Why Slavery Is Here to Stay

Posted on May 26, 2015 by Robert Ringer Comments (70)

Font:

The next presidential farce (er, race) is already starting to heat up, and it promises to be great entertainment. I admit it, I absolutely love good theater. The presidential campaigns are reality TV at its best — a year-and-a-half of nonstop lies, gaffes, chest-pounding, and some of the best slapstick comedy America has to offer.

Granted, it also can become boring, because we’ve heard all the lines so many times before. For example, it’s 100 percent guaranteed that every troglodyte who seeks the dictator’s job will, with a straight face, promise to “stimulate the economy,” “create jobs,” “level the playing field,” and initiate both “immigration reform” and “tax reform.”

We also know that there will be nary a mention of shrimp on treadmills nor the all-important question of why lesbians tend to be obese. No sir, none of the new crop of power seekers will so much as hint at wasting your money.

Of course, neither will they be specific when they promise to cut rat-hole programs from the budget. As always, the entire eighteen-month production will be all about hyperbole and vagueness. Substance, as always, will be missing in action.

But the most certain thing of all is that not one of the candidates will pledge to end slavery, because an end to slavery, by definition, would mean an end to government, which in turn would mean an end to the criminal class’s power over others and its unfettered access to your money.

What makes slavery possible is legislation, which legalizes organized violence. It therefore follows that the conditions of people can improve only through the abolition of laws that promote organized violence.

Which reminds me of what Lyoff Tolstoy, the great Russian novelist, had to say about the abolition of government. Tolstoy put a lot of thought into how this most evil of all of mankind’s inventions could be eradicated from the face of the earth.

He started from the premise that slavery results from laws, laws are made by governments, thus the only way slavery can be totally abolished is through the abolition of governments. True, some people in government, pressured by abolitionists, freed American blacks from slavery in the nineteenth century, but that did not prevent government from continuing to enslave citizens in other, more subtle, ways.

And as recent events in Ferguson and Baltimore demonstrated, blacks are still very much enslaved. But the nice thing about it from government’s point of view is that they don’t even know it.

In fact, they have been brainwashed into believing that more government involvement in their affairs would make them free. And yet, in their low-information state of confusion, they turn to violence to vent their anger against government.

But as Tolstoy pointed out, throughout history all attempts to rid the world of governments through violent measures only resulted in new governments being established in their place, more often than not governments that were more oppressive than those they replaced. Thus, violent overthrow of governments, however appealing such a sport may be to some elements, does not work.

The problem with violence is that it is used to compel people, against their will, to do the will of others. And that’s about as good a definition of slavery as one can come up with. Which is why all attempts to abolish slavery through violence is like trying to extinguish fire with fire.

It’s how the Russian Revolution produced Lenin, then Stalin, then, finally, more and worse violence, while the French Revolution produced Robespierre, then Napoleon, then, finally, more and worse violence.

Where Tolstoy totally missed the mark, however, was that he believed the days of government were numbered because it was just a matter of time until people would realize that government is inherently evil. He felt that eventually people would simply refuse to furnish governments with soldiers and money, without which they would be rendered impotent.

Tolstoy’s naïve vision presumed that men would become enlightened and moral enough to refuse to take part in any governmental activities, including those carried out by soldiers, tax collectors, jurors, and elected officials.

Instead, throughout history the opposite has happened, which is to say that the people themselves are the problem. Rather than becoming enlightened, they fail to understand that their participation in the criminal activity of government, whether in the form of labor, money, or military service is not a patriotic act, but an act that harms both themselves and others. The call for patriotism is, in reality, nothing more than a call for the populace to submit peacefully to slavery.

The sad truth is that a majority of people ignorantly assume that civilization cannot exist without governments, that the disappearance of government would lead to chaos and anarchy, and that people would revert to barbarism. But it’s preposterous on its face to assume that people cannot arrange their own lives as good as politicians and unelected bureaucrats arrange them.

If public works are needed, why should we assume that free people cannot, without resorting to violence, raise the money necessary to create something that is a genuine benefit to society? This includes roads, bridges, police and fire departments, and just about anything else that is a positive addition to a community.

Has government done such an outstanding job with Amtrak and the Postal Service that private industry could not possibly do as well? Hardly.

While robbers generally focus on plundering the rich, governments favor plundering the poor and protecting those rich who assist them in carrying out their crimes. Throughout history, they have relied on pariahs like Goldman Sachs and the Rothschilds to help them plunder at will. That’s why the average person’s wages have declined over the past twenty years and the wealthy have become wealthier than ever.

So, dear reader, I suggest that you sit back and enjoy the upcoming campaign festivities for the next year-and-a-half. They promise to be reality TV at its best.

Your biggest challenge is to not get so caught up in the playacting that you begin to take it seriously. After all, no matter which scoundrel ends up winning the throne in 2016, you already know, based on past history, that there will be no fundamental changes in the way government operates. Guaranteed!

And if you’re wondering about the fate of shrimp on treadmills and obese lesbians, rest assured that they will once again become important political projects right after the current presidential soap opera comes to an end.

Robert Ringer

+Robert Ringer is an American icon whose unique insights into life have helped millions of readers worldwide. He is also the author of two New York Times #1 bestselling books, both of which have been listed by The New York Times among the 15 best-selling motivational books of all time.

70 responses to “Why Slavery Is Here to Stay”

  1. Jorge says:

    First! =)

  2. Ron M says:

    Thanks, Robert. Your article is as good a concise explanation of government as slave master as any I have read. Also, your take on how the people contribute to their own enslavement is well taken. I always appreciate your thoughts, even on those occasions when I disagree with them.

  3. Aaron Starr says:

    Good commentary. I would only disagree with the following sentence: "And yet, in their low-information state of confusion, they turn to violence to vent their anger against government." I believe that rioters typically riot for less noble reasons; their displays of violence are opportunistic.

  4. Real American says:

    Wonderful, thank you. Can you please address the issue of forced vaccinations? Here in CA this is about to be law, and I need some god ammunition to fire at those who way, "Laws are what make a civilized society" and "We have to protect the good of all"

  5. Real American says:

    I like how my typo spelled good as god

  6. loewe1869 says:

    Insightful and hilarious, – the perfect combination. The obese Lesbian phenomenon was most amusing!

  7. Paul Herring says:

    Agree with Robert in some things. However, leadership, if not government, is certainly needed. Even to organise a simple party someone needs to take charge. To do so on such a massive scale as to build roads, hospitals, and other essential aspects of human society's needs under our present system, requires leadership. Who will do so? Who's qualified? And above all, who will do so with an altruistic view of those they lead? Such elevated humans are pretty thin on the ground.

    • Paul Anthony says:

      The problem with leaders is the sort of followers they tend to attract.

      Government is only needed to do the things individuals or groups of individuals, working together voluntarily, cannot do for themselves.

      Think about that and you may realize how little government is actually needed. Beyond national defense (not offense) and a court system to provide a means to settle differences, I can't think of anything. Can you?

      • IHeartDagney says:

        Nope. I can't think of a single thing the government does that is necessary beyond what you mentioned. And, it so happens, this is how our country was initially set up and in the 10th Amendment of the Bill or Rights. Can you imagine all the entitled caterwauling if we were actually to go back? What, no Social Security? No welfare? No job studying the spotted owl? Sheesh, these people don't understand that these very entitlements are the vehicle of their slavery!

      • Paul Herring says:

        I can, Paul. It's sad to make this point but people are interested only in themselves, first, second, third, fourth and so on. Unless people are paid for their services nothing gets done and it's been that way for thousands of years. A paradigm shift is needed.

        This simply will not, and cannot, be made by humans, because we can't successfully govern oursleves. More is needed and only the Bible has the answers but who's prepared to listen to its solution?

        • Paul Anthony says:

          There is nothing wrong with expecting to get paid. How else will you pay YOUR bills?
          But there is a big difference between people voluntarily paying for what they believe is needed and being forced to pay a government that will decide what is needed.

          I recommend you read "After the Blackout" ( I confess, I wrote the novel). It is possible to have a civil society without government.

          • Paul Herring says:

            We're poles apart in our thinking on this matter, Paul. Without some form of government, leadership if you prefer that, we have anarchy. That scenario is worse than pretty well any form of government. With respect, you don't have the solution to this monumental problem any more than I do.

            As a student of the Bible for more than 40 years it's plain to me that what it says provides the only lasting solution to mankind's global problems. You have massive problems in the US – anyone can see that. But we're not far behind that in Australia. There is simply no government that can fix issues beyond its borders. As for the UN – well…

    • Jean says:

      Paul – there's plenty of leadership available, but government often places obstacles in the way of those individuals who are dead-set on solving problems using their own initiative and / or money. The obstacles – known as regulations – keep the entry bar high, so as to eliminate any real competition to the government OR to those who are its cronies. Before government funding, universities and hospitals were largely built by private capital – did you ever hear of the Carnegie libraries? Or Carnegie – Mellon University? Or Vanderbilt University? As to qualifications, it's pretty remarkable what people CAN do when they feel CALLED to do it. You grossly underestimate your fellow person, but that may be because our current culture is so inured to mediocrity, apathy and an absence of personal responsibility that the sheeple choose not to live up to their highest calling. One other thing – privately funded enterprises are voluntary as well. If the leader turns out to be a jackass, those following have the option of leaving. Not so with government-funded projects. Whether I think the person in charge is a saint, a sinner or a complete boob, I still have the obligation to pay for his / her mistakes and to continue subsidizing them after they become institutionalized.

      • Paul Herring says:

        Nice response, Jean. Not sure if I 'grossly underestimate my fellow person', but those who do things purely for the good of the human family are pretty rare, both now and in the past. Such individuals are truly outstanding but don't always get the recognition they deserve because they don't seek it.

  8. Tom D says:

    "an altruistic view of those they lead"?? What country are you living in? Who is that altruistic leader that you imply exists? And what has he done lately?

    • Paul Herring says:

      Didn't imply an altruistic leader exists, Tom. I did ask if there is such a person though. It was a question, not a statement.

  9. Ellis Baxter says:

    Robert, you should run…, with 20 + candidates you could win in Iowa… with like 5% of the vote…. at least it would be REAL… I have been around political games for 52 years since I was 14 and each year gets worst … We need a new party … one that works and respects history. No more useless BS I mean no experience is grand ? Or "hell folks Of course I lied to get elected .. but I won !!!

    God Help us… What price Churchill?

    e

    • Tommy Maq says:

      He's probably too smart to sign up to get blamed for everything while having very little real power to change anything.

      Though the IRS is part of the executive, so it would be possible to just destroy it as Prez.

      I'd love the spectacle of different congressmen sabotaging their own careers arguing on behalf of saving it…

  10. cara says:

    AND WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE BEST WAY OF WEANING THE SENIORS CITIZENS OFF OF SOCIAL SECURITY (THAT THEY PAID INTO) AND MEDICARE?
    I WILL ANSWER MY OWN QUESTION: IT WILL TAKE MORE THAN A GENERATION TO DO SO, ALSO TO TEACH PEOPLE TO SAVE FOR RETIREMENT AND/OR A RAINY DAY.
    THAT SAID, I THINK IT'S LIKELY THAT SOCIAL SECURITY CAME INTO BEING, AT LEAST IN PART, BECAUSE SOME, OR MOST, ARE NEVER, EVER GOING TO DO SAVE ANTHING. FOR THOSE PEOPLE, GOV'T PROVIDES THE SAFE LANDING. ARE YOU ALL AGAINST THAT? (ESPECIALLY FOR THE BABIES.)
    ON THE OTHER HAND, DO Y'ALL THINK IT'S OK FOR US TO PAY THE BILLS AND UPKEEP FOR OUR UNINVITED GUESTS WHO COME HERE IN DROVES AND EXPECT TO BE TAKEN CARE OF? I THINK WE MIGHT SEE A MASS EXODUS IF THERE WERE NO 'FREE LUNCH' (GOV'T, I.E., OUR) MONEY. RALLY, WHAT THINK YOU ALL?

    • Jim Hallett says:

      For those who do not save, then that is THEIR problem! No one actually "paid into SS". It was just another theft tax that was squandered by the immoral thugs that are attracted to govt. If I had taken that 7.65% on my own and invested in it, I would have MUCH more than the paltry pittance that govt. returns to me. It is just a Ponzi scheme, yet most seniors think it is a godsend. The dumbing down of the citizens is so complete that people are incapable of rational thought. We do not need govt. for ANYTHING . . . and that includes roads, self-defense, etc. Read some Murray Rothbard or the Tannehill's great book for a synopsis of how such a system would work. What we have today in the Slave States of Amerika bears NO resemblance to what the Founders envisioned. Instead of a republic, we are a social democracy, just like western Europe and elsewhere – stolen from, coerced, and lied to – while the TIC (thugs-in-charge) and their cronies rape all the goodies for themselves. Robt. is right, and paragraph 5 summarizes the sorry state of affairs. Government is the most immoral, inefficient and dysfunctional institution on Earth!

      • cara says:

        I REPEAT; THERE ARE THOSE WHO ARE NEVER, EVER GOING TO SAVE. PERIOD. AND WHETHER OR NOT WE "PAY INTO" THE SS OR OUR MONEY IS "STOLEN" FROM US BY GOV'T, AS YOU INTIMATE, OUR MONEY ENDS UP THERE. SAME PLACE. MATTER OF SEMANTICS.

        IF WE HAVE BECOME , LIKE YOU SAY, LIKE WESTERN EUROPE, WHY/HOW DO YOU THINK THAT ALL HAPPENED? BECAUSE THE FOLKS DIDN'T GET THEIR ASSES OUT TO VOTE? HAHA.
        PS.

        ADDRESS THIS: WHAT SHOULD GOV'T DO ABOUT FOREIGN FREE LUNCHERS.

        • Tommy Maq says:

          "MONEY ENDS UP THERE."

          And by 'there' you mean 'gone' – please back up, integrate that new fact into your mind, then try again so you can talk rationally about the actual alternatives we face.

          Thank you.

  11. cara says:

    I MEANT TO SAY "REALLY", WHAT SAY YOU ALL?

    I ALSO MEANT TO SAY 'SOMETHING SOME ARE NEVER, EVER, GOING TO DO: SAVE ANYTHING.

  12. Ragnar says:

    First of all you should know there is no such thing as a free lunch. Second please explain why if someone does not plan for retirement, or anything else, that their lack of action becomes a claim against me? Whatever the state provides it steals from someone else first.

  13. RealitySeeker says:

    Ron Paul wasn't a typical candidate. He would have made a difference had he been elected president. There would have been less welfare and warfare.

    As the world moves closer and closer to another great war and another Great depression, it makes a difference who's elected. The Washington doomsday machine cannot be shut down, yes, indeed, that's true, but it can be slowed.

    It's easy to sit in an armchair and write about how it doesn't matter who's elected, but it does matter. I still have my guns because people voted for those of whom support gun rights. The Second Amendment matters. Violence matters. A hundred million guns matter. You can kid yourself that it doesn't, but it does. You can win the debate on paper, but the fight that ultimately matters is the one fought on the street. Talk is cheap.

    The collectivists understand where power comes from. And they are kept in check not buy words alone, but by the threat of the Second Amendment. So scribble on about how it doesn't matter who's elected. It makes good reading, but when the metal meets the meat and the bullet hits the bone such scribble isn't worth as much as softer toilet paper.

    • John Abbott says:

      Wow, That really makes sense! It was kind of depressing, reading the article, Your point kind of brings it all into per
      spective!

    • Mike S. says:

      I voted for Dr. Paul in the primaries, hoping he would do well, and if things would have gone ahead without the GOP changing rules, etc, midstream, he may have had much better results.
      I believe however, had Ron Paul been elected and started implementing many of his good ideas, he likely would have met the same fate as JFK and Bobby and Martin Luther King Jr.
      Those in control don't like to lose their power and will let nothing get in their way to prevent their loss of power for very long!

    • oscarwildeweenr says:

      if an inanimate tree, in an inanimate forest, with perhaps a heart carved into its trunk & the initials u.s.g. carved into the heart, falls upon, is felled upon, & inanimates one, or several, or millions, of the inmates, & their final mouthings intimate the primacy & potency of inanimacy being the cause of their impending inanimacy, but you’re not there to hear the mouthings, or lipread them, are there still soundings to be had anyway? Could mark twain fathom forrest gump? (assume “gump” approximates the noise wood makes falling from perpendicular to parallel terra firma). ☺

      talk is sometimes cheap. But political talk is never anything else. How could it be otherwise, starting from false premises, as it does?

      100mm…in all matters of accounting, tho, is it not the net that’s the percentage that perorates, & the gross that perambulates? Net (money) talks, gross (bs) walks.

      All the amen(dment)s, kings horses & men, cannae put humpty together again. it is so; so be it (used after a prayer, creed, or other formal statement to express solemn ratification or agreement. pretty close approximation of pharaoh’s “so let it be written. so let it be done.”). Or, as in this particular case, to build the Trojan horse around the greek destroyers after they’d plain sight & full view infiltrated. The Trojans, making a gross-net error, considered the wooden horse to be a trophy, & atrophy it was (“a t” gross, “at” net…lol). marked trojans couldn’t fathom forest greek – & so got themselves greeced…rendered unto…etc.

      • RealitySeeker says:

        "But political talk is never anything else."

        Oh yes it is, and it's not cheap when it's spewed by a sociopath who is commander and chief of a bloodthirsty, multi-trillion-dollar, nuclear-equipped military.

        Talk wasn't cheap when Tuthmosis III was one of the warrior pharaohs who talked the talk as he walked the walk all the way to Megiddo and back. Talk wasn't cheap ( it never is when talk leads to war) when Cambyses II of Persia conquered Egypt in 341 BC, and shortly thereafter, in 332 BC, Alexander the Great rolled his army in……..

        ……. talk wasn't cheap when the Rubicon was crossed, and it wasn't cheap when Washington crossed the Delaware.

        Hitler talked. Stalin talked. Mao talked. They talked, and then millions died.

        Somebody's going to do the talking for the American Empire after 2016. I hope to God it's Rand Paul. I don't too much faith in Rand ( or any political man) but I do know that Rand is at least a son of Ron and not a and SOB ( son of Bush).

        • RealitySeeker says:

          Talk is cheap when it has nothing to back it up—- and there's a whole lot of that kind of talk —- and that's what I mean when I say "talk is cheap". The bark has to be followed by a bite, the smell of gunpowder and a warface. "Let me see your warface." Tortoises, poets and musers and "jokers" don't scare me—- and they don't scare anybody— including community organizers. Why? Because they don't have a warface.

          When the SHTF "jokers" are about as useless as they come.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6vHOR8lzTg

          • oscarwildeweenr says:

            Too bad there weren’t voters, in those days & places, with scary warfaces on to “back them up”, to teach tut, camby & alex et al a thing or two. Otoh, other places & times, with voter-shooters in abundance, caucus racers were wielded so as to induce the oh-so serious polities to tear each others’ guts out. After which, nobel peace & Nuremberg booby prizes were handed out…& doubtless will be again.

            “Political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind,” wrote (m)animal farm(er) geo orwell. True that.

            talk is cheap when it pyramid-spirals from pisa premises…but the babbling tower builders never put paid the lesson. swamps & marshes & bogs are easier to “work” than granite – & so preferred. That’s a variation on why the drunk succumbs to the streetlight effect in his search for “the keys”…but also, from the wielders perspective, the slick willie Sutton effect: why do you rob banks? Because that’s where the money is. & from that, sutton’s law: when diagnosing, one should first consider the obvious. The forest, general, not just individual, spc, trees. & I’d say don’t be so Nathan Bedford about it, “get ‘em skeered & keep the skeer on ‘em.” ☺

          • oscarwildeweenr says:

            I'm a joker
            I'm a smoker
            I'm a midnight toker
            I sure don't want to hurt no one ♪♫
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZo88P1Ie94

            &, somewhat like Oscar, I ween, “life is much too important a thing ever to talk seriously about it.” not to mention, “I am but too conscious of the fact that we are born in an age when only the dull are treated seriously, & I live in terror of not being misunderstood.” Lol!

            When the shtf, I’ll still be floatin’ & stingin’, laughin’ & singin’. Humorlessness is a thumb that doesn’t oppose, & if my nervous system had operated accordingly when I was younger, I probably would have had to do less fighting. So you might want to rethink your rule of thumb about us jokers.

          • RealitySeeker says:

            I have no personal problem with tortoises, poets, muses and jokers. I wish the world was filled with them—-because they are the most fun to associate and collaborate with—-but it's not. The world is filled with ignorant, amoral human trash. And when a trash collector like Tuthmosis III or Bush lll goes on the march, it takes more than superfine words to defeat an empire building hegemon. It takes both superfine words and herculean deeds. I expect only words. Talk. And that's not going to be enough. This ain't 1776 America. This is 2016 amerika.

            What I also expect is that at best "voting" for somebody like Rand Paul shall only slow the decline and fall of amerika—- if he actually wins—- but that's a long shot.

            But it's worth a shot, because mankind is famous for its ability to muddle through. Voting is muddling, and muddling is the only real chance ( short of armed vetoing) to slow down the Washington doomsday machine….. Even if Rand loses, he'll still slow down Washington by dividing the GOP ( aka War Pig Party).

            By the way, I got your email. Thanks. I'll respond in due time.

          • oscarwildeweenr says:

            The Whorled whirls, as does what it’s filled with. Some dervish. Some davos. All deathwish. But, “there are more things in heaven & earth, horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

            Biggest bite I ever took, preceded by no barking at all, was a hs football team. I was 18. & even tho they were drunk, no way to say, in retrospect, I was sober to go against them. or humorous, either. it was more than I could chew. Funny only because survived. Eighteen was the excuse. We’re not eighteen anymore. Does that put the empire team into perspective? Parliamentary procedure? Did you know old Oscar called out the marquess of queensberry? An aggressive fish, but that’s like a cichlid poking jaws in the snout.

            Slavery is here to stay. “emancipating slaves, enslaving free men” ~ Jeffrey rogers hummel suffrage is a spiff granted to the trustees in the prison farm system. When you clank that chain, the branch davos-ians ~ “the elect”, perhaps, but not elected ~ nod approvingly, & think, “Way to go, Waco inmate!”

            Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind: don’t. & keep a healthy distance from sows with litters. I had one break down a farrowing house wall once, trying to get at me. she wasn’t one of wu’s pigs, but she coulda’ been. ☺

  14. What does "low information" matter if the mass of people cannot think and cannot read and understand, or hear and understand? Since this site turned me on to Ayn Rand's ATLAS SHRUGGED, I am finding that it is ALL THERE in that "Novel of Ideas". I'm still wading through 1,000+ pages. The book applies to "everybody" but not "everybody could read and understand it. Thanks, again, Mr. Ringer!

    • Jim Hallett says:

      And you can thank the govt.-sponsored forced schooling establishment for that "dumbing down." They do not want people who can think (could lead to a revolution), but rather, they want good slaves, which is precisely Robert's point. Every time I hear people refer to Amerika as a "free country", I cringe. It is only freer than some awful despotic states like North Korea, but there are MANY places freer than the USA, and they do not have govt. snoops perusing every detail of their lives.

  15. Robby Bonter says:

    All these extreme measures to "stimulate" the economy, when it is as easy as 1.2.3. – reduce all taxation by 90 per cent, and eliminate "progressive" taxation, and you have, indeed, leveled the playing field.

  16. Mr. Meritocracy says:

    "…and the wealthy have become wealthier than ever." Your point? Please do let us know what's wrong with me taking initiative, hard work and discipline to make myself even wealthier.

    • Robert Ringer RJR says:

      My point is that it's government legislation that keeps the poor from getting up off the floor, while at the same time passing laws that help the wealthy get wealthier. I have absolutely no problem with the wealthy getting wealthier through their own hard work and ingenuity. But that's not reality when government is involved.

      • Paul Herring says:

        Good answer and well-said Robert here.

      • Mr. Meritocracy says:

        I have absolutely no problem with the wealthy getting wealthier through their own hard work and ingenuity. But that's not reality when government is involved."

        That's patently false. It also smacks of the victim-think that truly is a factor that keeps people from getting rich.

        There are countless stories of people rising out of low poverty and becoming rich, despite of the government. Here's two right off the top of my head:

        Monty Campbell – http://www.montycampbell.com
        Barry Maher – http://www.barrymaher.com

        If they can do it, why can't anyone?

        • Paul Herring says:

          There are exceptions to every rule of course. However, let's not think these persons have gotten where they have with the help of the government. More likely in spite of government. Heads of multi-nationals can and do enrich themsleves every day but with the help of goverments because of their mutual benefit-sharing.

          • Mr. Meritocracy says:

            Yes, please notice that I said "despite of the government" above. That's the point. There will always be an obstacle…and always be those that find a way around the obstacle. Focusing on the obstacle and complaining, is the domain of those that would rather just be victims.

          • Paul Herring says:

            Complaining is a lot further than making a statement. I'm not complaining here, nor do I have a victim-mentality. There are exceptional people who can make a succes of their businesses in our world. Indeed, if such ones do this by offering a product/system/service which is truly beneficial for its users, more power to them. Not every person has or maintains the same noble ideals he started off with though. Robert Ringer has made this point in his article in this forum. .

        • oscarwildeweenr says:

          meritocracy – an elite group of people whose progress is based on ability and talent rather than on class privilege or wealth.

          sounds good. Alexander graham bell. “can you hear me now?” ☺

          guerrouj is the fastest miler in the world. 3:43.13 if he can do it, why can't anyone? because the distribution of ability & talent, not to mention other bits of luck, is curved, like a bell. Like space-time, too. not a flat, egalitarian, interchangeableness.

          rent seekers use gov to subvert the tolling of the curved bell. & humpty dumpty it – words mean what humpty, who means to rule, says they mean – call it "the liberty bell" (disregard the huge crack, all good doublethinkers out there). Do you hear it? or merely “hear” it (what you’re intended to perceive)?

          So, patently true & victimization, too. like, for one example, tippecanoe & tyler, too, steal from them, to "give" to u.(s. tax conscripts) – &, i.e., steal from them, too. oh, & foment war "business" – the ultimate health of curve subverters – with the brits (1812), that time.

          liars & tithers & bears (named bart), oh my…… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9ajZhH-yds

          • Mr. Meritocracy says:

            Anyone could. Want proof? Who was the fastest miler before guerrouj? And before him? And before him? Can you hear me now? Now let's really cook your noodle. Who will become the fastest miler after guerrouj?

            Given your logic, only people that are 6 feet and taller can be successful in the NBA. Can you hear Spud Webb winning the NBA's Slam Dunk contest now?

            Yes, there will always be people born with more "gifts" than others for a certain endeavor. So what? That just means the person without the gifts just has to work harder to get his reward, just like the two gentlemen I mention above. Should they have just cried in their milk that they weren't born with the right talents or about the government? Hardly. They just got busy and made it happen for themselves, regardless of the circumstances. A much more commendable pursuit than complaining.

          • oscarwildeweenr says:

            A woodpecker, shawshanking my bedroom wall, woke me this morning. your pitch doesn’t have that feathered one’s punch. But I bet it still generates some calorie$, along with all the peckdust. Yesterday, light-stopped at a busy intersection, read a small hand-lettered sign, planted in the median, indicating a successful “real” estate investor would be amenable to taking on a trainee, or possibly even a few. Do you think enough suburus drove by, bit-swallowed the screwedbeyou signage, & con-signed themselves to that particular youtoocan’s pitched beak? Not “anyone”, or “everyone”, coulda’, but some, possibly even enough to keep the roadkiller in gasbeans & less than earnest franks probably dialed the number, dropped dime on themselves.

            That a sucker’s born every minute is only the well known bit of the calculation. Less well known, because its self-soothing not to know it, to repress it, to deny it, is that every sucker’s a fraternal twin ego – & the second born, at that. first born, named alter, is always the con man. Remember the poster hanging in (the) fox’s basement office? A bell-shaped saucer, hovering, “I want to believe.” In alien colonoscopies. Etc.

          • oscarwildeweenr says:

            curve fitting: bending over conformance to wiles & wills, peckings & orders. Disparity (adversary to reality), a kind of charity that, in some cases, begins at home & never fledges, moves out. Crack the bell & call it wise. Tourists will pay to see.

            Grading on a curve: the concavity in the roadbed, the spoon that does the closest impression of the knife, shall be the simulation of straight & level: let the puddle-slipping & all its hydroplaning makework products proliferate. Toll the belled road & blind eye the carnage, & your fate.

            “The fool generalizes the particular; the nerd particularizes the general; some do both; and the wise does neither.” ~ nassim Nicholas taleb

      • Phil says:

        Amen. And today, it seems like many of the wealthy are getting yet wealthier via their govt. contacts, cronyism, and the like. The billions of dollars spread around via the bank bailouts, for instance – my God, if it were any ordinary citizen, these guys would be on the streets, bankrupt. Regulatory capture. It just boggles the mind after a while. Up is down and down is up.

  17. Scott theczech says:

    Consider this: Were I a government operatchik, I would much prefer nearly 100% of the population enslaved at a net rate of say…20%, than I would want 10% enslaved at nearly 100%. In other words this country managed to shift from being about a 10% enslaved nation to nearly 100%. Now that's governance!

  18. lopaze says:

    Its been proven throughout history whatever the government touches it usually falls apart and turns into total chaos. The masses of people can't think for themselves because they have been conditioned to believe lies. If you keep telling the lies over and over again regardless of the messenger people start to believe what's being said is true. I don't know what the solution is however I know for sure its not the government and big businesses. And this is coming from a man that use to be in the military. I think organized crime better known as slavery is here to stay and I don't see anything changing within my lifetime…

    • Robby Bonter says:

      The greatest example of "the lie repeated becomes the truth" is the grotesque fallacy that raising taxes solves economic problems, when in fact CUTTING TAXES is the best economic stimulus, without selling out the future, in the world. Raising taxes to exorbitant levels is the death knell for whatever nation, company, or program one is addressing.

  19. Rick D'Amico says:

    While robbers generally focus on plundering the rich, governments favor plundering the poor and protecting those rich who assist them in carrying out their crimes……..That is pure genus! You never cease to amaze me!

  20. A Proud Citizen says:

    I find it impossible to take you seriously. The fifty or so compliments you have received are as stupid and nonsensical as your rhetoric. Thomas Jefferson, a much more intelligent person than you or me, said, "Government is, at best, a necessary evil." Is the government enslaving us? Yes, as much as a "free society" and "private industry" does. Not all government is the same. A democratic government is completely different from a dictatorship. You advocate a society without government, which is ludicrous. "Free people" working together for the common good IS government! Without government, there is no provision for law and justice. Do you know of a country that has no government? No, because it doesn't exist. Have you ever been to a country that has a weak government? I have. Haiti has a very weak and unstable government. There are very few traffic lights and almost no stop signs. Does that mean there are no traffic rules? When four vehicles meet at an intersection, who goes first? No, there are rules: The most aggressive driver goes first! Public utilities are unreliable and sporadic. The unemployment rate is the highest in the world. Assassination of public officials is common and frequent. Justice is carried out in the streets. People are slaves to poverty and violence. There is your society without government.

    • Phil says:

      Ordered liberty was the norm in this country 150 years ago (if not perfectly practiced). A govt. that simply enforces private property rights, provides for the common defense (on a volunteer basis) – I guess at some point it is not even worth arguing with people holding your point of view. Surely you cannot believe that what we have in place now as "government" was even remotely envisioned by the Founders? It is frankly depressing to read your post.

      Statism is a one-way road to catastrophe. Mixed economies do not work. Jeez, why even waste the breath.

    • oscarwildeweenr says:

      I take you seariously. Here’s my cautery. ☺

      TJ would say, “with ‘best’ like this, who needs ‘worst’?” &, as long as we’re picking & choosing (& grinning), that founderer also said something about the ‘tree of liberty’ (not ‘democracy’) needing to be refreshed, time to time, with blood. Invasive choking weed species, albeit protesting too much, lay waste productive lands, i.e. lands made productive by self-interested anarchistic sorts, & it is for they, the weeds, that the till tolls. Or should. In a “just” world. Let the chlorophyll run.

      Free, &, or-well, private enslavement? Guffaw!

      Democracy, the god that failed. That’s a title you should read. But comprehension, there’s the rub(ber, hydroplaning above reality’s road).

      Free people, working alone (even if in groups of whatever sizes), for their own personal & private goods, w/o compulsion from/by/for overlords, & w/o resort to the mechanismo-institutionalissimo that enables their own overlording, IS anarchy…& the common good is an emergent property of that dynamical process. The emergent property of the tumorogenisis that you prefer – “what metastasis, er, country/state, has no gov, you ask – is wholesale stagnation & death. “citizen”-conscript fodder (slaves) first, of course.

      • oscarwildeweenr says:

        Gravity is a law. Who/what provides for it? justice is an ideal. What do power & rent seeking institutions, in color of law camouflage, have to do with ideals? What have such ever had to do with ideals? It is this: i-deals-to-myself*. self-dealing, under color of law (mere legality, in fact), which is to say brandishing & wielding of monopoly force – the Sherman anti-trust act, et al, applies only to those who are not marching to the sea with Tecumseh types, because that ilk “has” ‘sovereign immunity’. The con-scripts, on the payroll, & who pay to be rolled too, are silent, at best.

        Haiti? Don’t hat-e the playa, ha(u)te(ur) the game. Yeah, ouroboros, player eggs came before gamecocks. Not to mention mcnugget apologists. No players, no game. Well, no need to fallaciously argue from “foreign” authority. Ever been to cabrini green? Smack dab in the dictatorless strong-democracy heartland of the dead horse you’re wont to beat. if you’ve not been, too late. “taxes” erected it, “taxes” demolished it, symmetric bookends for the carnage volumes in between. But there are other lie-braries. Seek one out, & go. firsthand experience of monopoly of violence blowback, as brought to you by demo, & the rest of the striped, crats, predators all, just might make an impression, if not a deformation (of skull), on you.

        • oscarwildeweenr says:

          England town turns off traffic lights https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwHfibl1AoI

          German town abolishes traffic lights & codes https://www.minds.com/blog/view/24821546967944806

          Seven cities/regions in Europe do away with traffic signs http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/contr

          Anarcho-roads in Detroit https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/anarcho-road

          “aggressive” assumptions drive regressive control freaks to flatulently sow society, in a sewing circularist fashion, belch-emitting govhouse gases, all to reap the whirlwindiness they created…& all their imaginations are capable of is calling for even more gas. Boil’s (on the flesh of humanity) law: the pressure of an “ideal* gas” increases as the volume of gas increases. Inherent con-tradiction, the finely wrought iron-y balance scale, is the lancelot that drains this whack-a-pestilence, suppurates the boils from the men, man from the manimals.

          Anarchy~synonym~creativity/generativity is not the proprietor’s perspective, or druthers – you also got that wrong – but it is mine.

  21. jane says:

    This is such a touching topic, because when you actually see it working this way, it may sound like the truth. But you need someone to make the rules, if there's no government – who's gonna make them? We just need to choose people who run this country more wisely. I've been writing a paper about it with the help of https://essayhere.com/ , I've done lots of research.

  22. James says:

    I'm listening to "The Best of Robert Ringer" that I've had for quite some time but haven't listened to in awhile. It's an absolute gold mine of advice!

    One thing I love about it is the fact that it is read by Robert himself. It is always disappointing when I buy an audio book and it is read by some hired out person with a robotic voice. :)

  23. LikesToVote says:

    I would love to know how we could get along without government. If government disappeared tomorrow, the aggressive and thuggish among us would immediately form gangs to dominate and exploit their neighbours. In turn the neighbours, no matter how peaceful, would be forced to band into equally aggressive groups to protect themselves.

    Gangs claiming turf and grabbing for resources seem to the instinctive organizing principle of males. (Women always fare badly in gangs.) For evidence, just look at the countries of the Middle East and elsewhere that finally got rid of their oppressive dictators. Did the citizens, many of them modern and highly educated, then form inclusive committees to devise the most peaceful and prosperous life they could for themselves?

    No, they formed into heavily armed rival militias blasting the guts out of each other for the right to rule, creating a massive refugee problem as the weaker folk try to flee for their lives. Countries in which the government vanishes revert to armed warlords, each jealously guarding their turf and making their own rules. That's where kings and aristocrats came from. They were war lords who won.

    Governments and the military are both large gangs, but with rules that have evolved over centuries to keep them in check. In countries where the rules are not strong enough, the military realizes it has the biggest guns and promptly establishes a military dictatorship. Or the government becomes a corrupt kleptocracy sucking up any rights and substance the citizens try to accumulate for themselves.

    A functioning democratic government, i.e. one where the people ruled actually have some input, is a precious thing rarely achieved in human history. If the government is not doing the job if was created for, if it has become a tool of corporations, if it is taking away cherished rights, if it is letting education and vital infrastructure crumble, if it is robbing the poor to pay the rich, then that is failure of oversight by the citizens who are supposed to watching the store. It is up to those citizens to do the tail-twisting necessary to get the government back to honest practice.

    Sure, democratic government can be messy, inefficient and lumbering. But, as Churchill once said, consider the alternative. For those who can't imagine social breakdown, I can list a host of countries who couldn't imagine such a thing either before the economy was kicked to pieces, the coup was pulled or crazy-eyed militias started executing rivals in the town square. With the amount of weaponry floating around the country at the moment, I would consider the alternative very carefully.

  24. GilG2u says:

    Au contraire. Slavery existed because people wanted work to be done and forced others to do it. In other words, people didn't enslaved others for laughs but to do the lackey work. In fact it's been supposed slavery becomes more common when there's a labour shortage and dissipates in a worker surplus.

  25. inalienablewrights says:

    Good to run across your work again Mr Ringer. It has been a long time.

    You remind me of Larkin Rose in this article which IMHO is a good thing :-)

    God Speed

  26. Rick Dunaway says:

    Sir, two small quibbles. One, you said, “True, some people in government, pressured by abolitionists, freed American blacks from slavery…”, not really true, through the 14th amendment they enslaved us all. As the rest of your piece points out.
    Second, “…the disappearance of government would lead to chaos and anarchy,…”, true it would lead to anarchy, which is the absence of a ruler. There is no substantial reason to believe it would lead to chaos. The two words are not synonymous. Although those that presume to rule us would like us to believe they are.

  27. Will says:

    Good article rjrGave all the the do nothing's a chance to vent

Leave a Reply