Do You Share My Vision?
by Bruce G. McCarthy
Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he. ~Proverbs 29:18
While the U.S. Constitution is certainly not the Word of God, its creators held a view of government and sinful (tyrannical) man far more consistent with Scripture than do the politicians who openly ignore them both today.
The federal government, as originally intended, was to look outward, as our guardian of international trade relations, war powers and such - its influence over the people within these United States being very limited. That is, until 1861, when things would forever change with the Legal Tender Act introduced by Mr. Lincoln.
Seizing upon "wartime necessity," Lincoln circumvented the Constitution and the clear intent of its framers by introducing legal tender U.S. notes which sparked the most heated debates in Congress up to that time. What is virtually unknown today is that while Congressional opponents of this "fiat money" were against them. their advocates opposed them as well- almost to a man. To understand how unconstitutional legislation was obtained in violation of everyone's sworn oath; just consider the unread Patriot Act which was propelled by 9/11 Bush--Cheney fear mongering.
Other aspects of America's race toward 3rd world extinction reside in Marx's 2nd Plank income tax and Rockefeller's "free trade" scheme which supplanted protective tariffs. A sign outside the U.S. Customs House in lower Manhattan reminds us that: "Before the income tax was invented, the duty levied on imported goods fmanced almost the entire cost of America's federal government. . ." Read that again.
For those who are skeptical of federal "flat tax" proposals, this plaque stands as mute testimony to a better day than what our global planners have in store for us.
Imagine what it must have been like prior to the War for Secession when...
The chief dependence of the United States for revenue had always been upon customs. But no real test had ever been made of the sum that might be collected from this source. The aim had been to see with how small an amount the National Government could be supported, not how large an amount might be collected.~Twenty Years of Congress. (1861-1881) Vol. 1, by James G. Blaine (Speaker of the House), p. 399 (1884) -with emphasis.
Did those words elicit a wistful sigh and tranquil vision? Imagine life under a simple, constitutional philosophy, where the odds of tripping over a federal bureaucrat was nigh unto zero. But those were the days of federal dependence on lawful money that flowed from a free people to their lawfully paid public servants. It was a time when we were ashamed to beg Caesar for handouts.
Today's master-servant relationship is totally reversed. The servant public is now absolutely dependent upon fiat money that flows from their masters in Washington. Legal tender is the lifeblood of tyranny, and provided the means of replacing the U.S. Constitution with a welfare state run by the banking cartel through its administrative codes. To receive a privilege, benefit, grant, loan or license; an applicant must surrender his signature which creates a bond of law
Condensing several legal maxims, the process operates as follows: 1.) Applicants are presumed to know and intend the natural and probable consequences of their own voluntary acts. 2.) The agreement of the parties creates the law of contract. 3.) Contract law overrides common law rights and protections whenever there is a conflict of laws. So, with this in mind, consider:
A politician is addressing the home folks. For the first 15 minutes he extols states' rights and the crowd cheers. For the second 15 minutes he tells how he is going to fight for an increase in .federal subsidies and the crowd cheers just as enthusiastically.
The speaker and his constituents are good examples of the split vision with which Americans view government. In principle, many of us are against the extension of federal influence and control but, in practice, we turn right around and apply for each and every governmental benefit that happens to be available. ~ Big Government, Lawrence C. Murdoch, Jr., Vice President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, p.8
Federal grants do not originate with and are not dependent upon "taxpayers." When it comes to so-called "dollars," Washington does not need yours. They get all they want of those for nothing. If you disagree; just identify the substance - measured in dollars - which Uncle Sam and The Fed pay for them, and this writer will send you 100 pounds of it absolutely free.
Washington wants and steals what you produce. Their tools of confiscation are in your wallets and bank accounts. Fed notes are a 100% tax in favor of the issuer. The federal income tax and levying of interest on imaginary bank loans help conceal this fraud. After all, if you could print fiat money, and your neighbors were coerced by legal tender laws to accept them, you could use those bogus notes to steal whatever they own or produce. Would you bother to tax or collect interest on your phony bills? Probably not. Counterfeiters don't. But if you did, people would never guess that you were printing bushels of greenbacks in your basement for absolutely nothing.
Of frequent concern is how the national debt will be paid off. This overlooks the fact that banks don't lend any tangible thing to anyone - not even to governments. While we're told that no one is as far in the hole as Uncle Sam, it will be difficult to define and describe precisely 'what monetary substance the World Bank, IMF or The Fed have loaned to Uncle Sam or the world's many bankrupt nations. This is because bankers are the actual debtors. They only pretend to make the loans. Of course, the public is equal to the task, pretending to borrow a sum of nothing in proportion to the numbers shown on little slips of paper. So how much of the national debt is actually owed to whom?
Since banking is in violation of Biblical law (regarding just weights and measures, usury, theft, etc.), we could advocate its total abolition. Americans, of course, will never endorse such a level of personal and national liberty in their present state of moral debauchery. But isn't it uplifting to think about?
Here's a glimpse of what life might have been like in the "good old days" prior to Abe Lincoln's greenbacks and The Federal Reserve System.
In a paper called 'Cause of and Cure for Hard Times', published in 1787, an honest old farmer is made to say: 'At this time my farm gave me and my whole family a good living on the produce of it, and left me, one year with another, 150 silver dollars, for I never spent more than $10 a year, which was for salt, nails, and the like. Nothing to wear, eat, or drink, was purchased, as my farm provided all'. ~History of the People of the United States, Vol. 1, p. 19 by John Bach McMaster (1884), taken from American Museum, January 1787, Connecticut Courant, August 18, 1788 with appended author's note: "Had his case been an uncommon one, the force and value of the [news]paper would have been lost."
Who, today, could envision spending only $10 of silver per year - or saving $150 out of every $160 earned? Such was a world of substantive money, a Christian work ethic, no income tax, and almost no banks - a world as far removed from us as the U.S. Constitution and our Biblical heritage. But to re-coin a phrase: I have a dream...