NEW BLOG ADDRESS

Please see my new blog at http://www.coreyjsax.com

Thanks,

Corey

Putting the "Mock" in Democracy

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

-9th Amendment to the United States Constitution

"Did you want to know who is John Galt? Iam the first man of ability who refused to regard it as guilt. I am the first man who would not do pennance for my virtues or let them be used as the tools of my destruction. I am the first man who would not suffer the martyrdom at the hands of those who wished me to perish for the privilege of keeping them alive. I am the first man who told them that I did not need them, and until they learned to deal with me as traders, giving value for value, they would have to exist without me, as i would exist without them; then i would let them learn whose is the need and whose is the ability--and if human survival is the standard, whose
terms would set the way to survive."

- John Galt
Atlas Shrugged - Ayn Rand

Where we have once been a nation of persevering individualists, we have become a country of adult infants. Where we were once the economic engine that powered the world, we are now sinking the world into ruin. Where we once held intelligence, ability and reason as ideals towards which to strive, we now praise and honor unintelligence, inability and primal emotional responses. The status of our fallen republic and the celebration of our worst traits, was evident at the Minnesota State Budget town hall meeting in Minneapolis last tuesday.

While, I'm not a fan of Tim Pawlenty, I do support his budget cut proposal. We are facing an economic collapse that is as bad or worse than the Great Depression. Pawlenty's call for fiscal responsibility on behalf of Minnesota's legislature is a demonstration of real leadership and for that he should be commended.

I also give Pawlenty credit for standing for what is right, despite the fact that many in this state (especially in the city) are clamoring for more and more handouts that our government can't afford. It's never easy being the guy who has to shut down the party, and kick drunk folks home. Hopefully after all is said and done Minnesota with thank the governor for taking a stand and speaking frankly about our economic problems. We certainly cannot afford to keep the government credit card going.

At our town hall meeting, I spoke to this point as a businessman and a citizen. I work for a company (and have contributed to it's success over the past 10 years) that has played by the rules, operated ethically and has been financially responsible. We employ hundreds of people and pay a very significant chunk of taxes. I believe that the only way that Minnesota can get out from under this financial collapse is to allow businesses to succeed and to grow. Businesses that grow, hire employees and attract investors like flowers attract birds and bees. It is capital that produces wealth and prosperity, not consumption and deficit spending. Sadly, I was one of 3 out of 500 who argued this point. The other 497 who spoke or sat in the audience lined up at the trough to petition the government not for redress of their grievances, but for the fruits of someone else's labors, as if they were a legless man sitting on a street corner with a dixie cup hungry for change. Of those 497, many were those who headed or were employed by various state government funded support services; such as dental care for those who can't afford it -or choose not to get insurance, those who work for art and "culture" programs, those who operate Park and Recreation facilities and many others that I can't even begin to remember. It was not these particular pleadings that angered me, but it was when CEOs of the large hospitals: North Memorial, HCMC, and Fairview Medical Center, got down on their hands and knees and asked their legislatures to tax smaller businesses, so that they can get their "bailouts". Such moves are anti-American at best, and morally reprehensible at worst.

I didn't cause this economic collapse, nor did my employer. The Government and it's irresponsible fiscal policies caused this pain and suffering, and they intend to deepen the people's wounds by punishing responsible producers and saddling them with unsustainable tax increases. This will not grow jobs, it will not feed the hungry and it will not help us out of the current economic climate. Instead such moves will prolong the poeple's misery and make the situation worse.

Furthermore I just learned that Mayor RT Rybak, whose is running a reelection campaign for mayor, that he doesn't even plan on completing, has proposed to shut down the Mpls Department of Civil Rights Investigative Unit. One of the core responsibilities of government is to protect the Civil Rights of her Citizens. It is sickening that RT proposes that we spend $5.2 Million on a "green" roof for the target center, and $9.2 Million for a ONE MILE stretch of bike path, while eliminating organs of government dedicated to maximizing freedom and individual liberty. It also appears that RT Rybak is a little thin skinned when it comes to criticism. Rybak actually blocked me from his facebook page for openly criticizing him for bashing Governor Tim Pawlenty and pointing out problems with his budget. I think it show the true character of the mayor, to reject opposing positions from his constituents.

It time for us to stop being Good Democrats. It is time for us to stop being Good Republicans. It is time for us to be good Americans.

If we are to reclaim our country, we must first reclaim our neighborhoods and our cities. It is time to stand up for that which is right. It is time to work together to lift those up who need our help, instead of punishing those of ability and those who work hard to create opportunities for our communities. Elected officials at the state and city level have opted to plunder and loot one group of people to give favors to those who've helped elected them. This is not only UNAMERICAN, but it is also morally wrong.

Let us see past the partisan lies and work together to rebuild our country. Let us allow the people to have their Life, Liberty, Freedom and Happiness. Let us allow the people to keep their wealth, and to prosper, rather than allowing government to raid whatever remains of our grandchildren's piggy banks.

The R3VOLUTIONARY next door

"An army of principles can penetrate where an army of soldiers cannot."

-Thomas Paine



The Revolution will not be televised. The Revolution will not be immortalized through the silk screened posters disseminated by aging hipsters or marketed on iconic no shrink cotton t-shirts sold at the mall. Our revolution will lead to a "political correction" that will come as the result of practical and hard working American's losing their faith in their elected officials. These Americans don't trust our government, yet still have faith in their countrymen and the idea of a free American Republic. These Americans will reignite the idea that once lit the world.

Like the American Revolution, ours will have no armed military, there will be no olive green fatigues, no rebels, no repudiation of debt and no reign of terror. Instead there will be a resurgence and reclamation of our nation's Communities and the inevitable Civic Activism that is required to maintain a free republic. This new Civic Participation will be much more localized and downscaled than we are presently used to. It will also require that people deal with each other outside of the bounds of doctrine or ideology. There will be no "Republicans and Democrats" in this new world. There will only be individuals and their interests. We will not be able to discredit those with whom we disagree with simply because of their political affiliation. Nor will we use some preconceived rubric based on our imagined political identity. Instead the preservation of our lives, liberties and our property will be the new means of determining whether or not we enact a policy or not. Instead of passing the buck to city council, the state legislature or the federal government, the buck will stop with each of us. No longer will we be able to ask the state to infringe upon the rights of our neighbors, just because they have something that we may want or because we may not like they way in which they conduct their life. Such Civic Activism will emerge spontaneously. We will not need or desire to resort to a "forced" program of service, like what is advocated by the current administration. As has happened throughout history, when free to act, the people will come together of their own accord. 

This Revolution is not a planned event or a human instigated affair. There are no bomb wielding anarchists wearing black coats scheming over plans to overthrow the state. This coming "political correction" is just as inevitable as or current economic correction. This is natural course of affairs cannot be stopped, and as the state fights to maintain it's centralized control of power, the political correction will only become more evident to the rest of the population. Most likely this dynamic political shift will come on the heels of the total collapse of the American economy. As the Federal Government fails to bail out the states, the states will stop funding the counties and municipalities. There will be slashing of budgets, loss of local public services such as police and fire, and an astronomical increase in taxes. When it becomes apparent that these services have be greatly reduced or altogether eliminated, and that crime is on the rise, neighborhood groups and "block clubs" will self organize in defense of their communities. There will be plenty of unemployed former policemen and security guards to do the job. As the new private police service gains credibility and consistency in the eyes of their clients, the state funded security monopoly will wane. This will lead to further loss of faith in the state and the population will ask themselves why they continue to pay taxes or follow pointless laws and regulations, thus further undermining the state. 

 As the economic upheaval slowly metamorphosizes into a political transformation, old party identities and the current parties as they exist today will no longer be relevant. Most if not all political energies will be focused at the local and neighborhood level. Those who presently consider themselves on the left and the right, will need each other to build sustainable and lasting local communities. The "green" liberal who hates guns will need to learn how to defend his family from criminals and learn about gun safety. The gun toting conservative will need to learn from his liberal neighbor how to raise chickens in an urban area or how to bring city grown vegetables to the local farmers market for trade. Home schooling advocates and leftist community involvement advocates will need to work together to provide goods and services that the government and big business used to provide. 

This puts Libertarians in the position to be ambassadors between both sides in the transition period. Libertarians more than anybody else can identify with elements of both sides and bring them together in a way that will be needed to build a stable and harmonious local community. Whether we like it or not, this places us into an informal leadership role. This is beginning to become evident with people like Ron Paul and Peter Schiff. Where once these figures we're laughed off TV, they are now sought out for their advice. This phenomenon will occur at the local level, and it is important that we prepare. It is imperative that we do the work now to start preparing our local neighborhoods and communities. Going to or organizing "block clubs" or neighborhood organizations is a good start. Forming networks and even an online means of social networking could become the foundation for what in the future will become a neighborhood trade or barter market. Above all we must keep our heads. There are still many people who have no idea what is coming and who are not prepared. There will be nothing more debilitating than trying to adjust mentally during the actual chaos. Prepare now, get yourself mentally able to deal with it before it happens. When it does you will be a voice of reason and a voice of comfort to your neighbors and friends. 

I am not condoning the physical overthrow of the government, nor am I arguing for a violent attack on the powers at be. I am proposing the our current government will begin to collapse as a result of our current unsustainable economic practices and as a result of misguided attempts to fix the problem. While this will be a painful period for many people, it also provides exciting opportunities for liberty and reorganizing our society so that we might achieve unprecedented future prosperity. Even if these things do not occur, it is still a worthwhile effort to pursue building stronger and more independent communities and reorientation of political energies toward the local level. Thomas Jefferson referred to this as the "Ward Republic". If I am wrong and we spend our energy on pursuing community reorganization, then we gain better and more wholesome lives. If I am right, it may be the difference between Freedom and Slavery. 

Donate for my Minneapolis City Council Race Here.

The Government Delusion

"If only everybody would agree to be a dove, every single individual would benefit. By simple group selection, any group in which all individuals mutually agree to be doves would be far more successful than a rival group sitting at the ESS (Evolutionary Stable Strategy) ratio.... Group selection theory would therefore predict a tendency to evolve towards an all-dove conspiracy... But the trouble with conspiracies, even those that are to everybody's advantage in the long run, is that they are open to abuse. It is true that everybody does better in an all-dove group than he would in an ESS group. But unfortunately, in conspiracies of doves, a single hawk does so extremely well that nothing could stop the evolution of hawks. The conspiracy is therefore bound to be broken by treachery from within. An ESS is stable, not because it is particularly good for the individuals participating in it, but simply because it is immune to treachery from within."

-Richard Dawkins

"Governments and the military purport to protect the public from enemies, and if there were no enemies they would have to invent some, for the simple purpose of rationalizing their existence ...."

- Laurance Labadie

I'm not an economist. Nor am I a politician, a sociologist or any other kind of "social scientist" that makes use of fancy graphs and theories obtained from an ominous and distant ivory tower. I consider myself a scientific realist and a skeptic. As a result, reality is the crucible by which I obtain my truths and test my ideas of what and how things should be. Regardless of how valid I think that my assumptions might be, based on my vigorous pursuit of knowledge via reason, I too will err. The human mind seems ill-suited to naturally grasping exponential functions, and as a result is unable to understand much of how the world works. Of course we can understand, analyze and derive conclusions and sometimes test these assumptions; however, we get into real trouble when we try to create models for dynamic systems as we are rooted in time and place. In short, something in our evolution requires the human species to welcome conformity and the warm hovel of the known. We are wired to fear the unknown, new ideas and change. Of course many of us don't like accepting our inherent genetic disposition and we attempt to swim against the grain, and through blood and guts we push the human race forward. But alas, this too is wiring and part of our failure to understand the dynamic system which we are all a part. 

The Model Statue -- Portrait of Authority

We are born Tabula Rasa and without purpose, meaning or motivation. Upon our arrival on planet Earth, we are looking for someone to tell us who and what we should be and what the point of all of this really is. As a person grows and develops their personal experiences and free will in combination with social, political, religious, educational and economic forces create a model statue and defines a ideal to which he strives. This co-opted identity is a kind of life long beacon that defines the purpose or lack thereof in our individual lives. It is what motivates, inspires and compels us to fight for survival, against the inevitable fact that we will one day perish. As each of us will form our own model statues in our own likenesses we all have them, for they are our will to live. Furthermore, whether our statue is spiritual, political, artistic, emotional or whatever else, there is always competition among all of the statues. 

As economies of scale dictate, those statues or leaders with the most followers will be more successful than those with less. In order to maximize their success, leaders will seek to limit competition from opposing interests. But this too is part of the system. If we consider Dawkin's quote in regards to doves and hawks, we find that the most sustainable strategy for the ecosystem ––or in our example, society––is for there to be many hawks and many doves. While this seems counterintuitive as one might argue that a society of doves might be more peaceful, the fact remains that a society of doves is also more easily conquered as soon as a hawk decides to pop up. Dynamic systems abhor imbalance and naturally correct themselves, unless of course they are prevented from doing so by interventionists intent on cheating nature. In the dove/hawk example hawks must compete for doves. If the doves are being threatened they have a far greater chance of survival by dividing and conquering those hawks that seek to devour them. If we extrapolate this to society we find that most of what the government does is unnatural and imbalanced. 

Dynamic Equilibrium -- The Sustainable Society 

We are so incredibly conditioned and so socially conformed to the vision of the few hawks that seek to control our society, that when the nature of our controlled system is merely questioned, we close our minds and dismiss contrary perspective as a matter of habit. Our current society is run by a small group of powerful interests who possess a disproportionate amount of influence with those who make, execute and interpret the law. Few can deny that the individual alone has little affect on government on the national, state and even municipal level. It appears that the number of doves is so large and the number of hawks is so few that we've become powerless to truly change the course of our society. 

From the economic perspective our Hawk/Dove dichotomy is especially relevant. Critics of the sustainable economics of the free market argue that the laissez-faire approach creates an unfair playing field and will result in the supposedly inevitable control of the economy at the hands of a few powerful interests or hawks. Scientifically speaking this is exactly the opposite of what would happen. The economy like the ecosystem, or like any other dynamic system operates under the same set of natural laws and abhors imbalance. People however, do seek imbalance as we have difficulty understanding the non-linear means in which dynamic systems function. We perceive their mechanisms as chaotic, when really they are ordered and our own attempts to cheat nature are truly chaotic. The economy brings especially brings this to light. 

Once upon a time, economies were made up of those who sought to trade with each other. At this time there were two ways of getting what you needed; brute force, or persuading your neighbor to trade with you. Contrary to popular opinion, brute force is not a sustainable option in terms of acquiring the goods you need to survive. In a society with many hawks and many doves, brute force doesn't work, because brute force requires that someone give up what is rightfully theirs to another who has used force against them. In a situation with many hawks and many doves, or a market free to compete, brute force is frowned upon and punished by market. Doves who seek to protect themselves against hawks who use force will hire other hawks to deal with the bad hawks. As there is greater economic incentive to trade, there will always be more who hire hawks than those who seek to do harm. Additionally those who resort to brute force will not be able to hire others to create crime. This is similar to insuring yourself against damages. Insurance companies want customers who are risk adverse. Just as you can't buy insurance to burn your home down, or if you did it would far more expensive than the cost of your home, you wouldn't be able to get insured against hawks if you yourself were a hawk. Thus, those who commit crimes have no "crime insurance" and are subject to the others hawks who seek to steal from him. This is how crime would be handled in a monopoly free law enforcement system. 

In our current system, the State is the sole entity legally able to initiate the use of force. Thus, the state has a conflict of interest in resolving conflict between citizens. If Mr. Jones steals $500,000 from Mr. Brown and Mr. Jones knows the Judge or gives him money for reelection, then there would be a conflict of interest. Can we trust the judge to be fair or just? Has our current government been fair or just? History shows us that without competing hawks, or government with become exponentially corrupt until nature kicks in and forces a political correction or what some would call a change of power, or revolution. 

A sustainable system is one marked by longevity, local control and stability. When a small few are able to manipulate or exercise excessive influence within a system's structure, that system becomes unstable, unsustainable and subject to an increase in entropy and eventual collapse. It is irrelevant whether this system is an ecosystem, economic system, weather system or a political system. 

Historical precedent suggests that the most powerful States have the most violent collapses.

Empire vs. Republic -- Unsustainable vs. Sustainable

"The founding Fathers hated two things, they hated Democracy and they hated Monarchy and they saw to that we would have neither."  --Gore Vidal 

The public school system fails to educate students on one of most fundamentally important concepts in a free society; the difference between a Democracy and a Free Republic. Most of the founders were crystal clear in their rejection of democracy as a valid form of government that would stay free and embrace individual liberty. The founders, as students of history, understood that any majority rule system that failed to make the protection of INDIVIDUAL Liberties it's highest calling and only reason for existence, would devolve into tyranny. The founders understood that a majority rule system would limit the amount of hawks, decrease competition of interests and increase conformity. Furthermore, such a system would enable large corporate and banking interests to develop via regulation and legislation. The founders also understood that such a system could be milked if these large interests ever got their hands on the issuance of our then fledgling nations currency. The founders took every step possible to create a constitutional republic with an almost non-existent government. The constitution calls for Gold and Silver as our currency to be issued by Congress, not a central bank, such as the Federal Reserve Bank. They also knew that Gold and Silver backed money would force the government to balance it's budget and not borrow up to it's eyeballs. 

Every step that has been taken at our nations founding was intended to keep our nation a Republic, as limited and responsible government are the anti-thesis of Empire. Empires require exponential growth of government and thus need to feed off of an ever increasing amount of it's subjects property. This is done first through taxation and then through inflation. When our money was backed by gold and silver, the people owned the wealth and it was distributed fairly evenly across the population. Unfortunately the Myth that an ever growing Big Government enriches us all has caught on faster than the Facts that an ever growing government is a metastasizing cancer that threatens to choke off every free cell left in the body.

The simple fact remains: In an Empire, big government and the powerful elite of society work together for their own mutual interests, to wipe out their competition. This is manifest in war on behalf of the state and regulation and legislation on behalf of big business. Big business loves regulation, especially when the create the regulations to wipe out their smaller competitors. Much like the State and it's monopoly on the initiation on force, big business seeks their own monopolies or cartels. This IS NOT Free Market capitalism. By this regard, the United States hasn't been Free or Capitalist since before the New Deal. The Unites State has a Corporatist system much like Italy under Mussolini.

Many of those on the left don't understand that they're leaders are not creating a more fair and just world, or one that has greater opportunity for all. Instead the left in collaboration with the NeoCon Republicans seek to enrich and benefit their enormous corporate interests. Obama is already showing his Coporatist tendencies. 

The problem isn't human nature or greed as many would argue. The problem is that there is only one hawk and hundreds of millions of doves. The hawk however has hand selected the doves he wants to roll with, and has left the others to their own devices.

If we drastically downsized our government and decentralized the banking system, there would be many, many, hawks to contend with and the hawks would regulate each other. If we are to prevent the collapse of the United States of America, and we are to protect whatever is left of our LIFE, LIBERTY and PROPERTY, then it will up to us to tear down the Empire in Washington DC. It will be in our hands alone to restore The Republic of The United States of America. 

The Struggle Within -- Relearning Community

“Political ideology can corrupt the mind, and science.”
-Edward O. Wilson 

"Only entropy comes easy."
-Anton Chekhov

"Empires die, but Euclid's theorems keep their youth forever."
- Vito Volterra

In the field of Biology the concept of community describes a framework that binds all interactions between all species within a geographic location, all of whom which exist in a life and death struggle for their survival. For an organism to thrive, it must follow one or more of the following four strategies -– competition, predation, parasitism, and mutualism. When organisms singularly thrive, then the species will thrive. If the individual organisms cannot thrive and survive, then the species will fail and become extinct. Organisms and consequently entire species will adopt and execute the previously listed survival strategies and an equilibrium will be attained within the community if all organisms and all species are free to act, and a fixed set of rules govern all. The rules are important, and they maintain the integrity of the community. The Law of Gravity does not treat one species differently than another. There are naturaul rules that governs all within the community; however, individual species and organisms will react and adapt differently to these rules. Birds will evolve wings to navigate the gravity and beavers will use Gravity's power to move water to build a dam. How these individual organisms and species react to natural law in their varying different ways in combination with competition, predation, parasitism and mutualism creates and maintains the complexity of interactions between all organisms and maintains the equilibrium between energy and entropy within the system. This is known as emergence, grass roots or an organic system.

Human societies (and economies) operate by the same principles as natural systems. Like natural systems, interference by unnatural agents can throw off equilibrium and create huge unintended consequences. Consider the havoc that an invasive alien species can wreak on a small ecosystem. Just as introducing the foreign zebra mussel has damaged the equilibrium of Lake Superior and the St. Louis river, government intervention into society and the economy can create havoc with the existing social and economic balance and thus throw off equilibrium. A system that is balanced maintains a minimal cycle of change, whereas an unbalanced system has excessive, even bipolar fluctuations. Consider healthy eating habits, healthy eating habits consist of 3 modest meals per day. If one doesn't gorge himself and doesn't starve himself, he'll never get too hungry or too full. A non balanced binge and purge diet results in vomiting and starvation. What the Federal Reserve and the Federal Government are doing with their policies is the economic equivilent to bingeing and purging. The government has committed to ensuring that the boom time never ends, thus warping the business cycle and ensuring that after we vomit, we shall all starve.

Elements within the left and right sides of the so called "political spectrum" understand and embrace different parts of this concept. The left does a better job at fighting for and preserving Civil Rights (with the exception of 2nd amendment rights) than the right does. On the converse, the right does a better job of fighting and preserving Property Rights than the left does. The moderates are the worst, they have given up on both Civil Rights and Property Rights and campaign for an ever increasing malignant Statism in the form of a "Benevolent Leviathan"that seeks to dominate, control and direct every single aspect of human life. The Liberal Left and Libertarian Right both oppose the Statist middle, and yet are distracted by the false dichotomy of Left vs. Right. It is now clear that George W. Bush wasn't a conservative and didn't not dedicate himself to protecting property rights, the free market or limiting the size of the Federal Government. While it has become clear to most conservative Republicans, that they've been sold out, it is not yet clear to Liberal Democrats that that President Obama is not dedicated to preserving Civil Rights or any other pet project of the left. Obama has dedicated to continue Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney's immoral war of aggression against Iraq and has further promised to take on Pakistan (a nuclear power). Obama has also pledged to increase deficit spending and to cut taxes. These policies mirror the policies of the last 8 years. 

This post isn't about Obama or Bush, but about the need for the Left and the Right to work together for their common goals. The Liberal Left and the Limited Government Right want to make this country a freer and better place. Both sides want to increase individual liberty and to decrease tyranny on behalf of the State. The false dichotomy of the Left vs. Right has confused both the left and the right into thinking they are working for opposite ends. This could not be further from the truth. The Left blames the Right and the Right blames the left. Those who can't see the Emperors new clothes, blame the State. 

While it is becoming clear to most people that what the government is doing to the economy is not working, and that things seem to be getting worse, it is not so clear to the public how we got into this mess. Think back to when I wrote about community in the biological sense. Competition, predation, parasitism and mutualism are the strategies for survival. The state as a super citizen with a monopoly on the initiation of violence, has a clear advantage and upsets the balance against the individual citizen. 

Competition

In nature organisms compete for resources and the chance to reproduce and pass on DNA. In a human society or a human economy competition is a method of allocating resources. If I sell sell widget X and my neighbor sells sprocket Y, we are competing for the same customers. Our competition with each other will determine how we move forward. Perhaps one of us alters our product to make up for the others shortcomings. Or maybe one of us will go out of business and start a different business. Another option is that there is enough customers for both of us ad we coexist within the same niche. When the State becomes involved it throws the entire equallibrium out the window. Let us say that I manage to donate a large sum of money to my elected representative in our local government. Let us say that I have 75% market share and my competitor has 25% because he charges more money but makes a superior product. I have very costs because I use sweat shops and have a lower quality production line. My competitor makes his goods by hand. I call up my representative and tell him that we need to sell more sprockets because they improve the standard of living. To do this we need regulation that sets a maximum price for the sprockets sold. I suggest $2 below what I currently sell my sprockets for, but $25 below what my competitor sells them for. This law passes and now my competitor has to adopt a sweat shop assembly line like I do, and he has to decrease the quality of the materials he uses in his sprockets. He begins to lose customers because his customers uses to buy his goods BECAUSE they were higher quality. His customers now become my customers because I build a better cheaper sprocket then my competitor does. 

The State through regulation has thrown off the balance and given my company an unfair advantage while stripping the consumers of choices in the marketplace. This is similar to introducing an alien predator into an ecosystem to bring down the jack rabbit population. Not only does the introduction of the alien species kill off more jack rabbits than intended, but now the ecosystem is overfilled with dandelions that the jack rabbits used to eat. The dandelions choke off the strawberries that the monkeys used to eat etc etc. In our example, not only are the people worse off, but anyone who worked for sprocket company X, or who sold them sprocket parts. These are known as unintended consequences because they were the result of the imperfect knowledge of government planners. 

Predation

In nature some species and organisms prey upon others. Predators do not produce anything for the community, they merely consume and move on. In an economy, a predator takes the form of the criminal, especially the murderer, rapist or thief. In nature predators move from area to area and consume and in some sense can help provide balance by devouring an overgrown population. In the economic sense predators steal from the wealthy in a misguided attempt to balance wealth. While the individual criminal is a problem, state sponsored predation is a far larger problem. This takes the form of War, Police Violence and theft through taxation and other redistribution programs. The State in this regard doesn't produce, it merely destroys. 

Mutualism 

Mutualism is the foundation of community and the most successful biological strategy. It is also the most successful social and economic strategy and one that is fundamentally opposed to Statism. The humming bird the pollinates the flower is an example of this kind of natural free market cooperation. The humming bird and the flower are both better off by working together or else they wouldn't do it. They also work together out of free will and self interest, not duty or decree. In a human economy mutualism is private charity, the church or even local trade and interaction. Just like the Government can not force the hummingbird and the flower to work together if it isn't in their best interest, the State cannot create mutualism in the market place. 

 The natural world is many things including harsh and dangerous as well as nurturing and kind. Despite the wishes of individual members of any given species, survival depends on the success of the entire system. This is reality, natural law, biological necessity or whatever else you choose to name it. The success of the system requires a state of constant equilibrium. In this regard Government coercion always creates more problems than it solves.

Vote of No Confidence for the MN GOP LEADERSHIP

"Do not ever say that the desire to "do good" by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives."
~Ayn Rand

Just when I thought that the Minnesota Republican Party couldn't possibly disgrace itself any more than it did during this year's election cycle, circumstance has a peculiar way of surprising even the most cynical of people. With Ron Carey being the establishment's paper target, each of the other establishment contenders are wetting themselves to talk "change" while resorting to the same old failed tactics and bankruptcy of both character and integrity. Meanwhile the RNC is gearing up for it's next chance to pull the state party's strings like Mister Geppetto; however it's my job to make sure that this Pinocchio learns that he really is a "real live human boy" and not some woodcarver's plaything. And just like that little puppet who wanted to be a boy, we'll have to prove to each other that we're brave, truthful and unselfish and maybe we can become a real state party. Like Pinicchio, we'll have to learn to choose between right and wrong and of course we'll need to listen to our conscience, rather than the babbling of the RNC and whoever it is that controls them.

Currently, Tony Sutton, Dorothy Fleming,  Joe Repya and Brandon Sawalich. I can't really speak about Brandon Sawalich, as I don't him and haven't met him in person. He is of course part of the establishment, so I immediately do not trust him. My interactions with the others named above have led me to believe that they are not fit enough to work in a local DMV office, let alone run the Minnesota state party. They do all of course share that same desire to "command and control" much like the clerks at the DMV, so there may be a role for them there. Where to begin, where to begin. 

Tony Sutton seems like a nice enough guy. He's in the Restaurant business, much like myself. He talks a good conservative game. I recently sat down with him and some others to have lunch at Town Hall Brewery in Minneapolis. He mentioned his intention to run for State Party Chair. I asked him if he realized how the State Party's actions have fractured the party and hurt not only John McCain's chances, but the chances of all of our candidates running for office. He acknowledged this and went on to say that the RNC gave the Minnesota State party an undisclosed sum of money for our races in return for being the de-facto leadership of the party. Essentially Sutton told me that he and Ron Carey sold the State Party to the RNC and John McCain's campaign. If this happened 200 years ago, I'd be able to smell the tar AND the feathers. In light of this it is now clear why the Ron Paul delegates like myself were fought by sold-out-to-the-Devil RINOs. Folks like Tony Sutton and Ron Carey have probably spent hours justifying why they did what they did. We've all heard the end justifies the means argument. Despite how "good intentioned" Sutton and Carey think they were, the fact remains that they reneged on their duties and their integrity and handed over the party machinery of power to John McCain's campaign, rather than follow due process and the will of the People. 

Dorothy Fleming and Brandon Sawalich claim to have supported Ron Paul delegates and to have been sympathetic to our causes. This is clearly a lie. According to www.opensecrets.com Sawalich paid John McCain's campaign the maximum donation of $2300 and he also gave another $3000 to the MN Conservative Delegate team. For those who don't know, the MN Conservative Delegate team was run by the RNC and had picked their slate of candidates to run for RNC delegates slots prior to being interviewed by the nominating committee. At the Minnesota State convention the MN Conservative Delegate team and those who ran the State Convention hired John McCain staffers to run interception against Ron Paul delegates who wished to make motions on the convention floor. Both of these infractions are in violation of the State Convention rules. 

As a Ron Paul Republican and a Pro-Freedom, Limited Government Conservative, I have no dog in the fight for State Party chair. There is clearly no option for those who hate RINOs. As such I give my vote of NO CONFIDENCE and will focus my time on more important ventures, including rebuilding the BPOUs and Precints abandoned by our current leadership.

The only way any of these candidates will have my support is under the following conditions:

1. Publicly apologize for the dirty tricks and unfair practices in violation of State Convention rules. 

2. Admit that Ron Paul, his delegates and his supporters were right about the Federal Reserve and the Dollar Crisis. 

3. Admit that the War was a mistake and that we should bring our troops home as soon as possible.

4. Refuse any salary or payment for your service as State Party Chair or any other elected leadership position. 

If these conditions, I might have enough confidence to believe that the candidates running for State Party chair have learned from their mistakes and are authentically seeking to improve the Republican Party, rather than attempting a sloppy grab for power.