“Is this, Sir, consistent with the character of a free Government? Is this civil liberty? Is this the real character of our Constitution? No, Sir, indeed it is not. The Constitution is libeled, foully libeled. The people of this country have not established for themselves such a fabric of despotism. They have not purchased at a vast expense of their own treasure and their own blood a Magna Carta to be slaves. Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents, and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war, in which the folly or the wickedness of Government may engage it? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest rights of personal liberty? Sir, I almost disdain to go to quotations and references to prove that such an abominable doctrine has no foundation in the Constitution of the country. It is enough to know that that instrument was intended as the basis of a free Government, and that the power contended for is incompatible with any notion of personal liberty. An attempt to maintain this doctrine upon the provisions of the Constitution is an exercise of perverse ingenuity to extract slavery from the substance of a free Government. It is an attempt to show, by proof and argument, that we ourselves are subjects of despotism, and that we have a right to chains and bondage, firmly secured to us and our children, by the provisions of our Government.

The supporters of the measures before us act on the principle that it is their task to raise arbitrary powers, by construction, out of a plain written charter of National Liberty. It is their pleasing duty to free us of the delusion, which we have fondly cherished, that we are the subjects of a mild, free and limited Government, and to demonstrate by a regular chain of premises and conclusions, that Government possesses over us a power more tyrannical, more arbitrary, more dangerous, more allied to blood and murder, more full of every form of mischief, more productive of every sort and degree of misery, than has been exercised by any civilized Government in modern times.” ~ Daniel Webster; December 9, 1814. (Full speech)

Share/Bookmark

Click here to view the video on YouTube.

The police state is upon us. Drones now fly over our skies, U.S. citizens can be indefinitely detained without a trial, and police forces are increasingly militarized for duty. Wake up, education yourself and your friends and neighbors, because without an informed populace things will only get uglier. Times are rapidly changing, be ready. Stay informed, anticipate new directions, and prepare for the unexpected.

“The American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care. These precedent-setting changes in the law are extremely dangerous and will change American jurisprudence forever if not revised.” ~ Ron Paul

Share/Bookmark

The Merriam-Webster definition of slavery is the “submission to a dominating influence.” The 13th Amendment of the Constitution, adopted in 1865, specifically prohibits slavery and involuntary servitude. The U.S. Code punishes those who seek involuntary and forced labor of others with a fine and prison sentence of up to twenty years.

Yet there is one form of involuntary servitude, coercive labor, and obtaining money through force and threat of physical restraint that largely goes unquestioned in the U.S.: the income tax. First, let’s briefly explore the history of taxes in the U.S.

After the creation of the United States and the Constitution, the federal government paid the majority of its bills through tariffs and internal excise taxes on various items and goods. During the War of 1812 an income tax had been proposed to help pay off expenses but was never brought into existence. Several years later in 1817, every internal tax was eliminated and all of the federal revenue came from tariffs on imported items and the sale of public land.

To pay for the mounting costs of the Civil War, in 1862 Congress passed the first income tax of 3% on those who made between $600 and $10,000 (people who made above $10,000 paid a higher portion). This income tax was phased out in 1872. Another income tax was briefly put into place in 1894 and 1895, but was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. During this period, the Populist, Democratic, and Socialist Labor parties were all advocating for some form of income tax. The Socialist Labor Party was and still is the leading socialist/communist party in the U.S.

Arguments made for the passage of the 16th Amendment and the permanent ability of the federal government to tax income often revolved around the rhetoric that an income tax would mean less reliance on tariffs for revenue, which would result in lower prices, and therefore help less fortunate citizens. The original idea was that only the rich would be taxed and feel any negative effect. Sound familiar?

An income tax gives government the direct control over any individual who holds a legal job. This simple principle of direct taxation, especially since the 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913, has played a major role in the growth of the federal government over the past century. If government can reach into income, there is no limit to the extent that government can reach into your property to raise funds. It is all done in the name of protecting the poor and the middle class, punishing the rich, and promoting “equality.”

“It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.” – Frederic Bastiat

Think about this situation for a second. Are taxes not forced out of us through coercion and threats (audits, fines, prison, etc.)? Is income taxation anything close to voluntary servitude? Is the income tax in any way not a “submission to a dominating influence,” the Webster definition of slavery? At what point does taxation become a form of legal slavery?

Most people in the U.S. spend approximately one-third of their time working for the government. Some may argue that we get benefits by working for the federal government: welfare, education, and many other programs created since the adoption of the latest income tax in 1913. Would these same people argue that if slaves had been forced to work merely one-third of their time and received basic benefits from their masters that it would be morally acceptable? This practice would be rightfully blasted as immoral and illegal in a second if it was done by a plantation owner, but it is rarely questioned when performed by government. So I ask again – at what point does taxation become a form of legal slavery?

“To tax the community for the advantage of a class is not protection, it is plunder.” – Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of the U.K. (1874-1880)

The intentions of the income tax do not justify a thing. It is one of the core ideals of socialism, communism, and Nazism, the very systems that have grown into the greatest abominations of life that mankind has ever seen. The income tax builds into the notion that our rights, privileges, and liberties come from government and its powerful leaders. Certain centralized and elevated individuals have the power to take the fruits of our labor through force; this alone is a principle that originated with kings and some of the greediest individuals in history, not with a free people.

In The Communist Manifesto, first published in 1848, Karl Marx lists “a heavy and progressive or graduated income tax” as the second of ten general steps for a nation’s transition to communism.

The principle of the income tax is a direct assault on the life, liberty, and property of all humans. An income tax implies that there is a higher authority to whom we must work and contribute or be severely punished. It shifts power to the men and women who feel they know the best uses for our labor. The very idea is that certain centralized and powerful individuals in government have the wisdom and morality that the general people lack, and the authority to force others into that moral code. At heart, it is one of the most selfish, discriminatory, and violent ideals to have crept upon the U.S. and other nations.

“I know no class of my fellowmen, however just, enlightened, and humane, which can be wisely and safely trusted absolutely with the liberties of any other class.” – Frederick Douglass

The income tax has become incredibly entrenched in our economy and society today. It is often considered unthinkable to imagine a time when the federal government stayed within its constitutional confines; it is unimaginable to think of a federal government whose soul purpose is to protect life, liberty, and property. An income tax is one of the worst forms of taxation possible: there are few ways to avoid it (as you can somewhat do with sales tax, excise taxes, and tariffs), it is a horrid state invasion of privacy and property, and it turns government into a tool of plunder with a strong disregard for basic justice.

These elevated and seemingly angelic figures whom we elect convince us that it is because of too much freedom and voluntary exchange that our biggest problems arise, rather than recognize one of the greediest, most powerful, and largest attacks on life, liberty, and property through the income tax and the centralist principles it is guaranteed to carry with it.

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” – James Madison

Share/Bookmark

Different agencies and groups have been given the task to audit and investigate the Fed since it was created in 1913. The Treasury Department took on the job for the Fed’s first eight years of existence. In 1921, the General Accounting Office (GAO, now the Government Accountability Office) was established with the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921. The GAO is an “independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress.” It’s duties consist of performing audits, evaluations, and investigations. In general, it is called the “watchdog” of Congress.

Congress gave the GAO the auditing responsibility over the Federal Reserve until 1933, when Congress decided to give other agencies and firms the responsibility. For more than forty years after 1933, the GAO’s duties did not involve auditing the Federal Reserve. This changed on July 21, 1978, when President Jimmy Carter signed The Federal Banking Agency Audit Act into law. The Act had several major flaws. It returned auditing power over the Fed back to the GAO, except for four different areas that the GAO was prohibited to audit:

(1) transactions conducted on behalf of or with foreign central banks, foreign governments, and nonprivate international financing organizations;

(2) deliberations, decisions, and actions on monetary policy matters, including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, and open market operations;

(3) transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee including transactions of the Federal Reserve System Open Market Account; and

(4) those portions of oral, written, telegraphic, or telephonic discussions and communications among or between Members of the Board of Governors, and officers and employees of the Federal Reserve System which deal with topics listed in this Act.

Yes, it is actually prohibited to audit these areas of the Federal Reserve, and they are not any small items. Perhaps most alarming is the fact that the GAO can’t investigate the Fed’s foreign dealings. Letting their foreign operations go unnoticed is a rather disturbing prohibition, and brings up questions of sovereignty, loyalty, and what’s in the best interests of the country. We are talking about an organization that has monopoly control over money and credit; if anything, they should be one of the most heavily investigated areas of government.

The argument against allowing Congress and the American people to investigate these four items is that it allows the Fed to operate more efficiently and productively without excessive public or private scrutiny. No kidding. I don’t think anyone would argue that being protected against any investigation into four key areas of your operation would hurt efficiency.

This statement from John F. Kennedy serves as a good reminder of what we should expect and tirelessly demand from government:

“We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”

Money is one of the primary areas where Congress has neglected and ignored its Constitutional responsibility. We have given unimaginable power to a central bank, and prohibited important aspects of that central bank from being audited. This is dangerous in any circumstance, but that danger increases quickly when you add in the fact that we have a fiat monetary system, essentially an inflationary time bomb of monetary destruction waiting to go off.

The most basic question to ask is if this monetary system resembles that of a free society, economy, and people. Huge power over monetary policy is in the hands of the seven unelected members who make up the Board of Governors, which oversees the Fed.

The Fed is not here to create stability for the American people, it is here to ensure stability for government. It is time to reverse the trend and belief that the American people can’t control monetary decisions. Money is power, and that power should not be in the hands of a select few central bankers serving the interests of themselves and the government. That power belongs solely to the individual citizens of a nation, otherwise in the long run it will be abused, expanded, and used as an engine of tyranny.

The Fed deserves no special treatment. Let them be audited, investigated, and open to to public and private scrutiny. Congress and the American people have given them incredible power; a power that, especially if protected and kept secretive behind closed doors, will be destined to bring the country into a time of massive inflation, worthless currency, and great economic and social unrest.

Auditing the Fed is the first necessary step to stripping the outrageous power of an unconstitutional central bank and currency. Can you imagine what the founding men of our nation would say about secrecy in places of such importance and power? Secrecy in government leads to suppression of truth and the birth of tyranny. It is imperative that we once again realize the dangers of mixing secrecy and power.

“History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit and violent means possible, to maintain their control over governments, by controlling money and its issuance.” – James Madison

“Let me issue and control a nation’s money, and I care not who writes its laws.” – Amschel Rothschild

“Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed.” – Barry Goldwater

Share/Bookmark