The Pledge of Resistance – Saul Williams – Anarchast Intro

0

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Anarchism / Voluntaryism, Awake, Bitcoin, Philosophy | Posted on 04-04-2014

I remember walking down the street in downtown Gangnam many years ago and someone trying to give me a pamphelt with “The Pledge of Resistance” and “Not in Our Names” on it. I took the pamphlet, glanced at it, and figured it was some nonsense socialist garbage. I wasn’t interested in yet another “save the children” bit of nonsense that was “probably” the exact opposite of what it purported to be. I already “knew” that whatever cause was being pimped out was 99% likely to be doing the exact opposite.

After all, aren’t all the “activists” socialist assholes? I don’t know what I did with it. I probably threw it out.

But I was wrong and I missed out then.

Jeff Berwick used that as the intro to his Anarchast show on Youtube. It’s powerful.

Pure, power.

SAUL WILLIAMS PLEDGE OF RESISTANCE

We believe that it is our
responsibility to resist the injustices
done by our government,
in our names.

Not in our name
will you wage endless war
there can be no more deaths
no more transfusions
of blood for oil.

Not in our name
will you invade countries
bomb civilians, kill more children
letting history take its course
over the graves of the nameless.

Not in our name
will you erode the very freedoms
you have claimed to fight for.

Not by our hands
will we supply weapons and funding
for the annihilation of families
on foreign soil.

Not by our mouths
will we let fear silence us.

Not by our hearts
will we allow whole peoples
or countries to be deemed evil.

Not by our will
and Not in our name.

We pledge resistance.

We pledge alliance with those
who have come under attack
for voicing opposition to the war
or for their religion or ethnicity.

We pledge to make common cause
with the people of the world
to bring about justice,
freedom and peace.

Another world is possible
and we pledge to make it real.

The music in the Anarchast intro really adds a lot to that. It’s really well done.

I recently won the AllCrypt t-shirt slogan contest. I put forth 43 different slogans with several of them being variations of quotes from that poem by Saul Williams. I’m very happy to say that AllCrypt has chosen several of the entries I submitted, and one of them was based on that poem by Saul Williams:

Another world is possible, and we pledge to make it real.
– Saul Williams, The Pledge of Resistance

That’s some pretty powerful stuff.

The winner blog post is here:

https://www.allcrypt.com/blog/2014/04/winner-of-the-t-shirt-slogan-contest/

They’ve chosen 4 of my entries (some edited):

Silly: Mega Doge Sex Nuts. Yeah, we have those.

Drugs: Wanna legally buy some POT and METH with Bitcoin? (Tweaking wording before it goes to print. We’ve gone through 8 revisions. We’re indecisive)

Political: Another world is possible, and we pledge to make it real. – Saul Williams, The Pledge of Resistance

Suggestive: We do it DOGE style.

Now, I really like all of those. And they’re going to send me a t-shirt, so I have to choose one… That’s a tough call. I want to promote crypto. I want to promote so many things, but to choose just one… I have to go with #3 there. Saul Williams has such a beautiful piece of spoken poetry there.

I don’t want to just make people laugh; I want to make them think.

As Jeff Berwick would say…

Peace, love, and anarchy.

Central Banking – A Century of Failure

0

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Awake, Bitcoin, Logic, Philosophy, Police State, Politics, Poverty, Solutions to Problems | Posted on 22-12-2013

Tags:

The last century has been a complete catastrophe for money/currency. The criminal banksters won in a stealth move on December 23rd, 1913. Since then, they have managed to create more wars and death than at any point in history.

The central banking disease has since spread to almost the entire world. With control of the Iranian central bank now falling into the clutches of the central banksters, it seems only Cuba and North Korea remain, and they don’t need any help in creating misery – they’ve got communism to help them fail there.

But is seems appropriate that after a century of financial terrorism inflicted on the people of the world, that 2013 would be the rise of Bitcoin and crypto currency. Decentralised through a peer-to-peer network, crytpo currencies are faster, easier, and cheaper to use than the worthless digitally controlled fiat printed by the central banksters.

2014 will be an interesting year as crypto currencies consolidate their position as a sane alternative to the destruction wrought by the banks. Major retailers will begin accepting Bitcoins while smaller operations begin accepting Bitcoins and other crypto currencies.

There will be more turmoil as the banksters fight back. They will use the state as their weapon. They will push for regulations and laws. Their arguments boil down to only a few:

  • Terrorism
  • Drugs
  • Child porn
  • Tax evasion
  • Centralisation

They might come up with something else, but it’s unlikely. There is no good reason to not use decentralised crypto currency. Ultimately, it’s about control. And if they lose control of the money supply, they lose their ability to steal from people.

The banksters will use their puppets in government to attempt to create legislation that makes using crypto currency impractical. They will attempt to create new bureaucracies and legal hurdles that make complying with the law either impossible or impractical. They will use the state to attack the people as they always do. They are monopolists. They cannot compete because they have no skill sets that are worth paying for. They require the violence of the state to compel people to their will.

They won’t win. Too many people know what they are – vampires sucking the life blood out of humanity.

We’ve had a century of failure. It’s high time for the demise of the banksters and a century of prosperity. Well, more than just a century of prosperity, I hope. So long as people study what really happened in history, they’ll fight to keep the banksters staked and in their coffins.

Peter Schiff on Gold vs. Bitcoins Misses the Point

0

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Awake, Logic, Money, Philosophy, Security | Posted on 22-11-2013

Tags:

Peter Schiff is absolutely one of the smartest guys out there, and I have a lot of respect for him. However, he’s still missing the point about bitcoins and how they have intrinsic value. But first, here’s his most recent video on the topic:

bitcoinPeter is stuck on how gold has intrinsic value through physical usage where bitcoins have no physical usage and therefore no intrinsic value. He is quite correct if he means that bitcoins have no physical intrinsic value. However, this is not what he means. He means that they have no intrinsic value whatsoever. This is where he misses the point. Read the rest of this entry »

Killing Cops is OK. Sometimes.

0

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Anarchism / Voluntaryism, Awake, Cynicism, Philosophy, Police, Police State, Politics, States | Posted on 08-09-2013

Tags: , ,

V is for VoluntaryThe topic of violence really sets a lot of people off. Those that love it, get upset when you point out that they participate and endorse it. Those that abhor violence, get testy when the topic of defense comes up.

The first of those is easily seen in any discussion of tax with a statist. Lots of those out there, and not hard to find.

The other case, where people advocate violence for defense (outside of the state), isn’t so common. But there are 2 good examples out there.

The first, and best known, is Larken Rose’s “When should you shoot a cop?” (Video at CopBlock)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cElTyqJkMEw

He raises some good questions.

A more recent phrasing of the question is by Chris Cantwell in his article, “Concord Police, Go and Get Your Bearcat“.

Chris says the obvious when it comes to defending yourself:

So what to do? It’s a terribly unpopular thing to say, but the answer, at some point, is to kill government agents. The government agents know that, and that’s why they want a tank.

There really isn’t anything very controversial about what they’ve said, i.e. If the state initiates violence (aggresses) against you, you are well within your rights to defend yourself or resist that violence with violence.

If someone is trying to kill you, or attacking you and could kill you, you’re a complete moron if you refuse to use lethal force to save your own life (or that of another person).

Rudolph Rummel is a political scientist that has done a great deal of research on democide (governments murdering people).

He estimates that in the 20th century alone, about 262,000,000 people were murdered by various states/governments.

Those 262,000,000 people stand as a testament to the moral validity and moral imperative of defending yourself and/or other people with violence, and with deadly violence if necessary.

To put that somewhat into perspective, the Nazi murder of Jews represents about 2% of the total number of civilians murdered by government. About 50x more people were murdered that people never talk about.

Ignoring the topic of using violence against the state because violence is detestable, is simply irresponsible. Those that say, “it can’t happen here,” are most likely the ones that most need to discuss the topic. Larken Rose goes over the topic in detail in his video, “It Can’t Happen Here“.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2ebudnWlh4

The debate on the topic needs to happen. People need to think about defensive violence against the police and the state.

Nobody is saying, “Run out and kill the first cop you see.” Nobody is saying, “Kill every cop you can.” Nobody want to run around killing people. Well, that’s not really true – it appears that our governments love killing people and really get off on it, but let’s assume we’re talking about sane people – you know – voluntarists and anarchists. 😉

“Legalize Gay Marriage” is the Wrong Question

0

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Anarchism / Voluntaryism, Awake, Logic, Philosophy, States | Posted on 06-09-2013

Tags: , , ,

V is for VoluntaryI often wonder why people ask such idiotic questions or debate such moronic issues, like legalizing gay marriage.

The state has no business telling you who you can love or who you can marry. (Let’s assume consenting adults here and not go off on the retarded statist tangent. That actually needs to be said for some people… sigh…)

I actually had to get PERMISSION from the government of Canada to marry my wife. Similarly, she needed permission as well. Huh? No. Not joking. Really.

Nobody should ever have to ask the state for permission to love anyone.

Nobody should ever have to ask the state for permission to marry someone.

The state should play no part in the equation at all. It’s perverse and sick when it does.

The maximum role that any state should play is to passively accept information from people who do get married. That is, if you want to tell them, then fine. If not, then they have no business in your love life.

To allow the state to participate in basic human emotions is a gross over-step of any imaginable legitimate role. (Not that the state is legitimate, but let’s just pretend for a moment.) Even entering the debate on “gay marriage” is perverse. It lends credibility to the authority of the state to dictate who can love/marry who, which is surrendering fundamental natural rights that are so much a deep part of being human, that it is essentially surrendering your humanity to the state.

Whether or not anyone believes that it is right or wrong is entirely up to them. If you don’t want a gay marriage, hey… don’t have one. But leave other people alone to live their lives as they see fit. And don’t try to use the state to force people to conform to your whims.

Governments have no business meddling in love.

The question people should be asking is “why do we let government meddle in love?”

“Under God” is the Wrong Question

2

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Anarchism / Voluntaryism, Awake, Police State, Politics, Religion | Posted on 04-09-2013

Tags: ,

V is for VoluntaryKeeping or removing “under God” from the US pledge of allegiance is simply the wrong question entirely.

SJC to weigh wording of pledge

The state Supreme Judicial Court will begin hearing arguments this week in an atheist Acton couple’s quest to strike the words “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance their children say in the Acton-Boxboro Regional School District.

Why are children forced to pledge fealty to the state? Why is there a pledge at all? Isn’t it the job of the state to preserve the freedom of the people? Shouldn’t the state be pledging its allegiance to the people?

The entire “under God” debate is just an idiotic distraction from the real issue – we are all slaves to states that demand our allegiance to them, when it should be the other way around.

More Reliable News Sources on Syria

0

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Awake, Politics, States | Posted on 29-08-2013

Tags: , ,

It’s stunning to see the lies and drivel in the mainstream news media. They’ve done an excellent job at distorting truth and displaying some of the most transparent lies, e.g. Secretary of State John Kerry has been a wonderful source of lies and misdirection. You can verify that by listening to just about any word that comes out of his mouth.

For some better reporting and news about what is actually happening, check out Syria Report:

http://syriareport.net/

Or Syria Rebel Watch on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/user/SyrianRebelWatch2

However, do be aware that they are actually reporting what is going on, and that includes some graphic footage that many people will find extremely disturbing, e.g. foreign rebel fighters in Syria beheading and executing civilians.

 

Consumers Are Not Job Creators

3

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Anarchism / Voluntaryism, Awake, Business, Money, Philosophy | Posted on 26-08-2013

It’s rather annoying to hear the worst nonsense constantly paraded around like some kind of eternal truth. That “consumers are job creators” is some of that drivel. It only takes a moment to understand why.

I, along with billions of other people, am a consumer. I want a time machine. So do a lot of those other consumers. Where’s my time machine? Here’s my money to create all the jobs in the time machine industry… I’m still waiting…

But that’s an extreme example. Take a simple commodity like fish. There’s a market out there for fish. But it is probably more accurate to say that “hunger” plays a larger role in creating the market for fish than the consumer does. Jobs are created by businesses that supply people with fish. The consumer can certainly choose not to eat fish, but they still need to eat. And if they do stop eating fish, it’s likely that the business that supplies fish to people will shift to supplying them with what they want to eat. But the jobs aren’t created by the consumer – the business is responsible.

To be certain, consumers play a pivotal role in maintaining jobs. If nobody buys a product or service, the business that provides it will soon find itself in deep trouble.

Consumers merely dictate certain demands. (Well, that’s not entirely true, but the topic of manufacturing markets only further illustrates that consumers do not create jobs.) Businesses create jobs and fill those demands.

How some people get this so backwards is entirely a mystery to me.

Disinfo or Poor Reasoning at Reason.com?

1

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Awake, Logic, Police State, Politics, Software | Posted on 22-06-2013

Tags:

zxx fontA recent article at Reason.com talks about how a specific font (ZXX) can hide information from the NSA.

http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/21/dont-want-the-nsa-to-read-your-email-use

This is a pretty silly claim.

The first reason is pretty obvious: If it’s in digital text, then since the underlying character values are all the same as normal text and the font is irrelevant, well, the font is then irrelevant.

But for images or printed copies on paper, the only thing needed is for the OCR software to recognize the font and then match the glyphs (characters) to the proper letters, and again the font is irrelevant. Perhaps it might take the NSA a while to clue into it, but they’d eventually “get it”. Given that they store so much data, how long it takes for them is almost irrelevant.

It’s all pretty simple. Which makes me wonder whether the Reason.com article is purposeful disinformation or whether it is simply not well thought out by someone who isn’t very techno-savvy. It’s probably more likely that it’s just not well thought out, but given the simplicity of the issue, that’s somewhat hard to believe, leaving the question of whether it is purposeful disinformation open.

A $500 per ozt Silver Example

0

Posted by Cynic | Posted in Awake, Logic | Posted on 02-06-2013

Tags: ,

Dr. Jeff has an interesting question in a recent article:

http://www.silver-coin-investor.com/Silver-Short-Squeeze-Scenario-420.html

When the negligible value of paper currency eventually becomes apparent, what does it matter if silver is $500 per ounce in a world where a loaf of bread costs $100?

Well, it does matter. If you buy silver now before that happens. Here’s why…

Suppose you go out today and buy a $5 Canadian Maple Leave 1 ozt silver coin. That will cost you around $27 (CAD) or so right now. Where I live, the price of a loaf of bread is about $5 (AUD), and generally ranges from about $3 to $7. Forgetting the couple pennies difference in exchange rates, today 1 ozt of silver buys about 5 loaves of bread. This perfectly matches Dr. Jeff’s example above with $500 per ozt silver and $100 per loaf of bread.

And therein lies the answer. By buying silver (or gold) now, you preserve your purchasing power. Today you can buy 5 loaves of bread with 1 ozt, and when the SHTF, your 1 ozt still buys you 5 loaves of bread. Had you kept your $27, it would instead buy you about 1/4 of a loaf of bread.

What would you rather have? 5 loaves of bread or a few slices of bread? I’d rather have a few loaves. But that’s just me. 😉

Dr. Jeff goes on to talk a bit on the topic, but doesn’t hit that point, or if he does, it’s implicit for those that understand wealth preservation, and not at all obvious for anyone that doesn’t. He gets close to the issue here:

Furthermore, an ounce of silver will very likely buy you more food in times of financial trouble than you will then be able to purchase with its current equivalent dollar amount.

Cheers,

Ryan