Home » Posts tagged 'government' (Page 2)

Tag Archives: government

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

Money Is a Monopoly Government Will Never Surrender

Money Is a Monopoly Government Will Never Surrender

A major intellectual revelation from my youth came from reading Murray Rothbard’s “What Has Government Done to Our Money?” (1963). He includes a passing opinion that private markets are perfectly capable of producing money with no help from government. Under a sweeping monetary reform, private mints could compete in offering this good with full associated services. There is no need for any government intervention here.

It was the kind of claim that, at some point in one’s life, causes the jaw to hit the floor. Investigating this assertion more, I came to see that there was a large literature on the topic. Historically, money originated in the market economy itself, a naturally evolving institution that met the needs of trade. Whatever good was generally valued by everyone, and was as capable of being divided into consistent units with a stable value, could be deployed as money, with no need for government to do anything but watch.

But of course history has not panned out that way. Every government has a strong incentive to monopolize the good called money because this is how they can tax their citizens, reward the most compliant industries, cultivate close relationships with bankers, and inflate the currency at will through a variety of methods depending on the technology of the time.

We can of course imagine primitive tribes or pre-colonial native populations using rocks and shells, but is there a modern case where private coinage became normalized? In a major but often overlooked work of historical scholarship, economist George Selgin has written the most extensive treatment of the private coinage industry in the UK at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Australian PM Pushes for Crackdown on “Misogynistic” Speech Amid Fears Free Speech Is Fading

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s latest push for stringent internet censorship will continue to spark debate over free speech.

Following his more recent online censorship demands, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is doubling down and has advocated for more stringent controls on what is labeled as “misogynistic” online content. This initiative comes as plans are set for a national cabinet session in 2024 focused on women’s safety, which will address online harassment, among other issues.

This move marks another significant focus by the government, ostensibly on enhancing women’s safety, but raising alarms about potential overreach in curtailing free speech, as its other speech-related policies have done.

“Young adults should not be coached in disrespect or misogyny by online influencers,” Prime Minister Albanese said.

“I understand parents want to protect their kids from harmful material online,” Albanese added. “Social platforms have important social responsibilities and we need them to step up. Taken together, these reforms will give Australian families some of the tools they need to navigate the complexity of the digital world.”

The Prime Minister added that the legislation would carry “serious criminal penalties.”

The proposed measures include better tracking and monitoring the speech of those considered high-risk or repeat offenders and a drive to significantly reduce the presence of misogynistic content on social media platforms.

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland has expressed concern about the widespread dissemination of such content, particularly its impact on young users of social media. “The reality is that digital platforms are influencing our culture and social lives. They have a responsibility to do more to meet community standards,” Rowland said.

However, critics argue that the measures could infringe on digital rights and free expression, especially given the opaque nature of the algorithms that determine content dissemination.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Irish Villagers Attacked and Pepper Sprayed by Police. Conflict Over Hundreds of ‘Unvetted Migrant’ Centres Being Planted Throughout Ireland and the UK

The Irish government is now at war with its own people as clashes grow between police and Irish citizens who are protesting against over thousands of unchecked/unvetted migrants literally being ‘forced’ into their small communities. Government statistics show that 87% of the migrants are intentionally destroying their passports upon entry to avail of ‘asylum seeker’ status, therefore nobody know who these people are and whether, or not, they have a criminal record. Furthermore, most of the migrants seeking ‘asylum status’ are from countries that have no war. The migrants are eligible for free accommodation, free social welfare, free medical care, food, clothes, and various other perks. Whilst at the same time that the Irish government is facilitating mass immigration there are 14,000 Irish homeless people on the streets, and the Irish face a very serious accommodation crisis as the cost of renting has sky-rocketed. Make no mistake about it this could turn very nasty. 

The following shocking video of Irish villagers being attacked and pepper-sprayed by government police is an example of what is happening throughout Ireland (and the UK) as the Irish government, which for years has been little more than a puppet of the EU, turns, yet again, on the Irish people. Irish people, renowned for their friendly nature of ‘100,000 welcomes’ have in general been very welcoming to migrants. However, now after years of blatant ‘unvetted’ migration, increased crime, and a serious accommodation crisis for Irish people, it appears many Irish have simply had enough.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Wars, Apologetics, and Political Arguments

Wars, Apologetics, and Political Arguments

When political arguments ask you to commit to extreme positions, perhaps they are religious rather than ethical arguments.

Possibly the two most pressing world events at the moment are the wars in Ukraine and Israel. In each case, the argumentation for each side in the Western world has followed a similar and now-familiar pattern: My side is good, the other side is bad, and your neutrality on the subject is evil. In fact, anything short of giving material support for my side is an act of sedition.

But this type of argument is more suited to matters of faith than to matters of opinion or rationality. They are asking you to make real political and material sacrifices for their cause similar to the way a Christian asks you to sacrifice parts of yourself to live in faith that God is your creator. I am not necessarily making the argument that progressivism or neoconservatism are actually religions in their own right. While I understand that sentiment, those ideologies are still missing important pieces of what makes a religion a religion. Rather, it demonstrates how those ideologies use the concept of faith to compel populations to choose one side or the other, and commit their resources, in conflicts having nothing to do with them.

War arguments

For Ukraine-Russia, the American establishment opinion has seemed to be that Ukraine came into existence in 2022, nothing happened, and then Russia invaded it as the first step toward inevitable world conquest. Although “Russia is definitely losing,” if we fail to send over a single one of these aid dollars, Ukraine will promptly fall and Russia will easily overrun the rest of Europe in a matter of weeks. With Israel-Gaza it is that Israel has acted as a loving parent to the Palestinians, though sometimes utilizing tough love for their own good…

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Great Experiment

The Great Experiment

Is stratospheric aerosol injection inevitable now?

The retired aircraft carrier Hornet juts into the frame against a bright blue sky.
A government test of solar radiation management (SRM) was conducted from the deck of the retired aircraft carrier, Hornet, the first of its kind, on April 2.

“Desperate times breed desperate measures.”

~ William Shakespeare

Democracy has been referred to as the Great Experiment. As it teeters from the threat of Trump and “righteous” Christian Fascism, we must not forget that climate change is also an experiment that can topple democracy. Frighteningly, the two could easily work hand in hand as the realities of global warming create ever-increasing disasters from droughts and floods, force migration, create shortages, and drive systemic inflation. These conditions unchecked can lead to social unrest, military law, resource wars and dictatorship.


The Paris Agreement under heat

In 2015, the United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP 21 was held in Paris. Because of indisputable evidence of global warming from ice core sampling, ocean probes and satellite data, 196 nations signed a legally binding international treaty on climate change. That treaty went into effect in 2016 with the agreement to limit global warming to 1.5°C. To achieve that goal, greenhouse gas emissions must decline 43 percent by 2030.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article..

Banking on Surveillance: Republicans Investigate Major Banks’ Warrantless Data Sharing with Federal Agencies

Congressional inquiry into banks’ role in warrantless data surveillance following January 6 raises alarm over potential civil liberties violations and improper government collaboration.

Congressional Republicans are further investigating claims that at least 13 major US banks collaborated with federal agencies to monitor private transactions for signs of “extremism” following the January 6 Capitol events. The House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, led by Republican Jim Jordan from Ohio, is delving further into the alleged cooperation between these financial institutions and federal agencies without proper warrants.

These banks, including Bank of America, Chase, US Bank, Wells Fargo, Citi Bank, and more, are among those scrutinized for their roles in the reported surveillance. We previously reported about how Bank of America was found to be handing over data of everyone in the area during the events of January 6, whether they were suspect or not – and whether they had a warrant or not. But now, investigations suggest that the transfer of data was more systematic, potentially involving multiple financial institutions and the Biden administration itself.

Read an example of the letter sent to a bank here.

Already-uncovered information suggests that the Biden administration worked with banks to identify potential “extremism” by monitoring certain purchases such as religious texts like the Bible, or by flagging searches that included terms like “MAGA” and “TRUMP.”

According to the House Judiciary Committee, the probe has now expanded to include additional financial firms: Charles Schwab, HSBC, MUFG, PayPal, Santander, Standard Chartered, and Western Union. Letters sent to these institutions by the committee request documentation and communications with FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network) and the FBI to further investigate potential warrantless surveillance.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Financial turmoil in Canada – and what it means for the rest of the world

Financial turmoil in Canada – and what it means for the rest of the world

Max Bernier, leader of the People’s Party of Canada, says the new federal budget will send the country deeper into debt than it already is.

Our latest episode of the Collapse Life podcast features a returning guest — Maxime Bernier, leader of the People’s Party of Canada. He says the new federal budget is anti-growth and will send the country deeper into debt than it already is. He tells host Zahra Sethna there is no way Prime Minister Justin Trudeau can win the October 2025 election given the inflationary economic crisis people are experiencing. But he argues that Pierre Poilievre, leader of the Conservative Party, is ‘meet the new boss, same as the old boss.’ Find out what Bernier says this anti-growth budget means for Canada, and how policies in Canada might start to affect people in other countries, too.

Watch on YouTube:

Watch on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v4rnttc-canadas-anti-growth-budget-is-an-indicator-of-financial-crisis.html

Listen on Spotify

Big Tech Sponsors Event With Canadian Pro-Censorship Justice Minister Advocating Online Censorship

Canada’s justice minister, Arif Virani, proposes speech-restrictive legislation at an event backed by corporate sponsorship from Meta and AWS.

Canada’s government, represented by “captain of censorship” Arif Virani – the country’s justice minister and attorney general, will use an upcoming event as the opportunity to once again push for more speech-restrictive legislation, allegedly solely in order to deal with online “harm and hate speech.”

No surprise there, but the list of the sponsors of the event – dubbed, “Where Online Harms Have Real World Consequences: The Case for Legislating Against Harm and Hate” – is interesting. It includes Meta, and Amazon Web Services (AWS).

There could be different interpretations of this, one being that the giants want online speech regulated “to entrench their positions and keep out dissenting views” – as Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski put it.

Or it could be that Canada’s relentless policies damaging these companies’ business interests in the process of restricting speech are motivating the likes of Meta and Amazon to try to stay on the authorities’ good side, including through sponsorships.

And, two wrong things get to be true at the same time, so we may be witnessing some combination thereof.

In any case, the Empire Club, where the gathering is to be held, announced it by saying participants will be able to learn about the government’s plans to “tame some of the worst excesses of life online, and protect the rights of all Canadians who wish to express themselves without fear.”

All Canadians, that is, except those Virani would like to be put under house arrest or cut off their internet access as a kind of dystopian “preventive measure” – namely, when there is “fear” they might commit whatever’s designated as hate propaganda or crime, at some point in the future.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Brazil Targets Twitter Files Author Who Revealed Censorship Orders

Brazil’s Attorney General claims his Twitter Files coverage amounts to a “probable crime” against the state, a charge the journalist vehemently denies.

Twitter Files journalist Michael Shellenberger, who has recently been covering the public clash between X owner Elon Musk and the President of Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court (TSE) and Supreme Federal Court (STF) justice Alexandre de Moraes, is now likely to himself be targeted by one of those courts, the STF.

If the court starts a criminal prosecution against Shellenberger, it will be at the request of Brazil’s Attorney General Jorge Messias, who claims that there is information proving that the US journalist has committed a “probable crime” against the rule of law and institutions, along with an “attempt to destabilize the democratic state.”

Messias further accuses Shellenberger of disclosing confidential information related to the events of January 8, 2023.

The memo sent to STF says that the journalist on April 3 published, as part of the Twitter Files that concern Brazil, a number of emails exchanged by the court and X employees, which are referred to as “confidential files.”

And, of course, Shellenberger is “guilty” of making accusations against Moraes, Messias wrote, remarking that the journalist – “attributes authoritarian and anti-democratic measures” to the STF justice.

Shellenberger has denied these claims made against him, in turn describing Messias’ move as an “abuse of power,” urging the country’s Congress to investigate and finally end such conduct, and noting that in a democracy, there is no law against “destabilizing the democratic state” through non-violent means.

That would pretty much be what politics is all about – given that in this case, the term “state” clearly refers to those currently in power.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Expect Big Negative Revisions to BLS Monthly Jobs in 2023, GDP Too

Yesterday, the BLS released a little-read jobs report that shows reported jobs in 2023 may be wildly overstated. In turn, that means GDP is likely overstated as well.

Business Employment Dynamics (BED) data and and Monthly Job Data both from the BLS, chart by Mish

BED Chart Notes

  • Data is from the BLS Business Employment Dynamics (BED) report and the BLS monthly jobs reports (CES).
  • BED data is less timely but far more accurate than the BLS monthly jobs reports/
  • For 2023 Q3, the BED reports shows gross job gains of 7.559 million and gross job losses of 7.751 million for a net loss of 192,000 jobs.
  • The BLS monthly jobs reports show a gain of 640,000 jobs.

BED Job Gains and Losses by Quarter

Summary of Major Differences

Note that BED data is based on 9.1 million establishments while the monthly jobs reports are only based on 670,000 establishments.

The monthly reports are timely but inaccurate. And the BLS annual benchmark revisions do not also revise the monthly numbers. This makes year-over-year comparisons inaccurate as well.

I created the lead chart by netting BED data and comparing the BED net jobs to net quarterly jobs from the CES data.

BED vs CES

  • 2023 Q2 BED: +332,000
  • 2023 Q3 BED: -192,000
  • 2023 Q2 CES: +821,000
  • 2023 Q3 BED: +640,000

CES Overstatement

  • 2023 Q2 CES Overstatement: 489,000 Jobs
  • 2023 Q3 CES Overstatement: 832,000 Jobs
  • Q2+Q3 Overstatement: 1.321 Million Jobs

Thus, the BLS says that the BLS monthly job reports for 2023 Q2 and Q3 are overstated by a total of 1.321 million jobs.

Jobs Up 303,000 Full Time Employment Down 6,000 in March

In March, the economy continued to add a high percentage of government and social assistance jobs. Part time employment rose by 691,000 as full time employment fell by 6,000.

Nonfarm payrolls and employment levels from the BLS, chart by Mish.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Divide and Conquer: The Government’s Propaganda of Fear and Fake News

“It is the function of mass agitation to exploit all the grievances, hopes, aspirations, prejudices, fears, and ideals of all the special groups that make up our society, social, religious, economic, racial, political. Stir them up. Set one against the other. Divide and conquer. That’s the way to soften up a democracy.”― J. Edgar Hoover, Masters of Deceit

Nothing is real,” observed John Lennon, and that’s especially true of politics.

Much like the fabricated universe in Peter Weir’s 1998 film The Truman Show, in which a man’s life is the basis for an elaborately staged television show aimed at selling products and procuring ratings, the political scene in the United States has devolved over the years into a carefully calibrated exercise in how to manipulate, polarize, propagandize and control a population.

Take the media circus that is the Donald Trump hush money trial, which panders to the public’s voracious appetite for titillating, soap opera drama, keeping the citizenry distracted, diverted and divided.

This is the magic of the reality TV programming that passes for politics today.

Everything becomes entertainment fodder.

As long as we are distracted, entertained, occasionally outraged, always polarized but largely uninvolved and content to remain in the viewer’s seat, we’ll never manage to present a unified front against tyranny (or government corruption and ineptitude) in any form.

Studies suggest that the more reality TV people watch—and I would posit that it’s all reality TV, entertainment news included—the more difficult it becomes to distinguish between what is real and what is carefully crafted farce.

“We the people” are watching a lot of TV.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

South Koreans sue government over climate change, saying policy violates human rights

Plaintiffs, lawyers and activists gather outside South Korea’s constitutional court in Seoul ahead of a public hearing for a climate lawsuit on Tuesday, April 23, 2024.

SEOUL — As plaintiffs, lawyers and activists chanted slogans outside South Korea’s constitutional court on Tuesday, 17-month-old Woodpecker giggled, sending ripples of laughter through the crowd.

Woodpecker is the nickname of Choi Heewoo, the youngest among more than 250 plaintiffs involved in Woodpecker et. al. v. South Korea, one of four petitions filed since 2020 that the court is considering together in a landmark case.

The plaintiffs argue that by not effectively tackling climate change, their government is violating its citizens’ human rights.

While there are other cases in progress elsewhere, this is the first in Asia to have a public hearing and plaintiffs say that the court’s verdict, when it comes, is also likely to be the first in Asia.

Woodpecker’s mom and legal representative Lee Donghyun made him a plaintiff while he was still in her womb. She says South Korea’s government is deferring the task of reducing carbon emissions to future administrations and younger generations.

“The more we think this task can be delayed now, the bigger the burden our future generations will have,” she says. “I think it’s the same as passing on a debt to your children.”

Environmentalists criticize carbon emission reduction goals

Plaintiffs argue that South Korea’s goal of reducing carbon emissions by 40% by 2030 compared to 2018 levels is insufficient — it will lead to disastrous climate change and violate their constitutional rights.

South Korea’s human rights watchdog has filed an opinion with the government, stating that climate change is a human rights issue, and that the government is therefore obligated to protect citizens from it.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

Wave Goodbye to Another Set of Freedoms With the New Digital ID

Wave Goodbye to Another Set of Freedoms With the New Digital ID

In the 1980s, Australians fought hard against a similar national ID program, what has changed since then?
Commentary

“Papers please” used to be the ostinato of totalitarian systems, at least in the movies.

With the passing of the government’s Digital ID bills, Australians will have to become used to the digital equivalent—so what does that say about present-day Australia?

A few things have surprised me over the last few years, not the least the way the famous Aussie spirit of insubordination has been subsumed into a goody-two-shoes compliance with whatever capricious orders the authorities made.

I can’t imagine our forebears accepting lockdowns and forced vaccinations, and I certainly couldn’t see them accepting an identity card linking not just government accounts but private sector ones as well.

While the first proposition is an assertion based on a gut feeling, the second is very much based on fact.Remember the Australia Card?

In 1984, the Hawke Labor government introduced the Australia Card, and for the next three years, the government and opposition parties tussled over it to the extent that it triggered a double-dissolution election in 1987.

Objections didn’t just come from the federal Opposition either.

Queensland Labor Senator George Georges resigned from the governing party in 1986 over the issue, and in the lower house, Labor backbencher Lewis Kent said:

“Nothing can be more un-Australian than the need to provide one’s identity on the call of an official, be it a policeman or a bureaucrat. It would be more appropriate for the proposed card to be called a Hitlercard or Stalin-card.”

As a result, while the government won the 1987 election, and had the numbers to push the card through, instead, it withdrew the card when a technicality was found that could have affected its operation. One senses this was a relief.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Put Government Press Secretaries Under Oath, Subject Them to Perjury Charges

Put Government Press Secretaries Under Oath, Subject Them to Perjury Charges

“People shouldn’t be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people.”

-Alan Moore, V for Vendetta

“What’s good for the goose is good for the gander,” my Midwestern Irish-Catholic grandmammy used to opine as she indiscriminately lined up and sadistically hosed her captive grand-progenies down in the backyard, me included, after discovering a lone louse on a single head.

“That’s how we did it in the old country,” she would add.

Given how much historically unprecedented power is vested in the nuclear-armed government, derived in theory from the people, one would expect it to be beholden to a higher moral, ethical, and legal standard than the general population.

In a just society, at least, that would be the case.

But, of course, the United States government pursues justice no more than it adheres to Constitutional restraints. And so the most powerful actors in government can lie to anyone they like with impunity, but a powerless citizen making false statements to the FBI is a federal crime.

White House, State Department, et al. “press briefings,” — as they are euphemistically called because it has a more wholesome progressive ring than “Propaganda Power Hour” — are ritualistic exercises in sadomasochistic humiliation of a captured and put-upon domestic (and domesticated) American population.

At least once upon a time, the government propagandists who occupied the role of “X Department Spokesman” were skilled liars who maintained some pretense of respect for the media and minimal competency. This, by extension, conveyed some modicum of respect for the people whose interests the media allegedly serves. It was always an exercise in bullshit dissemination, but the window dressing of respectability and legitimacy was maintained.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Telegram Founder Reveals US Government’s Alleged Covert Maneuvers to Backdoor The App

US authorities allegedly sought backdoors into Telegram’s encryption.

Here’s a headline that surfaced on the internet this week: “US government tried to spy on people…” (…somebody, who happens to be the Telegram founder, “claims”.)

What a shocker. Is this really newsworthy? Actually yes – because here, we’re seeing the opposite of clickbait – a subdued, to put it generously, headline in legacy US media, in an attempt to report about some of the things Telegram CEO Pavel Durov said during his interview with Tucker Carlson.

But behind this headline lies a pretty explosive, even if not surprising story – of how countries (in reality, more likely than one, but in this case, one is named) view the backbone of internet safety and integrity, namely – reliable, secure encryption.

Long story short – they view it as the enemy.

Durov, a Russian now in possession of multiple passports, based in Dubai, UAE, and often apparently butting heads with snooping efforts from governments (including Russian) revealed during the interview how the government in Washington one time tried to “break into Telegram,” as he put it.

But really, doing this successfully, given the nature of the encrypted app, would have meant not just breaking “into” – but, breaking Telegram.

Durov spoke specifically about the spy agency activities when, according to him, they tried to recruit an engineer working for his company as obviously well-positioned to write encryption backdoor code (malware by any other name) the purpose of which would be to – well, break Telegram.

The last time he was in the US, Durov told Carlson, he was accompanied by a Telegram employee, “an engineer (…) and there was an attempt to secretly hire my engineer behind my back by cyber security officers or agents.”

What might the US agencies’ goals have been, Durov was asked.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Olduvai IV: Courage
Click on image to read excerpts

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress