taken healthy root in America. Thus, when we speak of a patrician class or Aristocracy in America we can make a fair comparison to them with the Old Regime of the French Aristocracy or the titles of England which continue to this day.
For those who are confused over this comparison, we can use the
illustration of Anthony O'Reilly of H. J. Heinz Co. who earned
a salary more than $75 million dollars in 1991 (see Financial
Institution Credit Watch or The World Almanac) on this. Mr. O'Reilly no doubt owes his position and power (money does buy power and he reaps a lot of it according to our sources) to a good education from a high ranking university(s), good connections, etc. which the workers in his factories are unlikely to obtain. As our National Debt and its Deficit increase so decrease the likelihood of an American's ability to obtain good schooling. At present rates--$20,000 per year (about what it costs to maintain a man in prison per year)--only the wealthy can afford to educate their children through a good university. To the lucky poor few who qualify for such scholarships, we can add only a hope that the American Aristocracy is still acquiring new blood as it were from the pits of the rank and file. Lucky is the young man or woman today who can add a degree to their resumé and luckier still are those who get the choice opportunities who have managed to acquire advanced degrees. Read the Help Wanted-ads: many "entry-level" positions, which require not much more than a third grade education, demand high degrees; and many there are which demand Masters degrees for routine and quite mundane though high paying work. The highest paying positions go to those with the Masters Degrees and the Doctorates, of course.
One of the things propelling these Aristocrats is the fact that the higher the qualifications of those under a supervisor the more the supervisor earns. So in many Government and Government funded positions there are quite earthy departments and their heads who are pushing paper from one basket to another without respect to the value of their labor but according to the quality of the class acquired within the department. It sounds strange but it is very true; and from my own experience I know of many people who acquired precious EE or ME degrees whose position was to update internal company specifications as they came through the government mill. Many of these pour souls never had their engineering skills tapped, but only the ability to read and post the fact that Mil-Q-9858 had been changed from Rev. E to F. The rest of their time they may perform rudimentary calculations on a particular assembly. Whole bay areas within factories might only spend the day searching tables and graphs for data and moving the data to another table and another graph. While positions like this are necessary, it is a fact that many people who fill so-called technical and specialized positions are dropped into such highly specialized niches that they have been reduced to drudgery: the same task over and over and over.
Of course, as our Industrial Base continues to sink following our drowning ship of state, the need for such positions is disappearing, leaving only room for a few highly specialized, distinguished technicians. All we are saying here is that the opportunities answering our old rising expectations of becoming Aristocrats ourselves are growing fewer as the factories are getting to be rarer. Today, the average CEO salary is just over $1 million per year, according to a recent survey. Since we know in the case of the San Francisco Bay the average salary is $30,000 per year, we can see that there is a good comparison between disparity in the wealth of the working class today, and their managers and governors; and that of two hundred years ago: it hasn't changed much. According to Lefebvre, in 1789 a Paris workman earned on the average some 30 to 40 sous a day. Bread escalated from 2 sous a pound to as high as 8 sous in the provinces. We can compare this to La Fayette who was very rich and inherited 140,000 livres a year at the death of his father, which, says Lefebvre's translator, R Palmer [The Coming of the French Revolution, by Georges Lefebvre, trans. by R.R. Palmer, Princeton Univ. Press, 1947], was about equal to $140,000 US dollars in 1947. What does this work out to on our comparative scale? $380 per day to a worker's wage of 50¢ per day or thereabouts. By comparison our $1 million per year executive makes about $2,740 per day against our average worker of $82 per day (dividing the total salary by 365 days per year); Mr. O'Reilly tips the scale over La Fayette at $205,479 per day: a ratio to a worker more than 2,505x versus La Fayette's ratio of 760x. As mentioned our Aristocracy are far more Aristocratic than the French Aristocrats who inherited the French Revolution of 1789! We care not that a French Aristocrat two hundred years ago earned great annual salaries or subsidies off of farming estates, factories or money changing. What we are interested in here is the disparity then and now and the disparity is far greater today than it was then. All the more reason for the poor to resent their plight. If the masses stormed the Bastille over the disparity between their income and the Aristocrats of the French Revolution, how much angrier will our own masses become? By a factor of 1,000? In theory the anger of the disenfranchised masses ought to be magnitudes higher than that noticed in the French Revolution. At the moment the masses starve in silence, with a begrudging stone thrown here and there. But time has a way of bringing out the truth no matter how much the government attempts to down- play it. The truth is that our beleaguered citizens are not too far from the anger which may explode any time now.
The French Aristocracy were a landed nobility whose titles to
offices and estates (and their income) were inherited. Next to
them were the Clergy whose Bishops were also of the Aristocracy
but whose estates were exempt from taxation as they are in America
today. Next to them (together they made up about 500,000 of the
population of 23 million) were the balance of the population who
were called The Third Estate. The Third Estate included everyone
from the peasants to the Bourgeoisie and the higher ramparts of
their class which included merchants, bankers, financiers, etc.
Liberty was blossoming in France, following in the wake of the
American Revolution, and barriers which in other nations prevented
peasants from ever raising above their miserable lot in life were
being torn down. As men left their farms to seek their fortunes
in the cities of France, many succeeded to the highest levels
of the nation and were, in fact, able to purchase titles and the
estates that went with them from the crown. Louis XVI, sensing
the rising conflict between him and the Aristocracy, thought to
break down some of the Aristocracies' advantages by giving away
titles himself. This, of course, aggravated the Aristocracy since
the Old Regime of noble, inherited estates was now being undermined.
By granting titles and admitting new entrepreneurs out of the
Bourgeoise into the Aristocracy, rubbing shoulder to shoulder
with the nobility as it were, Louis XVI only threw more coals
on a fire which because of the Deficit was already becoming
To cool off things (like Clinton bringing in the GOP guru, Gergen), the king brought into his administration an opponent of the reforms he had been trying to introduce to belay the debt whose name was Brienne (sound familiar Mr. G?). Brienne had a reputation of being a good administrator but was, says Lefebvre, in fact an incompetent ignoramus .
While the French system of government was different than ours, the problems they faced were functionally the same as we see in America today: first the Deficit, then the reforms to meet the deficit, which meant more taxes, and this was countered with the hew and cry from all sorts of places, previously heard in the American Colonies, No taxation without representation ! When the issues of "structural reforms" was raised, says Lefebvre, the battle began.
As said, the debt was a boon to some whilst a disaster to the
nation. The value of the livre fell as the debt increased, by
which means those watching the event could invest--buy and sell--bonds
and livres for profit. These, of course, did not wish to see any
change in the present circumstances, and many of them were of
the Aristocracy but most from the Third Estate Bourgeoisie financial
In America we have a similar situation going on. While we do not have a titled nobility, as was in Europe, we do have an Aristocracy or Oligarchy, as you may prefer, whose estates control the destiny of American politics just as the Aristocracy controlled the destiny of French politics two hundred years ago.
The American Aristocracy includes both the owners of old landed estates dating back to the foundation of this nation and the Nouveau Rich--like the up and coming French Bourgeoisie of two hundred years ago. Aristocrats all have the same motive, whether of two hundred years ago or now: to protect their estates (wealth and inheritance). To do this they take a serious part in the politics of a nation and, to protect their assets they must control their governors.
In France two hundred years ago the Aristocrats filled the upper house of Parliament. Next to their House were two other Houses following the lines of the Clerical and Third Estate Divisions of the society. In the Old Regime before 1789 the three houses had equal influence, but in the reform package proposed at the moment of the Revolution were ideas of giving the Third Estate a Double Representation, which would give them leverage over the Aristocracy. Within the Third Estate, as noted, were the financiers, and they were in view of the National Debt beginning to throw their weight around, as would be expected, as they were then the principal parties keeping the government afloat by floating loans. Most of the Aristocrats had by then seen their wealth and estates dwindling away as they watched the new Bourgeoisie cut into the action which they once monopolized, and other reasons involving premogeniture, etc.
More taxes, of course, were in the destiny of France; and the Aristocracy, being of a privileged class exempt from many taxes, felt threatened, and sought to turn the issue to taxing the Clergy's estates and, more importantly, adding a value added type of tax which would apply to everyone (sound familiar?). The Third Estate could not handle such a tax since it was unfairly biased towards the poor.
In our situation, the American Aristocrats include not only the
old landed interests and Nouveau Rich but also both houses
of our legislature. They buy their titles and estates much after
the same manner as the old sales of titles and estates initiated
by Louis XVI. In this country, in order to get elected to a political
office, one must buy the office. The payment of the office, of
course, does not go to the king, as in France, but to the media
mongers who choreograph elections. The more money one can raise,
of course, the better the opportunity for a successful run for
office. Those with connections and money are usually destined
to win. Because of the present system of funding elections, studies
show that incumbent representatives have an 80% chance of winning
reelection over any challengers. This is furthered by their advantage
of superior education, where they receive first pick of most positions
of economic and political power. Once into power, a family tends
to stay there in American politics. Thus we have the Rockefellers,
Kennedys, etc. who tend to inherit political offices (the public
expect them to run and take offices traditional to their families);
where two hundred years ago in France there were the La Fayettes,
the duc d'Orleans, etc. who held offices by divine right (through
knighthood by the king who ruled by divine right and was anointed
by the Pope in Rome). Remember President George Bush, the son
of Senator Bush?
Since the French Aristocracy did have the advantage of being educated and, at least philosophers by divine right, and to counter the king they began invoking the rights and citizenship to protect their own members in the Parliament (the nation was divided into several Parliaments by region or departments and bailiwicks).
Thus, out of their core came many pamphleteers who could not take advantage of a "free press" and published on their own documents like this to raise up the nation. With them were the upper bourgeoisie who were also pamphleteering the populace to get their Third Estate Message across, which, of course, would have preferred placing all the tax burden to service the debt against the Aristocracy and clergy.
Within the palace, as the nation was coming apart at the seams, the king was a laughingstock among his courtiers (including the Aristocrats--nobles). Queen Marie Antionette, in fact, was at the but of the rumors, and it seems that she had been flaunting her body around court a bit much and, with the affair of the diamond necklace in 1785, her reputation of being a bit of a whore (Louis XVI's children were said not to be his own!) became sealed. Though Louis XVI was jealous of his authority in countering the Aristocrats and laying out titles at will, he, says Lefebvre, was lacking in will, but honest and well-intentioned. Obviously what was going on around him as a result of the deficit was a bit beyond his head if you know what I mean.
Having had enough, the Aristocrats initiated petitions of grievances in 1789, formally demanding the drafting of a constitution, the voting of taxes by the Estates-General and the turning over of administration to elected Provincial Estates (as in the old days). Again, individual liberty, freedom of the press, and freedom of conscience were at the head of the list of their grievances. In response the Third Estate came out with a pamphlet written by Sieyès called, What is the Third Estate? This pamphlet gave expression with cold violence to the hatred and scorn inspired in him by the aristocracy, saying:
Who would dare to deny that the Third Estate has within itself all that is necessary to constitute a nation...Take away the privileged orders, and the nation is not smaller, but greater.
At the time, because of the deficit, more pressure was being put on the peasants who then daily faced the tax accessor, knowing that the poorer one was the more he was taxed. Today our poor are worse off, and as today the peasants and the petty workers of two hundred years ago struggled as unemployment began to increase its toll. Then the cost of living was going up but wages were
going down or failing to increase (as is the case in the United
States now). Says Georges Lefebvre, in the best
of times wage rises were hard to get; it has been calculated that
between 1726-1741 and 1785-1789 prices rose 65 percent while wages
went up only 22 percent .
Unlike our system but the results are the same taxes were farmed by nobles who took a percentage of the taxes they collected (like the Sheriff of Nottingham in the tale of Robin Hood in England). The Tax Farmers maintained granaries, etc., and while they were quite well to do and their granaries were bulging with excess the masses were starving. The trucking of the grains to market further aggravated the masses, for as their hunger-ridden faces watched loaded wagons passing by some to the King's granary which also was overflowing they began to riot and raid the wagons. Chasing after these sources, and being chased in turn by a wearying mounted police force (they began to lose heart in clubbing the state's victims and sympathizing themselves with the protests), beggars and the unemployed began to leave their own parishes, became as vagabonds and descended upon the towns. It was estimated that out of the 23 million population, 10 million of them were in need of relief, of whom 3 million were beggars. This is a sketch of the scene just before Bastille Day, July 14, 1789, at the height of harvest when the sun was scorching over the heads of the hapless beggars, when their fury reached its peak. It was time for Revolution to visit France.
The deficit in America is proportionately worse. In fact, George Soros, a major financier in the Western World, who heads The Soros Fund and other ventures, commented on the Television series, Adam Smith, on PBS aired 6-4-93 the following (we paraphrase):
"I believe that the EC nations are sliding into a Depression..and America too is following behind them, sliding into a depression;" and in answer to Adam Smith's question, "a real depression, as in 1930?" he asked, "yes, a depression as in 1930" was the answer.
Time magazine paid him honors in their May 31, 1993 article on The Man with the Midas Touch. Mr. Soros's observation cannot be taken too lightly, as he is considered in the Western World one of the major movers and shakers in the financial community. One reason his opinion is respected in this area is because he is one of those financiers as in the French Revolution who made profits through investments which took advantage of the economic downslide. The TV program above cited actually dealt with the plunge of the British pound only recently and the £8 Billion the British government lost as its value fell. The British government lost half of its treasury in combatting the fall of its pound. The scenario went like this (as was a similar case with Louis XVI): The European Communnity (EC) agreed that in the event a currency of the community would begin to fall the Central Banks would buy back the currency and force its price back up. As the British pound began to plummet, only the British government was left defending its pound, buying it back while it plunged. Since they lost £8 Billion, it follows that those who were buying pounds and then selling the currency back to London at a profit made £8 Billion, among whom were men like George Soros [On June 9, 1993 news reports out of Germany acused George Soros of raiding the Mark while it dove in value]. Thus, fortunes were made overnight through the British falling fortune, as has been the case throughout the Reagan-Bush Estate in profiteering off of America's falling fortunes, which is--as the battery commercial said--still going on! for obvious reasons.
As noted in our work Financial Institution Credit Watch and Against Leviathan (sorry for so many books we broke our one work up into tiny bites to make them easier to digest) one of the curious anomalies in our present circumstances is that among our major trading partners the dollar has been plummeting in value (now over 50% to the Japanese yen) over the last ten years. Since the bulk of our retail goods are imports from clothes from China to cars, cameras, and household appliances and electronics from Korea, Taiwan, Japan and Germany we've had a serious bout of inflation with regard to the price of our goods. These products not only have increased in price over the years (a $10,000 car ten years ago now is $30,000), they in some cases cost half again as much owing to the deflating dollar! At the same time wages in the US have been suppressed, with the average wage being about $30,000 per year in the San Francisco Bay area, for instance. $30,000 ten years ago was still about average for the area (in 1979 I was making $30,000 per year and thought it then was a little above average; alas, today my skills can't seem to requisition even a job in Home Depot at minimum wage!).
Today, in addition to the loss of jobs and purchasing power, there
is now a new trend of converting full time positions into part-time
positions. People once making $12.00 per hour now are being replaced
by part-time and temporary employees making $6.00 per hour. Last
evening an employer explained why he is making the shift. Rather
than pay benefits (added to the labor cost of an employee) which
average $5,000 per year, he said, he can make up the peaks and
valleys in his business through over-time and part-time advantages.
Unfortunately, this shift in attitude is causing people who once
were barely scraping by on $12.00 per hour to now lose their homes.
For at the lower wage scale worse: even the $4.25 minimum wage most people simply cannot pay the cost of rent or their mortgage, let alone cover their other daily expenses. This
practice, therefore, particularly in view of an average CEO's
salary of $1 million per year, is unconscionable and down-right
How does this connect with Britain? Part-time employment replacing full-time positions has already been going on in Europe. But in Britain the problem of unemployment is much more severe. On top of this the British are not only one of our major trading partners but also a major investor in the US economy. As the US fortunes fall, so do theirs. In contrast, the Japanese, sensing the American falling fortunes, have been withdrawing their investments from the US and turning them back home or to more fruitful fields.
Of all the currencies among our major trading partners in the West, only the British pound has failed to rise against the dollar and, in fact, has plummeted in value with the dollar. We are not surprised, since Britain probably is more closely tied to the US Economy than the EC, thus, accounting for the fall of its pound and the cutting loose of it from the EC and failure of the EC to support it. Not long ago the pound to the dollar was five to one; soon it will be one to one.
We are speaking in particular of those who control the wealth and presently the future of this nation. As with the Aristocrats during Louis XVI's day, so too are they beginning to get a bit nervous. The problem here, as George Soros pointed out, is that the entire G-7 nations are at risk of depression. Following this is the rather rude awakening that there is no where to hide one's wealth once the [sudden] collapse begins.
George Soros's comments follow the fears of some of our senators who were not afraid to state on television that this nation is in serious trouble--like bankrupt! (in Louis XVI's case his treasury was empty August 24, 1789) and our bankruptcy seems to have begun when Reagan submitted his first budget (see Against Leviathan on this).
Agreeing somewhat with this state of affairs is a commentary in Against Leviathan between the author and William F. Buckley Jr.
Recognizing the situation at hand, we attempted to prod some of our own Aristocracy into exposing the nature of the Debt to counter the false impressions being splayed out of Washington D.C. and the Media. Where President Bush and now President Clinton saturated us with a steady stream of "it's getting better" and programs for a "deficit reduction" the simple truth which is now scaring the hell out of major world financiers--is that the Clinton plan of Deficit Reduction is smoke and mirrors. A serious "deficit reduction" program would require the equivalent of doubling our yearly income taxes every year for at least the next forty years. That's just to pay the interest and maybe some principal on our $4.3 trillion debt and to keep from being foreclosed as it were. Anything short of this is comparable to the joy of being like a mushroom: kept in the dark and fed--well you know what we mean.
Doubling our taxes or any serious taxation to service our debt will surely produce riots. As is the case with most revolutions, it is the Aristocracy who first sense the call to action. They have the most to lose in the affair. Again, keep in mind that we have both new and old Aristocrats with a lot to lose, who need to look further ahead than we who are trying to scrape by on month to month paychecks--or welfare.
Based upon the present circumstances the direction of the depression is not likely to be as it was during the 1930's. This one will no doubt be characterized with violence. For the nature of our coming depression carries with it the problem of a corrupt, nonrepresentative government and a few idiots being at the source of the problem. This is the kind of provocation peculiar to the French Revolution, where the masses at all levels knew that their misfortune was owing not to accident--as in the 1930's--but sheer corruption and stupidity.
Misfortune is something which cannot be overthrown; a fool and a thief on the other hand, provoke revenge. In the 1930's there were mistakes and misfortunes and President Hoover left us with the legacy of what happens with the error of his administration, "trickle down economics" which Reagan reinstated as "Supply Side Economics," whose results subsidized the rich at the expense of the poor. Whilst Hoover could err, repeating the error and adding corruption to it enters the arena of the callousness only matched by Louis XVI and his ministers Brienne and Calonne. President Reagan further compounded the abuse from his Supply Side profiteers by following the route Louis XVI took: who allowed his ministers, Necker, Calonne, and Brienne, to borrow, borrow, borrow to service an enormous debt incurred in what was a noble cause: financing the American Revolution. Reagan and Bush do not match up to that high level of a cause, for the debt they incurred year to year was totally wasted on what at best turned out to be pie-in-the-sky schemes feeding the rich and starving the middle class into the poorhouse, and the streets of despair. This might have been avoided had Reagan's heads-men known the personal guilt their victims shared in the travesty he made of American justice.
The French no doubt wag their hand a bit when La Fayette's name is mentioned. He did persuade the government to help out the American Revolutionaries and created the French deficit for his troubles.
If the French masses stormed their government over its folly and debt--even though it was for the good of the American Revolution how much worse will be the anger of the American Masses when they discover they are today far worse for the wear and tear, and the corruption behind it, than the French Dissidents were two hundred years ago? What will be the anger of the French, Germans, Italians, British and Japanese (to name a few) when they discover their fortunes flung to the pit because of America's blind dedication to the folly of its last three Presidents?
If people like George Soros are scared the balance is frightening...!
Recognizing the nervousness of our Aristocrats, the gainsaying
and other goings on in our government, one can see that a similar
conflict in power exists in Washington today as it once did in
Paris two hundred years ago.
We believe that the Depression can be avoided at least mitigated. If we can bail out the United States, as it were, we can minimize the effect of the falling US economy on the EC and Japan. At the moment the masses in Germany are already disquieted over the economy and since economic disparities often press down the least fortunate of a society, the present rioting and unrest also involves racial overtones (the brown-shirts against the Turkish imported workers who were needed a few years ago to supply the American market and the world but now are surplus). The Turks are Moslems. The Moslems at the moment seem to be the doormat of several places of discontent and abuse. From the American policy concerning the Palestinians and the people of Kuwait to the present burden of Boznia, the Moslems know that American's have been dealing them cards from a loaded deck. So the discontent brewing in Germany over refugees, Turks, etc., brought about by the falling Western Economy, in turn brought about by the unconscionable US National Debt, is showing its head.
Already in France the farmers have organized protests, and in Japan a growing resentment of US manipulations of Fair Trade agreements is taking its toll.
Because the threatening depression involves a group of Industrial
nations-- principally the EC, US, Canada, and Japan--as belts
begin to tighten fists also tighten. The US and the EC are now
forcing Japan to cut back its unfair trade advantage, as the West
puts it, whilst Japan scratches its head wondering why it is being
punished for being a good capitalist, producing goods more efficiently,
better quality, better price, etc. Americans call this "dumping";
but the term really applies to companies who sell products in
foreign nations at a far lower price than their mother country
(we call them Multinationals, who, bowing to profits only, exploit
people in contempt of nations--and undermine every foundation
of ethics). Such companies and their practices should be severely
penalized to assure that they no longer engage in such practices
(many don't pay local taxes! and yet they exercise more influence
upon our legislatures than may our own people!). These conflicts
will worsen, and with the falling fortunes those who stand the
most to lose will begin searching for scapegoats, name calling,
etc. Some patching may result, but the cause of such "Trade
Warring" comes back to the US National Debt which is provoking
the desperate into acts of desperation--rich and poor alike.
The only way to break the growing impasse and the conflict breeding from one nation to another is to reform the presently deranged and corrupt system which has caused the US National Debt. The key to this reform must be in those who would have the most to lose: the Aristocracy. If they do not move quickly to get the situation under control, as in France two hundred years ago, the disenfranchised masses may solve the problem for them and turn some spotted rioting into a full-fledged revolution.
Where the revolution will first begin among the G-7 will no doubt be--and deservedly so the US. This is so for two reasons: 1) the cause of the West's and Japan's dismay is the US National Debt which has been bleeding their economies; 2) The EC and Japan cannot replace their failing markets caused by the crumbling US Economy quickly enough to mitigate the damage to their own Economies. To heal their immediate ills they must force the US to cure its illness: though it's like asking our Aristocracy to drink bitters. If they delay the cup of bitters will become for them poison, as when The Terror of France took revenge on Aristocratic scoundrels who didn't answer their calls of despair. Better to now drink the bitters, don't you think?
What follows are some letters to that effect, followed by an Agenda for a Reformation which we hope each and every one of you will answer not by rhetoric but by your actions!
May 25, 1993
C/O The Soros Foundation-Hungary, Inc.
888 Seventh Ave., Suite 1901
New York, N. Y. 10106
Dear Mr. Soros,
I have been working on a new television documentary which reveals in a real-life court setting the problems involving our National Debt and its growing annual $300 Billion interest payment which were created by the Reagan-Bush Administrations. We call it the Trial of a President and it focuses in particular on George Bush's falsification of the 1993 US Budget Summary Balance Sheet, where he failed to include account no. 051, Resolution Trust Corporation , in his Summary of Outlays. This is just the top of the iceberg concerning the shoddy manipulations of the US Economy under the aforementioned administrations. It is of concern to all of us now--regardless of our political affiliation because the debt they created and the procedures they used to misinform the American people about it continue under the Clinton Administration but to a higher degree!
I have been corresponding with William F. Buckley Jr. on the matter (see Against Leviathan enclosed, which contains our correspondence); and my reason for contacting Mr. Buckley and now you is because you both are wizards of sorts and you both are able to exercise influence. We are speaking here of the influence necessary to stop the crash of the US Economy which has been in progress as you well know.
Because we live in a Democracy of sorts (it has a greater resemblance to an Oligarchy or Plutarchy, moving, as the historian Polybius might describe it, more on the order to Mob Rule, something on the order of the Third Estate of France), it is my firm belief that the only way to stop the continuing crash is to properly inform the American people of what is going on. Thus we suggested a Docu-Trial exposing George Bush's excesses and the $300 Billion per year interest payment which is now eating up 3/4ths of our Personal Tax Income [an estimate; we need an audit because of the false data being distributed by our government; ed. note]. Our concept of the Docu-Trial is described in a letter to the famous attorney, Gerry Spence, which follows below.
Always the violation of Human Rights begins with the excesses of those who hold the wealth of a nation. In their greed they manipulate the wealth of the nation to concentrate it in fewer and fewer hands, eventually, whether in America or in the shambles of the Soviet Union, leaving the masses high-and-dry so to speak. In America we can see the results of this exploitation by counting the numbers of Homeless on our streets, whose numbers exceed no doubt the count of the Kurds, Palestinians, and Somalians whom we have helped over the years. It is time now to help our own people before they begin to rise up and change what is now a Corporate State, a Plutarchy for the benefit of the rich into something more on the order of the struggle now going on in Yugoslavia.
No man knows better than you the state of our economy, and perhaps
you will agree with the conclusions cited by myself and Mr. Buckley
in Against Leviathan. As the economy continues
to sink into the abysmal depths from which it cannot return, everyone
who has their capital in paper will be left with nothing more
of value than the paper they are holding. As you know the wealth
of this nation since 1981 has been shifted from an Industrial
base and the tools and jobs to support it to the Bond and Stock
market: the money market. Money does not make money, said a sage
long before Karl Marx thought of it; but the truth of the matter
which seems to be present now is that money begetting money
does not beget jobs. In truth, money begetting money does
not beget value. When those who have vested all they own in the
Money Market realize the monster of inflation being fed, the stock
market will fall to the 1981 levels where it belongs; and all
those who have no possessions (anything of value) to back up their
positions will lose.
Accelerating the fall is the $300 Billion Interest payment which is causing Federal cutbacks which in turn causes local layoffs here in San Francisco and across the nation. As the $300 Billion Interest Payment moves to $325B more layoffs at all levels will occur: more of our Giant Corporations will fall. The key to our demise, as is true in most economic failures, in Brazil, etc., is our failure to meet our interest payment.
We can no longer depend upon our government to deal with the problem, as evidenced in the carping over $16B to jump-start our economy, when we have had $300 Billion interest payments stalling our economy.
We can no longer depend upon the Media to tell the truth about this situation, as they seem to all be of one mind: to hide it. It seems that the four networks have one writer, and that writer, if not dealing with sensationalistic overtones, is often preoccupied with creating them.
Recognizing the obvious drag the $300 Billion Interest Payment is on our economy (some people call it the Budget Deficit, though they have no idea what the difference between the Deficit and the National Debt is), I thought Mr. Buckley and a few others who are respected patriots might be willing to bring forth the Truth which is sinking the titanic American Ship of State.
I, myself, have no interest in what that Truth is, only that
the American people are told the Truth, whatever it turns out
to be. Most have no idea what the National Debt is and, like Dan Rather, think that our share of the $4.3 Trillion Debt is $17,800 which only our children need worry about paying. The truth, and Dan Rather would be much wiser were he to tell it this way, is that about 3/4 of every personal tax dollar stuffed into envelopes is not paying for government services but some financial magnate's fancy chariot and household. When the people realize that their tax money is being wasted on palaces of the rich, they will revolt. Reading Thomas Paine's Common Sense I think this is what happened in 1776. So what we now see in the future requires only the passage of time. And while you or I may not be present at the time we pay this debt, this letter with Against Leviathan and others like it may be there. We, Mr. Buckley, and others are courting destiny; and she more often than not called Fortune, a goddess at one time courted men like us with the most unimaginable and unreasonable mishaps!
In the past the aristocrats sensing a fall would gather around the likely power to win: Whigs against Tories and that sort of thing. Today there is no power around which our aristocrats may gather. Because there is no power (we speak of a leader), and--sensing a fall--there is no place for them to hide their assets (falling real estate follows falling employment statistics) except overseas or in certain commodities, such as gold. This is further driven home in the chart inThe Outlook March 31, 1993 which shows the six-month "T" Bill rate and the S&P Index Yield after a 2.5%-3% spread from 1980-1991 now "flatlining!" Because of our extraordinary interest Payment low yields in government financing are mandatory; but who in the world would invest at such low rates? The bond rates must go up as will interest rates and inflation the dread of the market. With S&P 500 yields plunging from 6% in 1980 to their 12 year low below 3% the future is grim!
Normally when a state begins to fall, its currency falls in value, causing inflation. But our government under the Reagan-Bush Estate cleverly avoided this by its "Account System" of accounting, rather than the old "Cash System." All this accounting, as you well know, is "rubber currency", a system based upon an infinitely ordered extension of credit which negates the use of wheelbarrows for carrying money to the bank. Today about 20% of this "rubber currency" is owned by the Central Banks of our major trading partners, among whom the dollar has fallen (except for Great Britain) up to 50% during the last ten years. All this says is that when the Federal Government has been reporting low inflation figures it hasn't been telling the truth; and the fact is that as the National Debt increases so will increase the momentum of the falling dollar among our major trading partners (more thoroughly addressed in Financial Institution Credit Watch).
William F. Buckley Jr. agreed with me, as noted in Against Leviathan, using his words: "we were probably sunk" [as in the Titanic; ed note] "when Reagan submitted his first budget".
You have children, I suppose, as do I and many others who are in a position to save their children's assets (their assets are in danger).
Our national integrity is at stake in many more ways than I can describe here. I believe that an airing of our National Debt Crisis as it really is (H. Ross Perot attempted to broach the subject in part) will set our nation on a course which can lead it away from the present catastrophe. The enemy we have today is in our own self--not King George III of England--and our White House is further from us than Merry Old England was two hundred years ago. Adding to the separation between us and our government is as in the days of the privateers of King George greed, a Leviathan of sorts, which cannot result in anything short of a total consumption of our economy: and, with our fall, the fall of many European nations with us. If our own Aristocracy (our nation was founded by aristocrats) will bite the bullet as it were and turn this nation around, I believe a healthier outcome of the present situation will occur. Much better than the rioting of the homeless and other dispossessed Americans just around the corner, as the Senator Doles et al. mumble over the need to increase their over-stuffed pensions or President Clinton takes another haircut.
We need to get back to Representative Democracy and the Trial of a President, I believe, is a way of introducing this first step.
You, among many other financial giants, have the most to lose and yet the most to gain by a healthier nation and its economy. I'm hoping you politics aside and leaving judgment to a true-to-life court trial will support the funding of this Docu-Trial.
Your ideas on attorneys for the prosecution and defense would also be appreciated. If the right attorneys are selected the entire policy of the Reagan-Bush Estate will be heard and fairly tried, setting not only a criteria for more responsible government (at all levels) but also serving as a warning to those legislators and government executives who would serve their and their patrons's interests above the interests of the people.
This request for funds is out of the ordinary beyond the customary interests of the Soros Foundation but well worthwhile from the patriotic point of view: unless, of course, you favor a real trial of President Bush!
I congratulate you on your vision in trying to support the new democracies trying to root in Eastern Europe. Now there is hope that Human Rights and Human Dignity can prevail there once again, and as they grow in strength so will we Americans benefit.
But it is worthwhile to mention that my first introduction to the idea of Human Rights was from a Hungarian refugee about twenty years of age who was my supervisor in a large ware-house in Los Angeles in 1961 (I was then 18 years old). He had escaped under the border wire only a few years before and told me of his many sacrifices and experiences from the Soviet occupation in 1956. In part because of him a prolific writer on Human Rights was created (see a partial list of my works in Against Leviathan).
I have written you about presenting a televised trial on our economic nemesis, but the root of the matter involves the violation of Human Rights in America, another but related issue at hand. For as the privateers in our economy rake up profits in the money market they have been wiping out jobs, and with the demise of jobs, fortunes; and as the fortunes of our masses have fallen, so have the numbers of the Homeless on our streets increased--now in the millions. Do you know that most of these people have no right to raise a Tent over their head, to protect themselves and their loved ones from the wind, the rain, or the sleet or snow? Imagine a government so cruel that it prevents people from raising their own shelters. Did you know that in many cities it is against the law to take food to our Homeless in the streets? We can feed the animals in the park but not our own people. Did you know that those who are homeless but are able to raise money for hotel rooms must move every twenty-eight days in the Bay Area? and because of this they can't arrange to have a telephone or address by which they can seek jobs (I think the Untouchables in India were treated with greater dignity!). We note here that we must not be deceived. Many pushing shopping carts are, besides begging, shopping hotels! Most are being arrested, however.
Did you know that the longer one is without a job the less likely he is to be hired? Most employers seem to prefer hiring people who already have jobs, thinking those who are unemployed are not quality employees, etc. Several months ago a PBS Program noted that American companies are now thin and trim at the employment levels of World War II, suggesting this is a good thing. The only problem here, which they didn't mention, is the fact that we now have about 70 million more workers than we had during World War II, and without jobs (their numbers exceed the populations of many European nations!) they must starve. Since the National Debt (interest Payment) is consuming jobs, this belt-tightening will continue, causing more of our homeless refugees to be spewed onto the heartless streets of our heartland. The attitude towards this problem is as it was in Nazi Germany, except no one has suggested murdering our Homeless, though I am sure many NIMBYS would permit it.
We have our own refugees, multitudes in our streets whose only possession seems to be a styrofoam cup. Since the $300 Billion Interest Payment is responsible for many of them, we hope that you will find a way to help us and direct us in getting our government and jobs back. Again, a fair and less dramatic way of beginning this event would be a televised showing of our true Jeopardy: The Trial of a President.
I have addressed this to you personally and hope that the officers and directors of the Soros Foundation will understand that the matter at hand we speak of our Economic Salvation needs the highest and most immediate attention. Most people cashing in on the Dow Jones when the Nation is crashing do not appreciate this, no more than the aristocrats pandering in the courts of King George III appreciated the plight of the men of Lexington, New Jersey.
We quoted Polybius (167 B.C.) who influenced many philosophers all the way up to Montesquieu (1717), who influenced Thomas Paine and others. And they all agreed that nations are always changing, sometimes from bad to worse and then to good; and they all agreed that the worst forms of all governments were contained in their thesis. The worst form of a democracy is Mob Rule or, as Hamilton or Madison put it, the Rule of Factions, which in turn produce the obverse: the more centralization of power. Unfortunately, power in our nation is vested in a man who is expected to have the knowledge and conduct of a god, who at present as the trend continues produces the results of tyrants. Most tyrants, as history has shown, were complete idiots. Now the people on the street who are homeless have no idea what I have just said, but you, Mr. Buckley, and others like you do. And the only way to mitigate the suffering from the excesses of our tyrants is to tell the people the truth for a change. What do you think of this? Would our nation be healthier if its people were told the truth? Can we trust our democracy in such a crisis, nothwithstanding our near-sighted News Media?
What I am proposing, of course, is not a revelation for the Six
O'clock News. It can be handled much more maturely than that.
Nor is it meat for the Newsstand. Rather, its substance is best
appreciated by those who can maneuver this nation around and who
still have a sense of patriotic pride to sacrifice a short term
gain in the stock market to reaffirm our long term commitment
to lead the world in Human Rights. Not Human Rights
for others but for our own suffering multitudes. Awaiting
your reply and with deep respect for your judgment, I remain,
Mr. Soros' reply to our request:
October 8, 1993
On behalf of George Soros I am responding to your proposal for funding The Second Coming of the American Revolution .
Unfortunately, I must inform you that Mr. Soros's philanthropic support is confined to funding the activities of his foundations in Central and Eastern Europe, and the Former Soviet Union. Your request, I am afraid, falls outside the scope of that funding.
With best wishes,
Office of George Soros
May 15, 1993
Gerry Spence, Atty
P.0. Box 548
Jackson, Wyoming, 83001
Dear Mr. Spence,
I have been working on a television Docu-Trial called, The Trial of a President, which reveals in a real-life court setting the problems involving our National Debt and its growing annual $300 Billion interest payment which were created by the Reagan-Bush administrations. Key to the trial is the evidence that George Bush falsified the Balance Sheet of the US Budget by omitting line item 051 in his tally of government "profits and losses". Account no. 051 has to do with the losses of the Resolution Trust Corporation and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation which had to do with funding our failed banks and savings and loans. The omission of account no. 051 leaves about a $100 Billion misrepresentation on the deficit for FY 1992-1993. This is only the surface of the garbage heap which Presidents Reagan and Bush left behind them; and the Docu-Trial would obviously pull into the evidence of President Bush's manipulation of the Budget other matters drifting back into the Reagan Administration. The elaborate bogus accounting system of Iran-Gate would be relevant here, etc.
The Docu-Trial is important not only to present criminal activity (falsifying Balance Sheets of Corporations is a criminal activity, as it should also be in government), but also to set an accord for President Clinton who seems dedicated to continuing the practice. We note here that President Clinton promised to reduce his White House Staff but instead of following through on the Promise with a lay-off, he just changed the account number under which the staff were accounted! Doesn't this just irk you?
Our last three Presidents have been lying and cheating in the manner of Accounting for the allocations and expenditures of their administrations. Unfortunately, Congress has been aiding in the venture by turning their faces from the practice.
Recognizing that the just offering to the American People would be a real criminal trial of President Bush (whose activity was the most sordid so far of the three), and knowing how difficult it would be to summon such a trial, we thought that an alternative would be to present a Perry Mason type of show: a Docu-Trial.
The Docu-Trial would not only expose the nature
of the Presidents' bogus accounting practices but also serve a
warning to President Clinton and others after him that they are
at the least expected to be truthful in their accounting for the
US tax dollars and obligations. So far the false accounting practice
has left us with a [growing] $300 Billion annual interest payment
which is cutting into the Mandatory Funds necessary to
run this country, causing more lay-offs, base closures, etc. As
Senator Moynahan from Massachusetts said not long ago on the
Evening News, this country is bankrupt. The Docu-Trial
would outline the nature of this bankruptcy. We believe it better
to deal with this problem now than four years from now (or earlier)
when the stock market crashes (see Against Leviathan ),
from which we shall all lose.
The $300B will continue to grow each year. Deficit Reduction at this point is impossible, since the interest payment is now 3/4ths of our Personal Income Tax Revenues. In simple terms we are in a hole from which we cannot dig ourself out! To perform a true Deficit Reduction program (as opposed to the phony claim of President Clinton) we must not only each year increase tax revenues and reduce expenditures [$300B+] to eliminate the $300 Billion Interest payment, but also add a reasonable tax revenue increase/reduction to account for a payment against the $4.2 Trillion National Debt, against which the $300 Billion plus interest payment accrues each year. Here we see the true nature of the problem, where President Clinton and Senator Dole have been arguing over a $16 Billion investment to prime the economy, when they seem unconcerned about the growing interest payment. See the problem? They argue over $16 Billion to build us back up when $300 Billion is dragging us down. It's stupid, isn't it?
We thought the format of the Docu-Trial would be best served if two of America's greatest trial lawyers were to volunteer to prosecute and defend the case at hand. One would choose the prosecution; the other the defense and then muster all the evidence they could dig up to present their case in an "entertainment" program for America. This would also give us a real Perry Mason type of show, since America would be given an opportunity to see two of its Greatest Trial Lawyers in action. In this respect we would have on film some legends which otherwise might not be saved.
I first sent the program to William F. Buckley Jr., hoping he might be persuaded to produce the Docu-Trial after the manner of his Firing Line Debates. The discussion he and I have been having over it is documented in our Tiny Book , Against Leviathan, which we also enclose for your perusal [Mr. Buckley subsequently declined getting involved in the Docu-Trial project; ed note].
The other attorney we set politics aside as lawyers seeking justice must do I thought might be F. Lee Bailey or another you might suggest, should you be interested in the program.
Please keep in mind that half of the performance is the showing of some legends before they slip into history! Of course, the show would be the first of its kind and no doubt not only set a record of sorts but also be a healthy way of purging the soul of this nation, as it were.
Hoping we hear from you, I remain,
Mr. Spence's response to our request:
July 26, 1993
Thank you for your letter of May 15, which i'm just now answering. I've been in trial for a number of months in the Weaver case in Idaho.
Your project sounds interesting. Keep me informed as you proceed further.
G. L. Spence
OF SPENCE, MORIARITY & SCHUSTER
I enjoyed our telecon of 6-1-93. I am enclosing the two companion
documents which contain my conversation with Wm. F. Buckley Jr.
about the impending collapse of our economy which we described
in Against Leviathan as the certain sinking of the
American ship of state (a Leviathan of sorts you have to read the book).
I decided to defer forwarding this and other information on to Ross Perot, for reasons I shall now explain in part.
The complaint at hand involves a government which has lost touch with its people (sic. violated its covenant with the American People); and the complaint carries to the desire to restore the Representative Democracy for which the American People contracted. Our original contract first outlined in Thomas Paine's pamphlets, then the Declaration of Independence, and finally after much debate known as the Federalist Papers was born against the abuses of King George III of England. This contract, of course, became the Constitution of the United States, a right Hallow document no matter how you look at it.
This complaint focuses on the need to preserve the Constitution which for practical purposes now offers little in the way of the Representative Structure of government which it had imagined things which Ross Perot in part addressed and we discussed on the phone. In sum the Constitution has been undermined by the power of factions and the whims of the Media, and what has resulted is a nation pulled apart at the seams. We say it has been pulled apart because its works are now things which fit into the catalogues on tyrannies better than those of democracies. In a manner of speaking we can say that the governors driving to their fancy palaces, through our streets in their limousines, are little different than those who the last seventy years drove through the streets of Moscow, in their limousines to their fancy palaces. Both groups existed for themselves and not the people. Both exploited their people and their land and both committed intolerable abuses towards their people and their land (far worse than those complaints listed in our Declaration of Independence). Both were willing to destroy the entire world to propagate their own [suicidal] petty interests.
Reagan believed he could collapse his competition through enormous defense expenditures, thinking whilst he maintained a high defense budget he would collapse the Soviet Economy who would not be able to keep up. As we look at our American cities we can see that Reagan also destroyed our cities as well as the Soviet Economy in the process. He threw the child out with the bath water as it were. This process is still going on. As noted in the enclosed, the annual Defense Budget at its highest is still less than the annual interest payment we now have for Reagan's excesses. Unlike the Defense Budget which can be reduced by the stroke of a pen, the $300 Billion interest payment against our National Debt (equal to half the value of the entire $9 Trillion property off the United States) cannot be removed for at least another forty years unless there is a complete collapse in which case those who own our National Debt will end up with stacks of worthless paper.
This is what the big money managers know and fear. So they are looking around for a safe place to put their money whilst they are still tempted and torn to keep playing the wheel of fortune on Wall Street. Thus, Mr. Buckley and the Aristocrats who control the wealth of this nation are in need of an escape from pending catastrophe; and through this there is complete agreement between the liberal writer of Against Leviathan and many aristocrats like Mr. Buckley about the impending doom. How to counter doomsday is the question at hand.
As noted in Against Leviathan , those who own the most of this country stand to lose the most; but many of them have already taken the precautions to exit their wealth to foreign shores. Many we no know as Multinationals who owe no allegiance to any nation (or city). It can be surmised in Against Leviathan that Mr. Buckley places no hope in Salvation in the Multinationals. In fact it is clear that he just plainly does not know what to do. He and I agree that the situation is as it were with Jonah and Nineveh but in our case the people of the United States are now so corrupted they would not hear a Jonah and change their ways. Gaping on edge: the cloaca left by Reagan, we sink in silence.
Let's agree with Thomas Paine: that a democracy thrives best with
many representatives of the people--its almost a maxim: the more
the merrier. Polybius writing circa. 176 B.C. agreed but warned
that we must be careful about Mob Rule. The Federalist Papers
translated this warning into the fear of Factions. The
Constitution left this problem unsettled.
The success of a representative democracy is dependent upon the integrity of its representatives. A key to maintaining integrity was grafted into the offices and their terms; but no one of the signers of the Constitution could have imagined the information revolution at hand. But they then did have newspapers and pamphleteers and knew the power of the press as it were. For they had launched a Revolution that way (they printed over 200,00 copies of Thomas Paine's Common Sense , for instance). As an aside I thought to update Common Sense with the result being in Against Leviathan. Unfortunately, as opposed to the several hundred thousand thoughtful men in the colonies, I doubt we can find a thousand in America today who can understand it. So printing 200,000 copies of Against Leviathan and anything like it would seem to be a waste of time at the moment.
NIMBYS (not in my back yard sociopaths). First the Public Conscience if there is any left has to be raised. Thomas Paine et al. did not have this problem two hundred years ago. Then people believed it was a sin to lie and cheat; today it is the maxim (best vocalized by President Reagan, then Bush and now Clinton) that one must lie and cheat in order to succeed. They base this maxim on the creed, only the fittest shall survive, which translated into the idea that the power is in Wall Street, etc.; and the fittest are presently 30-40 year old nike equipped joggers who are now cutting off the jobs and benefits of those who are not able to keep up with them (their mothers and fathers!) in lying and cheating. They move factories at will and even cut off their mothers' and fathers' pensions--many raid pension funds to finance the take-over of other unsuspecting firms--; how many ways they have lowered American Society to fund their sordid moves! The parents they condemn to die in lonely institutions they also disgrace! Worse is their attitude to the Homeless, whom they prefer to see jailed rather than hospiced! America, it's amazing how a Democratic Republic can lower itself to feed these beasts! Didn't we see this two thousand years ago? Can't we be a little better than Emperor Nero's Gang of Vandals and the beasts in his coliseum?
They learned well from Reagan.Thus we have NIMBYS leading the Reagan-Bush Estate in condemning the Homeless and others dispossessed of their rights and jobs. Like the skin-heads and brown-shirts of fifty years ago who idolized "might makes right" and that sort of thing they shame their victims! The NIMBYS maintain the affront against Human Rights and Human Dignity in America no doubt in the belief that their indifference to suffering will keep the masses from rioting. It follows slavery: convince a slave of his shamefulness and he won't resist oppression. Honest, enlightened governors would never allow this of course...
The United We Stand America way introduced by Ross Perot offers a podium--let's call it a Forum-- upon which ideas may be exchanged: needed to address both the economic catastrophe and its political causes. The problems of which we have been discussing are caused by institutional processes and cannot be resolved by rhetoric alone. Let's say that UWSA is successful within a year from now and manages to cause 80% of the House of Representatives whose terms are up for renewal to endorse the current UWSA platform. What does this mean? It means a short respite from the calamity at hand. It would be a false hope. Intimidated representatives may go back to Washington; believing that might makes right etc. they will revert back to their old ways of lying and cheating. For it is a truth that had we elected honest, responsible representatives, instead of those who occupied Congress and the White House, we would not have the debts at hand, nor the homeless, nor the plight of our cities who watch themselves being raided of jobs (and tax revenues) by other states and, more particularly, other nations. Seeing this without a reformation our representatives will distance themselves from us again. Following this progression we deal with a progression of thought all the way from Plato's ideal Republic
to Polybius's historical observations and predictions, through our own American Federalist founders we have two ready options:
1. Dissolve the Federal Government completely and reform the continent into individual Republics which can be more easily managed, deferring the original Federalist needs to the United Nations. In other words and we can see the processes taking shape already for California to escape a Federal Collapse it might do better by keeping the Federal Tax dollars home and, as the seventh strongest economy in the world, compete in the world economy on its own merits. Other states might realign or combine for similar leverage. Our several Republics might be "united" under a hemispherical Economic Union after the manner of the EEC, etc. Standing in front of this is of course the Pride of being an American, what ever that is. I had a Brazilian friend who reminded me, when I introduced myself as an American (I never could manage saying I'm a United Stateian), that he too is an American. If we're Americans we must behave as Americans--whose duty is to keep and dress all their land.
2. Bring our Representatives Home. Eliminate the redundancy
of our local, state, and Federal governments (following after
the manner of the German system), and bring our distant representatives
home from Washington D.C. This accomplishes several things at
once. First, the redundancy of Federal and local regulations will
be eliminated and with them the redundancy of the bureaucracies
enforcing them. So government will become more streamlined following
this plan, and being more streamlined can bring forth the opportunity
to make it more responsive. With this saving in Bureaucracy one
can pour back some of the savings into more representatives! This
reverts back to the idea of Tribunes of the people. The Romans
invented the idea of Tribunes of the people which
became after a manner of speaking translated into our House of
Representatives. The idea of the Tribunes was to represent
the commoners (re: also the House of Commons in Britian) whilst
the Senators would represent the Aristocrats. Still not a bad
idea: we just need more Tribunes or, to put it another
way, less expensive and more responsive Representatives. Alas,
our elect formed for themselves a new Aristocracy (or Oligarchy)!
To liberate ourself from this Aristocracy, or Oligarchy, the existing Congress must be recalled (fired), and a new one re-elected, but according to new processes and criteria: a subject now critical to a needed reformation.
Ten years ago France initiated Minitel , a national communication network which contains all sorts of things from electronic Billboards, Public Information, to Home Shopping, etc. In a documentary on PBS last evening after we spoke the point was made that the conflict between the University students in France and the government was resolved through the Minitel system. Perhaps you saw this documentary as well.
Perhaps the key to our salvation is through using our computer networking technology to better advantage, as the students used it to raise up in an instant multitudes in defense of their cause, where their representatives had failed them. In the example given the changes the students accomplished would not have been possible without the instant communication process of the Minitel. And what that documentary was showing us was a model of instant democracy. In that model the issues were (I am certain) thoroughly discussed on the Minitel billboard, a resolution was taken on the billboard to protest in certain locations across the nation of France, the protest was launched successfully, and the law was changed. So a "Minitel" network can provide a forum as in the days even in the Roman Forum (everyone who wished to participate in politics had to be a dedicated daily gabber and shoulder rubber in the Forum) upon which political remedies may be resolved.
Since we are speaking of a Revolution of sorts (every protest is a rebellion and its result is usually revolutionary) the progression at hand leads us to the observation that the USWA offers a network of discontents upon which a national network founded on new criteria may be utilized (I hesitate to use the word "exploited"). Using the USWA as a launchpad of sorts, and launched into a Minitel type of network, we can on a broad based scale discuss how we can bring home our government (who at the moment have sold out to the multinationals and other god-forsaken beasts) with minimum expense and time. Bear with me on this writ itself as an illustration of passing the word, for here you can know me and meet me in depth in a personal sort of way without the interference of power- point tactics by politicians, wheelers and dealers, etc. The image here is in the word, not a face or TV image. After reason has had its course then let's see the image, if you understand what I mean. American politics is the opposite: first the image and then tell them anything. Through the image NIMBYS create a person but behind their words is greed: a beast with no compassion or hope for the hopeless.
The kind of change discussed above is radical change to the present system but quite in line with the Federalist goals. Once a true Minitel type of Network is established, keeping the criteria of our representatives representing the common will, no doubt hope for a solution will be somewhere located in a local official whose door is always open, who reads his mail (accessed by subject and author at any instant), and who attends a semi-annual meeting in Washington D.C. to cast his final votes on the Federal issues affecting this great nation. We note here that one of the nice features of the new CD technology, which can enable this venture, is that the entire Library of Congress can be stored on a few shelves and give the searcher the instant capability to study every document in the library by title, subject, or author--or even a phrase! In the documentary last evening they pulled up the phrase, to be or not to be that is the question; and the CD resource displayed several works which carried that phrase, among which were Shakespeare, Plato's several works, and some works of Aristotle and Cicero. Now if this letter were plugged into that CD resource, it would appear in that group! Imagine, if you will, going into your representative's office and demanding an answer to your letter. And imagine him turning in his chair to his computer and asking you what it was about. You cite a phrase, the computer hears it, and you see your name listed with many others on the same subject. Perhaps all you see is a total of names by community. He nods and calls up the Billboard which is addressing that serious problem (by the numbers of the letters captured under the phrase in question). Since we deal with bringing the Representatives home to the people, our CD Source lists this letter with them.
I never saw Homeless people until I visited Paris, France in
1986; and its Metro tubes were filled with them, as it was then winter. When I returned home to San Francisco I noticed a couple of very filthy beggars rummaging through some dumpsters on 9th street near the 101 Freeway. Then (having been lost in the suburbs until a few years ago) I saw multitudes of Homeless a few years ago, whose numbers have been growing ever since. And these people now count into the millions far more in number beyond the Palestinians, Kurds, and Somalians whom we have helped (I do not begrudge them the shelter we have given, please understand) our own people mind you! have no right to raise a shelter over their head to keep out the wind, rain, and even the sleet and snow, who often are seen cringing under a bridge or overpass or an abandoned building. Many of them I speak of our own people! are arrested for being homeless (their condition of being homeless prevents
them from having a telephone and address by which they may obtain
a job; and thus they panhandle, of which it is now a crime). Nazi
Germany had the same policy towards those of whom it shamed. I
recall they [Jews] were first reduced to joblessness and then
homelessness and finally ashes.
Seeing that the apostles of America's Passion--NIMBYS--have been infected with that disease which reduced wonderful people in Europe to begging and finally ashes, it is my desire at the moment to find some responsible citizens I speak of Patriots who are willing to take a stand against the present indignities and inhumane treatment of the American people and help save them! But such saviors of the people are as hard to find in America today as they were in Nazi Germany! [for obvious reasons]. To take the required stand (see Against Leviathan) we have to speak of jobs, and to fund the jobs we have to speak of the truth behind our National Debt (we've been bankrupted and can't afford to fund the jobs); and to address this we have to address the problem of stopping the cause of the bankruptcy; and to address this we have to address revolutionary measures needed to reform our representatives: who must respond to the needs of the people of this nation.
Time has a way of assuring that all governments change one way
or another. Most cease to exist within a couple of generations;
and none as Gandhi so wisely observed ever survived through violence. If you live by the sword you will die by the sword;
the meek shall inherit the earth--you know the idea. But the point
we would leave you with here is the fact that one does not accomplish
change by beating one's gums (rhetoric). What accomplishes change
is the need for change and consensus to act for change now. When
speaking of changes to governments there are two courses of action:
constitutional=lawful, or unlawful.
The Unlawful, generally, in the case of tyrannies, result in violence; but there are instances, as in Australia, where a complete [unlawful?] change of government was accomplished without violence. In India the British were thrown out via a program of [then unlawful] nonviolence. Fortunately here in America we have a Constitutional guarantee!--the Bill of Rights--and if this is not sufficient to assure freely expressed protest and reformation we have International guarantees, such as the right to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. Most communities in America are in violation of this international agreement, as they restrict and interfere with our rights of assembly and information exchange through issuing permits of assembly, etc.
When one begins to act lawfully, one these days has to start in reference to International Law. Conflicts between International Law and local laws must always be challenged in favor of the International (Universal) Accord. Upon this I rest our thesis and my spirit. As long as we stay within the parameters of International Law every protest we offer is lawful. But under the United Nations Charter the law stops with the Nation under which one's rights are violated. It simply says that each person shall be treated with dignity as a person under the law and have a right to appeal his case to the nation under which he is a citizen. This, of course, did not help the Kurds, so the United Nations broke precedent and interfered within the domain of Iraq to defend the rights of the Kurds. Thus, a precedent does exist by which a group may obtain protection by the United Nations. But to come under this kind of protection it must have an identity. Political action against a nation, which needs the full protection of the United Nations, must have a "political" identity. A Political identity also not only identifies a group but focuses its agenda upon which it stands.
though the Reagan-Bush Estate thought otherwise-- until they are put into action. With this estate tumbling behind us we have a means to overcome and put away the corruption of our government with a combination of ideas and actions. Since I am speaking of our own Congress and White House and their patrons (who include major Media networks), the exchange of ideas can only be freely accomplished in two ways at present: through a patron like Ross Perot a heavy-weight or through a Minitel type of network (Electronic Billboard). Fortunately for the present moment there is an opportunity where massive communication can take place and organized into an Acting Political Body--with an agenda and identity--using the platform launched by the UWSA. Since Ross Perot has already set himself up as the patron of the UWSA and formalized a means by which it can raise funds, this fledgling has the ability to exist as an entity in its own right (under whatever political name and agenda it should choose). Once it says it exists and lays its claim upon history, its need for Ross Perot is no longer as a patron but as a joint member of that congress of politicized individuals. As a joint member his ideas would be respected as any other; and somehow through that congress resolutions and agendas may be enacted to exercise its influence upon the American System of government. Ross Perot might be thought of as one of the founders of such a bill, just as the founders of our nation are noted on the bill which created us: our Constitution.
Republicans think they are Republicans, whatever that is; Democrats like to think they are Democrats, whatever that is. But really most governments break into two ideologies: Conservatives and Liberals. Conservatives generally represent a cross section of the Aristocracy in our case the Oligarchs or Plutarchs, which ever you prefer who want a minimum of change. William F. Buckley Jr., Fidel Castro, and Mao Tse-Tung are all died in the wool conservatives. They wish to preserve the government, and its institutions, in power (though they all stem from revolutionary movements). Liberals, on the other hand, want change and want it now. As in the case of the [defunct] Soviet Union the Liberals there had more in common with our Republicans than they had with our liberal democrats!
In this country, thanks to the emphasis placed on it by Presidents Reagan and Bush, a Liberal is associated with the blemish: tax and spend. But the biggest tax and spenders (we discuss this in Against Leviathan ) were Presidents Reagan and Bush! The problem here is that they were taxing and spending more than our resources could handle and the spending they accomplished was not on the people but on their own patrons: multinationals, etc. President Clinton still going on! is improving upon Bush's tax and spend policy and its wasting of the American Economy. He is doing it on such a scale that even Charon , the Greco-Roman god (the Ferryman of Hades), who wielded his hammer upon the heads of those condemned to death, might himself cringe at the destiny before us.
We mention these things to illustrate what can happen when one
chooses the wrong identity, often bringing more dread among the
ignorant public than information about a cause. UWSA has the identity
of Ross Perot--in itself both an asset and a liability-- which
may not represent the long term interests of the UWSA as it is
now being formed. Also, UWSA carries an implicit suggestion that
Ross Perot has been, is, and will continue to be its leader (something
on the order of the New Federalist schtick of Lyndon LaRouche).
America needs leadership, not demagogues, and through leadership
a direction to steer to avoid a complete collapse. Ross Perot
can be a leader but not--for the long haul (unless he's discovered
the Fountain of Youth)--the leader. There's a difference. During
our Revolution there was no one leader, but there were many quality
leaders! which is why the break-away from King George III succeeded.
If you wish your sacrifice to succeed you need a new name; and a political name applies for the several reasons mentioned above.
I am a philosopher, an idea man. I have no desire to speak in the streets. There are many who can do a better job of carrying the voice of change better than I. But I know there are extraordinary violations of Human Rights and Human Dignity every day from our corporate boardrooms, who destroy our jobs and homes, and who, even worse, shame those they consume: the refugees spilled out from their rapacious jaws upon our streets. I am against this, as it appears to me as Hell.I know that in Hell there is a code of every man for Himself , and when I walk down our streets seeing the styrofoam cups held out to hard-hearted passer- bys I am reminded of this. I know that if I do not do works to defend them I will not ever deserve to be counted as an American which is something which at one time hoped on a more heavenly place and dared to create it! For we did inherit a legacy to defend the Rights of all Men, and this legacy never originated in Hell! This follows, as Thomas Paine so well put it, the idea that we have a Continent and the Business of the World at hand and we must separate ourselves from those who pander in the courts of power and fulfill our mandate to set the model of Liberty for not only this continent but the world at large. One does not accomplish such a mission by rhetoric but by works. By example.
That vision has been lost and we must be horrified of any American who would be proud to export the examples of America which Presidents Reagan, Bush and now Clinton bore. So the agenda at test is to bring forth a criteria of justice by which America can fulfill the destiny imagined by the patriots of yesteryear. Now, there is no justice, and these leaders strayed far from the truth!
Patriots exist by example. Ross Perot set an example of Patriotism. We note, of course, that one must set America's needs before his own, even if it means shame by taking on a cause which others think unworthy, even if it means the loss of property, and even if it means the loss of life all of which are possible threats because of the present corruption of our government. Thomas Paine, in Common Sense, again is my source of judgment here.
Scapegoats are things which identify the sins of a community and
are sent away from the community (thus carrying with them the
sins!). Being fair to the example we must preface this thought
with the knowledge that the Nazis used the Jews as scapegoats.
Scapegoating by its nature is an evil thing.
Our forefathers used King George III as a scapegoat, though it is clear that the halls of his palace were filled with far more villainous individuals than he had ever aspired to be. The same is true of Louis XVI and Marie Antionette, whose behavior and consequences the Clintons ought to take more to heart. Louis XVI was probably not high in integrity but, as in the case of King George III, plagued by corruption. I mention his case because it is most similar to present circumstances: Louis and his wife were flaunting their riches a bit too much whilst the masses were huddled on the streets, as in America today. In France the abandoned masses were fewer in number than our own case, we must add. Also then as now the aristocracy was looking around for scapegoats upon whom the blame for their own misfortunes could be placed.
Looking at Against Leviathan we can see a phenomena going on now which demands a kind of relief for our own aristocrats, by which they can separate themselves from the identity of the present government and launch something which will--pardon my blunt edge save their own ass. They can see their entire fortunes even the survival of our Republic at risk. You might begin with reading page 57 of Against Leviathan in this regard, since Cicero stood before the Roman people and warned them that the end of the Roman Republic was at hand. The people did not respond to Cicero and a few years later the Roman Republic fell and the Roman Empire replaced it. Their great experiment in democracy was over. Some Aristocrats here are no doubt drumming their fingers on their desks, and rubbing their hands, after the manner of those at the end of the Roman Republic.
The thing which kept the Romans from responding to Cicero was their own pride. The Roman Republic's virtue was quite exhausted during Cicero's time, and only a few men like Cicero were left to hold it up; once Cicero was gone, Virtue flew the coop as it were and the Republic fell. When the end comes both Aristocrats and thieves doff their pride and reach for virtue but then it is generally too late.
To focus political change one must convert the need for the change into an Idiogram. Of the many used in the past is again the scapegoat: the symbol of all that is wrong with a society. Marie Antionette was such a symbol. In our own case are Presidents Reagan and Bush who have fought hard for this distinction. Once the people of this nation agree upon this distinction, we can broach some subjects most Republicans and Democrats have not been ready to address. For in the case at hand giving Presidents Reagan and Bush their well deserved dishonors is the problem that Congress did aid and abet in the fall of our Republic to the miserable state it is now in. This leads to the revelation that Scapegoats Reagan and Bush will expose many scapegoats in Congress (so many guilty parties in Congress may fear).
This seems to be the objective of the UWSA, in any case: to expose
the truth about the Reagan-Bush debacle and change the representatives
and senators who cooperated with them.
Purging the Soul. We need to call a spade a spade as it were and begin addressing both Presidents Reagan and Bush as criminals--which they are (see Financial Institution Credit Watch on this). Then to thrust home the image there should be demonstrations in which both Reagan and Bush are hung in effigy. Expediency is important here, with the message, no longer will we tolerate such conduct in any of the high offices of our land, and these two men should be cited in memory of the manifest with which they loaded us down! This is an action which has meaning and inertia built into it. It is an action which the Homeless masses and the jobless can see is in defense of their needs, and burning the effigies where the Homeless are in their greatest numbers certainly seems to be a fit recompense. To do this the organization authoring the event must have its identity and its spokespersons. The agenda of this Identity must outline why the community is burning Presidents Reagan and Bush in effigy.
We say this for two reasons. Firstly, it forces those members of Congress who haven't been representing the people and have been allowing the homeless and jobless situation to grow like a cancer to take note of their own images and jobs. Secondly, it causes them to confront the crisis at hand as a crisis and, hopefully, apologize to those whose only possession is a styrofoam cup. If not these let them apologize to God!
We were not one of them! If there is any over-riding message in this it is the fact that we cannot allow history to pass by without at least a protest ! As feeble as this complaint may prove, it at the least acknowledges that we refused to be identified with the likes of Presidents Reagan and Bush and others who wasted this great nation!
We mean not to jeopardize past works of the UWSA but to plant
what it has spawned into a firm earth and nourish it, and, hopefully,
grow a responsible world from it. That's the Spirit!
Neither I nor you should be afraid to bridge the extraordinary gap between us and men like William F. Buckley Jr. whose sense of righteousness and brilliance is greatly to be admired but needs encouragement (for my part I love many of his ideas but we need some follow-through from him; as seen in Against Leviathan), which can be gotten by coaxing. Those whose reputations and fortunes are at most in jeopardy often do not know which direction to turn, particularly when things seem to be crumbling on all sides. So they need to be coddled as it were so they will know that their image and fortune is better protected in our future than the grim future of the Reagan-Bush Estate! This, of course, is the criteria of the agenda in Against Leviathan . Not by might but by the mind-- the Spirit--you understand?
On the other side of the gap are men like Ross Perot, rich and poor alike, who know that time is wasting and the longer the delay the heavier falls misfortune and with it Charon's Hammer. Polybius said fortune often is not exactly what it seems to be. While Fortune--a goddess once-- courted men like us with the most unimaginable and unreasonable mishaps and reversals, more often than not misfortune came through the folly of near-sighted people gathering behind complete idiots. Most troubles of nations are self-wrought, as evident in the corruption of Presidents Reagan and Bush and now coming home to roost vis a vis President Clinton.
The Homeless and the jobless may think it was an accident of fortune that they have lost home and family, but reason--as history shall soon show--affirms otherwise. There have been a considerable band of vandals working within our government who have been working extremely hard to bring forth the bad fortune at hand. How long will the people procrastinate before they take action to stop the progress of a most unfortunate fate ahead?
People like you can answer this. Except for the hammer yet above
the rocks, the heights from which to answer may seem many: beware:
over all higher causes waits the hardness of truth! Awaiting a
reply, I remain,
Encl. Against Leviathan and companion, Financial Institution Credit Watch ; see also our pump primer, What Price Justice enclosed.