Today in 1828, Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy, or Leo Tolstoy, as most have come to know the Russian writer, was born in Yasnaya Polyana, a few hundred miles south of Moscow.
“The Kingdom of God is Within You”
While Tolstoy is best know for works such as War and Peace and Anna Karenina, it is important to note that Tolstoy’s later works on Christian Anarchist thought and non-violence (specifically, what is refered to as “peaceful non-resistance”) had a profound impact on Martin Luther King, Jr. and had a direct impact on Mahatma Ghandi.
“L.N.Tolstoy Prokudin-Gorsky” by Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky – Журнал “Записки Русского технического общества”, №8, 1908. Стр. 369. URL: http://prokudin-gorsky.org/arcs.php?lang=ru&photos_id=818&type=1. Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons – http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:L.N.Tolstoy_Prokudin-Gorsky.jpg#mediaviewer/File:L.N.Tolstoy_Prokudin-Gorsky.jpg
For anyone who is interested in truly achieving peace, his work The Kingdom of God is Within You is a must read.
Tolstoy’s influences included Victor Hugo, George Fox, William Penn.
In honor of Leo Tolstoy, we present links to our own works which have been inspired by Leo Tolstoy, whom Ghandi referred to as:
The greatest apostle of non-violence that the present age has produced
Join us in honoring Tolstoy and all of the peacemakers on this earth, for now, more than ever, our voices are needed! Go forth, and love your neighbor as you love yourself
Our long awaited Treatise on Economy and Philosophy, Why What We Use as Money Matters, is now available in various digital formats at Smashwords.com and on Kindle at Amazon.com. With any luck, we will have a print version available before we leave for the Southern Hemisphere.
What kind of book is this? It is largely up to the reader to decide. For us, it is the fruit of two years of wrestling with some of life’s deeper questions with regards to Economics, Politics, and Philosophy. It has answered many of them and, in turn, has raised other issues, for in our exploration, as you will see, the current state of affairs is laid bare for all to examine, and our recommended courses of action may be unpalatable for many.
Nevertheless, there it is, altogether thick and challenging, yet refreshingly simple, the key to reversing the effects of climate change.
In a sense, it culminates the first phase of what we set out to do here at The Mint. There will be more to come, but for the time being, we leave you to ponder the following brief excerpt:
“The natural world strives daily to achieve a perfect state of balance. Events and occurrences that, taken by themselves, appear chaotic and devoid of meaning are together part of a constant rebalancing of the earth’s delicate state. Each event is a splash of color across an oppressive gray sky that hints at a rainbow that will soon appear. “
Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani girl who survived a vicious attack by Taliban gunmen as she and her friends attempted to exercise their right to go to school, was given the opportunity of a lifetime yesterday as she addressed a youth delegation at the United Nations’ general assembly room on her 16th birthday. Her address to the UN, which can be seen below in its entirety, will go down as one of the greatest in recent memory.
Many in the West will no doubt be stricken by the fact that there are places in the world where girls are not allowed to attend school even when the facilities exist. We were stricken for a different reason: Malala is not only one who has stood up for educational rights, she is a 16 year old peacemaker.
In the speech she cites Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and others as her inspiration to pursue peaceful methods of protest. In doing so, she has become a living example of two truths:
That violence is a symptom of cowardice, and that the peacemakers shall be called the children of God.
The following is an excerpt from our upcoming ebook release, “What is Truth? On the Nature of Empire” which is volume IV in our series “Why what we use as Money Matters.”
As we researched the book, we were joined unexpectedly by James Tissot by way of his astonishing artwork. His depiction of Joseph and His Brothers approaching Pharaoh adorns the cover, and his great works, such as this one entitled: “Ce que voyait Notre-Seigneur sur la Croix” or “What Our Lord Saw from the Cross” in English have moved and inspired us as we have toiled on this volume. We pray that they will move and inspire you as well.
“Ce que voyait Notre-Seigneur sur la Croix” (What Our Lord Saw from the Cross) – by James Tissot
What is Truth? On the Nature of Empire
As men and women go about their daily occupations, it is relatively common to stop and form an opinion on the benefits or detriments to society of a particular action taken by the government. While it is easy to form an opinion and then take sides of an issue, perhaps the most important question that can be asked is not, “What should the government do?” but rather, “Why is the government doing anything?”
The reason that the second question is rarely, if ever asked is that the concept of Empire, or a large scale government which is seen as the ultimately authority, has been part of the human experience for so long that it’s existence or utility are rarely, if ever, questioned. We pray that this volume has caused you to give it some thought.
The ignoble goal of all Imperial activities has been to establish and maintain primacy in the affairs of men and women throughout the entire known world. This demand for primacy and allegiance takes the form of the Empire claiming a monopoly on the use of force, which is invariably followed by demands for tribute. Ultimately, the head of Empire will make an appeal to divine right and declare him or herself a deity. As the Empire begins to fade out of existence, it tends to become more violent and intolerant, not conscious of the fact that its subjects are devoting a great deal of time and energy to escaping its grasp.
Those who remain are left to either perish at the hands of the Empire or at the hands of those who see no alternative save the use of the force of arms to overthrow the Imperial leadership, which has been necessarily populated by the members of society who are best able to suppress their conscience in blind pursuit of the Imperial imperative.
Such is the nature of Empire, and it is lethal to human progress. The existance of Empire on the earth ensures that all who inhabit it will take the side of Cain, who in the Biblical account related in Genesis chapter 4 lead his younger brother Abel to a field where he murdered him, or Abel, the innocent. Cain’s murderous act is born out of the mistaken belief that the removal of others from the earth will secure one’s place before God and man. It is an idea that is the driving force behind Imperial action, and it is death.
Cain leadeth Abel to Death by James Tissot
Fortunately, there is a better way. The better way lies neither in violently or peacefully resisting the Empire, it lies in the doctrine of non-resistance, which paradoxically is the best way to ensure one’s safety and security regardless of the state of Imperial degeneration that one finds themselves surrounded by.
However, the path of non-resistance is not without risk. Many of history’s most noted adherents are noted because they perished while clinging to this principle. It is not for the faint of heart, yet it is attainable.
The power to do this is found in the person of Jesus Christ, who replied to the Imperial lament, voiced by Pontius Pilate, an instrument of the Roman Empire, “What is truth?”
Jesus’ response, which is not recorded in the Biblical account but made clear by His subsequent actions, echoes through 2000 years of Imperial rule to guide our actions today:
“God Forgives”
In His reply, we find the power to embrace the doctrine of non-resistance, which is the only hope that mankind has to live in peace both here and now, regardless of the proximity of Imperial rule to his or her daily activities, and in eternity. For to forgive is to live in eternal peace with God himself.
Stay tuned in to The Mint for the upcoming ebook release!
We are taking a brief break from Old Jules and our “To Build up the Land” series to present the introduction to our soon to be released e-book, the latest volume in the Why what we use as Money Matters series. Enjoy!
b: a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
c: a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
2.a: absence or denial of any authority or established order
b: absence of order
Disarming the State is as simple as changing and then using one’s mind
Anarchy. The word strikes fear in the hearts general public, who have been trained to conjure images from fraternity house shenanigans to rioting and looting on the streets of important cities at its mention. For most civilized persons, with these mental images close at hand, anarchy is something to be avoided at all costs. How can civilized society carry on with the threat of bombs and looting effectively slamming the brakes on human progress?
In this volume, we seek to free the concept of anarchy from these negative connotations. For anarchy, far from being the greater evil in the choice amongst evils when it comes to man’s state in this world, is really not a choice at all. Rather, anarchy is something that every human being and animal on the planet is born into. It is the basic state of man in this world. It is an ultimate given.
As an ultimate given, it is futile, nay, self-destructive for men and women to live their lives fretting about falling from a state of order into one of anarchy. The line of thinking is debilitating and counterproductive to what must be mankind’s highest and most urgent calling in the physical realm: How best to respond to the state of anarchy in which they live.
For it is not anarchy itself that causes disorder and the other maladies which the mere mention of the word bring to mind, but mankind’s failed responses to this ultimate given under which they labor and cause others to labor on their behalf. The only thing more dangerous than confusing anarchy for the disorder which arises from the collapse of a failed response to it, is to spend ones life’s toils aiding another person’s failed response to his or her inherently anarchic surroundings.
Further, this volume seeks to give the reader a sufficient level of awareness to step back, if even for a moment, to evaluate the response to anarchy under which they are currently laboring and make a sober evaluation as to whether they are truly laboring in alignment with their own best interests.
Too many lives have been wasted laboring under a mistaken fear and avoidance of anarchy, and we hope this volume will steer the reader away from this fate. It may not change the way you think or what you do at all, and that is good. For to personally validate ones own course in life with a firmer grasp of the facts has caused harm to no one. In fact, it should cause one to carry on with a renewed sense of pride and purpose. We only encourage you, then, to offer others the chance to give their own lives a sober evaluation, and respect their decision to change once they truly understand the wonderful anarchy into which we are all born.
The book is now available on Kindle and will be available on Smashwords in early May.
Today, the United States of America will live through a day which is charged with irony. On one hand, its citizens will hear a discourse given with the aid of teleprompters from the Commander-in-Chief of the most lethal killing machine on the planet. On the other, the same nation will celebrate one of the greatest community organizers and peacemakers of modern times, Martin Luther King, Jr.
In honor of the Dr. King, we wish to share perhaps some little known facts about the man who immortalized the words, “I have a dream.”
The first is that Martin Luther King was seeking a relatively low-key role in the desegregation movement that he is now recognized as the leader of. According to the documentary of the Civil Rights Movement, “Soundtrack for a Revolution,” Dr. King was thrust into the leadership role of the movement in Alabama largely so that the local leaders could save face should it fail.
The second, and most enduring, are the tactics which Dr. King employed in mobilizing forces against segregation, those of non-violent resistance. These tactics made the American Civil Rights Movement both unique and undeniably effective.
In Dr. King’s time, non-violent resistance had been most recently employed on a large-scale by Gandhi in India. Non-violent resistance is the idea that acts of non-resistance in the face of aggression are more powerful than the all of the weapons and anger on earth, for it is clear that fighting violence with violence tends to lead to further violence. In order to break the cycle of violence, it must be confronted with peace.
Some of the most eloquent defenses of Dr. King’s moral guiding light have been written by relative unknowns such as Adin Ballou, who wrote the Catechism of Non-Resistance, and William Lloyd Garrison, who penned the Declaration of non-resistance.
In practice, Dr. King employed the tactics championed by Wyatt Tee Walker, who advocated direct but peaceful confrontation in the form of protests and marches. The premise being that unjust laws, such as those employed to maintain the policy of segregation, would not stand in the face of public scrutiny if peacefully resisted on a large-scale.
Today, in honor of one of the greatest leaders of the modern age, let us embrace non-aggression and turning the other cheek as the ultimate solution to our problems, if even for a day.
Famous quotes attributed to Dr. King:
“Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.”
“Never, never be afraid to do what’s right, especially if the well-being of a person or animal is at stake. Society’s punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way.”
“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
Today, the rockets around grounded in the Holy Land. For how long, is anybody’s guess. It appears, as most negotiations are, to be a mixed outcome, as both Egypt and the US are involved in the role of policing the agreement.
The current cease fire, which has, for the moment, halted aggressions between Hamas and Israel, appears to call for the Egyptian government to guarantee the conditions are being met with big brother, the United States, monitoring the situation.
If indeed the rockets, in particular the longer range Fajr-5s, remain neutralized, Israel will have gained a key objective. However, according to Stratfor, it appears that, for the moment, only Hamas and Israel have assented to the cease fire. The Palestinian Jihad remains a variable, and how long the cease fire will last likely hinges upon their willingness to observe it, as any projectile launched into Israel from Gaza will likely trigger the imminent Israeli ground invasion.
It is difficult to tell if Israel is strategically better off assenting to what is being reported as a tentative cease fire. While humankind benefits, this will slow progress towards what we perceive to be the Israeli’s ultimate goal with this operation, the disabling of Iran’s nuclear program.
On the other hand, Israel now has the US firmly engaged, raising the odds that US assets will be called into the region. In a sense, they have been hovering there for the past 11 years.
The United States has a gigantic problem of its own, namely, a Fiscal train wreck which is nearing impact with an ETA of January 1. The train wreck has already done a great deal of damage, as assumptions across the board are being reset in anticipation of Washington punting or worse, bungling the situation.
Unfortunately, it is the type of problem that the Keynesians who dominate economic thought at the highest levels have openly advocated war, the ultimate economic stimulus in a self destructive, insane, “debt is money” system, as a remedy.
As the winds of war continue to swirl about the Middle East, let us be thankful for the gesture made by Hamas and Israel, and pray that it will bear the fruit of an everlasting peace in the region. For in the deepest despair lies the potential for the greatest hope, and consequently the greatest good.
At this hour there have been few specifics as to what the terms of the cease fire are, but the mere fact that the hostilities have ceased comes as a great relief and gives those of us celebrating Thanksgiving, the wonderful, unique, and perhaps purest holiday celebration that we know of, an extra reason to celebrate tomorrow.
We continue to pray for the peace of Jerusalem and beyond, for peace is merely a matter of erasing borders and choosing to forgive.
For a lasting peace to prevail, the deadly “Might Makes Right” mentality must be renounced in favor of IMMEDIATE FORGIVENESS, and it is up to each one of us to choose to forgive and be forgiven. Only then, when there is peace in our hearts, will the world know peace.
Happy Thanksgiving, may you and yours dine on forgiveness and drink in grace this Holiday Season.
The nation is still digesting the election results from last week. Followers of The Mint already know that nobody won the election. 43.9% of those eligible to vote chose not to endorse the shenanigans in Washington DC and, when the entire voting age population is considered, 48.9% of adults will have abstained from actively choosing the next Commander-in-Chief.
Given that those who voted for the candidate that took second garnered 26.9% to the victor’s 28.4%, there were bound to be some hard feelings.
Those feelings are now manifesting themselves in the form of what have been billed “Secession Petitions” which generally request that the White House “Peacefully grant the State of Texas, South Carolina, Florida, etc. to withdraw from the United States of American and create its own government.”
A sample from Idaho, which is representative of many such petitions, can be seen here:
The American people certainly have a sense of humor. Amongst the best retorts we have seen are comments along the lines of “The answer is no. See US History 1861 – 64,” and this counter petition from the City of Austin, Texas:
The Idaho petition, like many, cites the Patriot Act and NDAA as examples of the Federal Government’s restriction of Freedom. It also eloquently quotes the part of the Declaration of Independence which states that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving from their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute a new Government…”
At The Mint, we advise our fellow taxpayers to sit back and enjoy the irony that the founding document for the United States is now being used as proof that it is time to dissolve it. It must be said here, once and for all, that the idea of America is that all men and women are created equal, born free, and possess certain unalienable rights (amongst which social security, health care, and a common defense are nowhere to be found). By definition, the idea of America means not being subject to an earthly sovereign.
The Government of the United States of America, circa 2012, must be understood as something completely different.
Despite the fact that the current Government seems curiously obsessed with restricting individual freedom, it is, for the most part, impotent. For those of us who, either by virtue of proper upbringing or by attendance at the school of hard knocks, have learned to respect the freedom and property of others, there is little to fear. Government at the Federal level has no reason to bother us, unless one deals in its currency or desires to travel, in which case it becomes a tolerable nuisance.
However, as the “sovereign” states which attempted secession 150 years ago paid a high price to teach the world, a Government that is petitioned or provoked can become deadly. The reason for this is that the above mentioned shenanigans in Washington DC are largely a result of the over representation in the current Government and its accompanying bureaucracies of individuals who never quite learned that stealing and killing are wrong, rather, they learned that by calling them by names such as taxation and war, they could get otherwise peaceful people to go along with creating their unilateral vision of what constitutes a better world.
Fortunately for humanity, this state of affairs is quickly righting itself, as the debt laden beast in Washington appears on the verge of collapsing under the weight of its own obligations.
At The Mint, rather than sign a petition to ask something of an impotent Government which at best is incapable of granting it and at worst will see the signer as an existential threat, we advocate what we call “Individual secession,” which we define as peaceful non-resistance of the Government by choosing daily to live in the Kingdom of God.
God tried to warn the Israelites, who at the time were dealing with scandals involving their appointed judges, what would happen should they demand an earthly king:
“10 Samuel told all YHWH’s words to the people who asked him for a king. 11 He said, “This will be the way of the king who shall reign over you: he will take your sons, and appoint them as his servants, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and they will run before his chariots. 12 He will appoint them to him for captains of thousands, and captains of fifties; and he will assign some to plow his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and the instruments of his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers, to be cooks, and to be bakers. 14 He will take your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves, even their best, and give them to his servants. 15 He will take one tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give it to his officers, and to his servants. 16 He will take your male servants, your female servants, your best young men, and your donkeys, and assign them to his own work. 17 He will take one tenth of your flocks; and you will be his servants. 18 You will cry out in that day because of your king whom you will have chosen for yourselves; and YHWH will not answer you in that day.”
The Israelites didn’t care, they wanted a king, no matter what the cost. Are you desperate enough to accept the conditions laid out above? For they haven’t changed in 3061 years.
The alternative, living in the Kingdom of God, requires recognizing the one who was crowned on a cross, forgives, and enforces the Golden Rule.
As we watched the Presidential debate Tuesday night, along with the rest of the huddled American masses, we were hoping to hear something that would sway us from our current non-voter status. We hardly listened to what was said, although our radar went up as one attendee asked about inflation, which happens to fall into our realm of interests. The periscope of our consciousness went down, however, as each candidate responded in turn with a stream of words which registered as a vague reference to a non-entity referred to as “the economy.”
They just don’t get it. And unless someone at the top “gets” the concept of inflation and its root causes very soon, the current form of the United States government may not exist by the time the next Presidential term is completed.
With the exception of the inflation bit, we hardly listened to what was said. Politics, as most politicians will attest, has nothing to do with the keeping or breaking of promises. In the end, these expensive popularity contests boil down to the intangible of charisma.
As such, we were more interested in the demeanor of the candidates. Both, while giving the appearance of physically fit, well dressed, and well informed men, seemed to lack something we call the spark of life, that thing that makes you want to be around somebody. The intangible of charisma, so hard to define, yet so apparent when present, did not make an appearance last night.
We decided to retain our current policy regarding democratic elections.
At The Mint, our current policy is to refrain from voting on all matters which ask us to reach beyond our own city and county. Even then, we inform ourselves and vote, not on individuals seeking election to sinecures, but on specific referendums, generally with the dual aim of obtaining personal benefit and minimizing both our tax bill and governmental interference in our personal affairs.
How did we arrive at such an unreasonable stance with regards to voting? How can we consciously fail to perform our “civic duty” year in and year out and still live with ourselves?
The conscious decision not to vote, at its base, is our way of peacefully resisting what has become a shameless power grab at the highest levels of government. A series of well intentioned actions at the Federal level has lead to a number of unintended consequences which are about to cause a great deal of suffering.
Beyond this philosophical objection, there are practical matters to consider, which we submit for your examination and comment:
1. Mind-boggling complexity
From time to time, a ballot measure will be presented which will be stated in a manner so clearly that one can place a vote and know exactly what a yay or nay will mean in terms of real world consequences. As for the rest of the ballot issues, along with the selection of lawmakers and judges as our proxies, one can’t be expected to keep up with the chaos that passes as national and state governments, and for the most part, we feel that participating in elections or the political process on at these levels is at best a waste of precious time and, at worst, encouraging an enterprise which long ago overstepped any reasonable boundaries, both in its authority and its ability to manage its finances. At this point, the best one can hope for is to stay clear of the amoeba.
Large scale democracy has a nasty habit of imposing the will of a few on all via the ignorance or indifference of many. Circa 2012, voters are rarely asked straightforward questions like “Is it ok to steal and kill?” They are instead asked questions like “Do you prefer a fellow named Obama or Romney to serve as President?” We will ignore the fact that politicians on the State and National level are thrust immediately into situations where keeping promises depends upon factors far beyond their control, and simply recognize that the choosing the President of the United States does little or nothing to change the underlying bureaucracies and interests which have turned the Government of the United States into a strange form of benevolent mafia.
2. The question of taxes.
By our calculations, we give up roughly 16 hours per year just compiling data for and filing the required tax declarations at the State and Federal levels. Not to mention the time spent generating the money to pay said taxes. On the county level, this seems reasonable. The county even has the courtesy to calculate the tax bill for us and simply request payment. As for compliance, it is simple, you either pay the bill or you don’t.
Further, if you think that your tax bill is too high, you can leave the City or County and find a City or County with a more reasonable tax regimen, or no regimen at all.
While leaving the City or County may be a costly step, it may be feasible for those who desire to move. Relocating geographically from a State or a Country is quite another matter, which makes their manner of taxation both understandable and sinister.
The Federal and State governments, as opposed to most county governments, have a much different take on both taxation, as well as the rest of the authorities which they have granted themselves over their subjects. We use the term “grant themselves” because, as anyone who has tried to vote their conscience on a ballot measure can attest, many measures are written in a way that simply makes the voter a tool in the hand of those who crafted the legislation.
{Editor’s note: We will refrain from going into the argument that somehow, the illusion of democracy, the Western embodiment of the “Might makes right” mentality, creates a government with legitimacy on the scale the the State and Federal Governments circa 2012 claim. It is sufficient to say that there are an abundance of examples which would argue to the contrary.}
Returning to taxation with regards to the State and Federal regimens, it is up to the individual to file a declaration each year at their own expense. Naturally, the governments reserve the right to audit said declaration, again, at the taxpayers expense. If any inconsistencies are encountered, the taxpayer faces a myriad of penalties from the payment of additional taxes and penalties up to and including serving time in prison.
Even this tack could be considered reasonable were the tax codes written in a straightforward manner. As things are, the income tax code serves as nothing more than a spider’s web, designed to entangle all who tread it. We are all caught in it, it is just a matter of time until the spider makes its way over to devour us.
The saving grace, if there is one with regards to the State and Federal tax regimen is this.They can’t take us all. While it is likely that every single American has failed to fully comply with the 73,608 page tax code, it is extremely unlikely that the spiders of the various Government or State tax authorities will ever get around to eating all of those who are caught in their web. As with any predator, they tend to go after the larger prey first.
In this sense, adopting the Franciscan/Marxian belief that poverty is a virtue may keep one safely off of the spider’s radar.
3. The Trail of Tears
While both complexity and having to pay for something are generally good enough reasons to abstain from any activity, the most compelling reason not to vote is one that is best understood by examining one of the most shameful examples of the modus operandi of the Federal Government: Their well documented dealings with the Cherokee people, whose world collided with the Feds in the early 19th century in the Southeastern part of North America.
The Trail of Tears, a painful chapter in US History – courtesy of http://katta1f.wikispaces.com/
We refrain from making value judgments and will simply examine the highlights of the interaction as we understand them. A much more detailed account can be found, as always, in the Wikipedia.
The Cherokee found themselves generally prospering as a people and inhabiting lands in the Southeastern US in the 1700 and early 1800’s after presumably relocating there from the Great Lakes region. During this time, they increasingly came into contact with European settlers and engaged them in trade.
As time went on, the increasingly organized and well armed colonies began to covet the lands of the various Indian groups in North America. Once the revolution against the British and subsequent conflict known as the War of 1812 had been won, the States of the newly formed United States of America began to dispossess the various Indian peoples of their lands.
{Editors Note: Sensitive readers are asked to excuse, for the moment, the use of the term “Indian” (Columbus most likely died believing that he had landed in India en route to China, hence the mistaken identity attached to Native Americans peoples), instead of the appropriate “Native American”. The choice to change terms at this point in the essay was made consciously so that the reader may understand which groups were impacted by the barbarous Indian Removal Act. No disrespect is implied or intended.}
While their tactics changed according to what was politically expedient at the time, the general policy of the State and Federal Governments was to ultimately expel the Indian populations and force them West, so that the vested interests of the States could take advantage of the lands which were occupied by the Indians.
What is most troubling about the treatment of the Cherokee people is that, from what we can tell, they had adapted to life amongst the new colonists and generally worked to comply with what were ultimately unreasonable demands of the governments. As a case in point, the Cherokee allied themselves with and fought alongside the US against the pro-British factions during the War of 1812. They served the US’s interests in the war alongside none other than Andrew Jackson.
Jackson later returned the favor by signing the Indian Removal Act in 1830 which sealed the Cherokee’s fate and began the final chain of events which would lead many of them to an early grave along the now infamous “Trail of Tears.”
While the the Indian Removal Act was passed on the assumption that the Cherokee and other Indian groups faced certain extinction were they to be forced to live alongside the increasingly numerous white settlers, it is generally acknowledged today that the real motivation for the Act’s passage was the discovery of gold in Georgia.
We have read about and watched similar scenarios of deceptions preceded and followed by apologetics play out too many times by centralized governments over the ages to believe that a group of persons who do not know our name and are so far removed from us that they would not recognize our moccasins if they took the time to walk a mile in them, have our best interests at heart.
Even if they did, we have observed that their best efforts to effect change on a large scale end up causing more harm than good. While the economic damage done by such unilateral actions can be repaired or forgiven, the damage to the moral character of a society of embracing this might makes right mentality will ultimately destroy it.
The desire not to participate in the choosing of the next person to be called “Commander in Chief,” or any of their collaborators or subordinates, is the primary reason why we will not be walking around with a sticker on our chest or an ink stained hand on election day.
For The Trail of Tears has been tread for too long. It is time to live in the Kingdom of God.
10/15/2012 – Portland, Oregon – Pop in your mints…
In today’s Mint, we offer, for your enjoyment, an event which transpired during our time of service on the democratically elected dorm council as secretary at Weyer Hall, circa 1993. While the narrative touches upon many themes that will no doubt evoke strong emotions, we humbly offer it as an example of the shortcomings of governance by democratically elected bodies.
It is recounted here, with certain liberties, in loving memory of Ma Tinder, long time dorm Mother at Weyer Hall. Enjoy!
The Stampede.
During our short, but eventful time as a student at Hastings College, we resided in Weyer Hall, an all male dormitory which housed 70 residents. While we assume that the College Administration had ultimate responsibility for campus governance, each dormitory was governed by a small group of democratically elected peers who sat on what was known as the dorm council.
During the Fall semester of our sophomore year, it fell to us to serve on the council as Dorm Secretary. We say fell, because we did not exert much effort in our campaign, nor did we crush an inferior opponent in a moderated debate. For all we know, we may have raised our hand at the wrong time, an innocent mistake which caused our name to land on the ballot.
Nonetheless, we were determined to serve our fellow residents to the best of our abilities. As Secretary, our responsibilities included taking notes of the decisions of the dorm council, which invariably included the details of certain disciplinary actions taken against those who did not follow the rules and were foolish enough to get caught, publicly recognizing noteworthy accomplishments of the residents, if any, and informing them of upcoming events.
Our diligent dispatches reached the desk of the College President as well as the backs of every bathroom stall in the dorm, where they were most likely to be read. For a time we created toned down, official version of the dispatches for the President. However, our inner laziness finally demanded that we produce just one dispatch, complete with all of the juicy tidbits and unsolicited commentary fit to print.
The President seemed to love it.
The dorm council meetings were held in the quarters of the Dorm Mother, affectionately known as Ma Tinder. Ma Tinder’s quarters were located at the center of the first floor of the three story structure. She resided there, along with her dachshund “Peanut” as a source of calm in what was otherwise a cross between “Revenge of the Nerds” and “Animal House.”
The dorm council’s business, which it faithfully discharged at its monthly meetings, was to decide trivial matters, such as the design of the dorm t-shirt (which is fodder for another day), as well as to enforce the rules of the dorm. Violations of the law of the dorm included residents found to have invited a female to the premises without signing them in at the desk, excessive noise, possession of alcohol and other illegal substances, and in one infamous case, the unlawful operation of a charcoal grill…indoors.
The tranquility of Weyer Hall was about to be transformed Photo Courtesy of Hastings.edu
The dorm council, as with any governing body, was divided into unspoken but acknowledged factions. Those who were there to enforce the rules, and those who were there to ensure that the rules, if enforced, were loosely interpreted and administered with clemency.
You can imagine which camp the younger Mint fell into.
So it happened that on a Sunday afternoon, as winter descended upon Central Nebraska, the dorm council assembled in Ma Tinder’s quarters during mandatory “quiet time,” as was the custom. As we were discussing matters of relatively trivial importance, a pounding noise, distant at first, then increasingly loud and frequent, arose from somewhere in the interior of the building until it passed, as would a locomotive, directly above Ma Tinder’s isle of tranquility.
It was the Stampede.
Those members of the council who were firmly in the rules enforcement camp immediately sprang to their feet in pursuit of the perpetrators of what was obviously a direct affront to the authority of the council. To flagrantly violate “quiet time” by running in boxers and boots, as heavily as one could, through the hallway directly above the meeting place of the council was not simply a minor violation of the rules, it was mutiny.
Those of us who found ourselves in the “loose interpretation/clemency” camp slowly arose, fighting off a chuckle, and give the appearance of chase as doors all over Weyer Hall immediately shut as the Stampede ended just as suddenly as it had begun.
For not only did we see the Stampede as an artful form of both coordinated self expression and protest, we had helped instigate it.
In the end, while the entire dorm was given a stern warning to respect the the rules, there were no individual indictments. Like history makers throughout the ages, the Weyer Stampeders had proved their point,
A quick note to share a smattering of links and thoughts related to the Catalan Independence movement and the latest wave of anti-austerity protests in the Club Med region:
The people of the Mediterranean states are no fools, they realize that they have been made the scapegoats and guarantors for years of mismanagement by their parasitic central governments and banking sectors. In a reasonable world, where the government respected its citizens, a region like Catalunya would have the right to shrug off the debts of the central government and make a go of providing basic services on its own.
The Catalans deserve better
Something, that most Catalans will point out, it is capable of doing very well.
However, when it comes to sovereign debt, it appears that there is no escape for the capable. Rather, the noose is generally tightened as the central government becomes increasingly desperate for revenue.
All reasonable dialogue is thrown out the window, and the central government makes a nationalist appeal and orders subservience at the point of a gun, as evidenced by the statement issued by the Spanish Military Association to Artur Mas.
The statement comes in response to protests calling for Catalan independence that included one in five Catalans (1.5 Million of 7.5 Million).
We must note, however, that the Catalans are an unusually peaceful people, and the chances of widespread violence are nil.
We were attending grad school in Barcelona when the tragic Madrid train bombing occurred on March 12, 2004. Apalled by the violence, we participated in a protest of similar size.
It was beautiful.
We took the Metro to Passeig de Gracia and slowly streamed down Barcelona’s grandest boulevard. As we came together with the main march, it was apparent that this was a large event which was hell-bent on rejecting the violence with an overwhelming show of peace.
No al terrorisme, No a la Guerra by Kippeboy via wikimedia commons
As we marched down the Paseo, from time to time the procession of millions would stop, clap our hands, slap our legs, and then hold our hands, palms out, in front of us in silence in a grand gesture that shouted through the silence:
Enough of terrorism, enough of war. This message came to the world in stark contrast to the regular reaction of an eye for an eye that had been pursued up to this point with predictable results.
We pray that this latest round of protests in our beloved Catalunya and Spain end in a similar fashion, with a firm and peaceful rejection of austerity, and a show of solidarity and goodwill towards men.
The distinction between the failed “Might makes right” mentality, which is the ideological base for all Empires, and what we have termed the better way, which can be summed up in the words of the Golden Rule: “Love your neighbor as you love yourself,” was made clear to all in an event that can only be adequately described as the flashpoint in human history, the moment which literally opened the possibility to choose the better way.
37 “You are a king, then!” said Pilate. Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”
38“What is truth?”retorted Pilate. With this he went out again to the Jews gathered there and said, “I find no basis for a charge against him.”
a papyrus shroud containing the text of John 38: 17-18
For those unfamiliar with the scene, which is expounded upon in John 38:28-40, this historic exchange between Jesus and the Roman Governor Pilate takes place in Pilate’s residence, which is referred to as the Roman Governor’s Palace, in Jerusalem on the day before the Jewish Passover in what is now known as the year 33 CE according to the Gregorian calendar. It was witnessed by none other than the Apostle John. It is evident by its inclusion in John’s gospel that He grasped the full importance of the exchange.
For John was witnessing the start of a revolution.
Pilate, the governor, was Rome’s representative in Jerusalem, capital of the rebellious province of Palestine. He spent his days tempering an uneasy peace between Caesar and the Jewish majority of the region. His life was a daily exercise of the compromising principles and choosing the lesser of evils. Perhaps more than any historical character, He represents the inescapable consequence of humanity orienting itself by the “Might makes right” mentality and the ever present fear that it engenders.
Pilate was the embodiment of Empire.
Pilate utters the lament of Empires across the ages: “What is truth?”
His reply to Jesus’ statement about everyone on the side of truth listening to him (Jesus), “What is truth?” is neither a contemptuous mock of Jesus, nor an honest question, rather, it is an exasperated utterance of a man whose life has been reduced to endless compromises, and has seen that the lesser of evils is, in any and every case, necessarily evil.
One must wonder how many heads of state today utter these same words as they contemplate the clear moral law in contrast to what they have been called to do in this life.
How many career military men, after carrying out an assault on the enemy, have grappled with this lament in their souls?
Each of them may grapple, if indeed they pause to reflect on such matters, with a contradiction which has been eloquently expounded by Adin Ballou, who wrote a significant body of work on peaceful resistance, in his pamphlet entitled: “How many Men are Necessary to Change a Crime into a Virtue?”
“One man may not kill. If he kills a fellow-creature, he is a murderer. If two, ten, a hundred men do so, they, too, are murderers. But a government or a nation may kill as many men as it chooses, and that will not be murder, but a great and noble action. Only gather the people together on a large scale, and a battle of ten thousand men becomes an innocent action. But precisely how many people must there be to make it so?–that is the question. One man cannot plunder and pillage, but a whole nation can. But precisely how many are needed to make it permissible? Why is it that one man, ten, a hundred, may not break the law of God, but a great number may?”
Yeah, it is a contradiction that rightfully haunts thinking persons the world over to this day.
The question that haunts thinking persons the world over to this day, “I que es la veritat?” (“And what is truth?” translation from original Catalan) highlighted by Antoni Gaudi the Passion facade of the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona. (Photo by Etan J. Tal)
At this flashpoint in history, Pilate speaks for all of them. The Might makes right system, which must avail itself to represent the truth in a vain attempt to cloak itself with a shred of legitimacy, leaves its thinking adherents searching in vain for a truth that ultimately relies on the fragile force of arms to perpetuate itself.
On the other side of the truthless void embodied in the person of Pilate, is Jesus, the Messiah. Jesus brought the truth with Him wherever He went. As He stood, soon to be condemned to death by the Might makes right mentality which was swallowing the world, He embodied the truth as never before. John witnessed this moment in the governor’s palace and remained shocked to the end of his days.
The Apostle John, witness to the watershed moment in human history
To Pilate’s lament, “What is truth?” Jesus replies, then and forevermore: “God Forgives.”
In doing so, He ratified what he had preached in the Sermon on the Mount, to turn the other cheek, what is know today as the doctrine non-resistance.
Ever since that fateful day, which represents THE watershed moment in all of human history, mankind has had the choice to chose the Golden rule, “Love your neighbor as you love yourself,” over the self destructive system of Might makes right. For Jesus represents the clear change in God’s relationship with mankind. God would no longer claim His ultimate authority on the failed Might makes right philosophy, for there is none mightier than the Living God. Rather, He chose to cleanse the world through Jesus, the ultimate example of non-resistance.
Jesus’ crucifixion served as an indictment to every soul who would claim triumph by defeating others. It served notice of the moral bankruptcy of the world system. For over 2,000 years, those who have stopped at the cross to soak in the message, as John did, have been relentlessly making the world a better place.
In His resurrection, Jesus shattered every excuse for those who believe in Him to cling to the failed system of Might makes right, for to cling to the system is to live in constant search of, or worse, a fear of a truth which has already been revealed. It is to deny that the kingdoms of this world are perishing and the the Kingdom of God is advancing EVERY DAY.
The Christian, then, has no moral standing when embracing the “Might makes right” mentality in defense of property and even life. Jesus showed us the better way, the way to the Father. He is preparing for us a home in God’s Kingdom, where the rule of Might makes right is vanquished, where peace is permanently established and treasures are secure, for the Golden Rule reigns supreme.
Yet the true irony and divine beauty of embracing the doctrine of non-resistance here and now is that it serves to enhance both the peace and security of the adherent.
Adin Ballou dedicated 50 years of his life to spreading the doctrine of non-resistance.
Leo Tolstoy, in his great Christian-Anarchist work “The Kingdom of God is Within You,” pays homage to Adin Ballou, an American preacher who was a colleague of William Lloyd Garrison, the great American Abolitionist. Ballou devoted 50 years of his life advocating for the doctrine of non-resistance.
The following is a version of the Catechism of Non-Resistance that Ballou created for his followers. The last paragraph is especially moving, so much so that we consider it required reading for all human beings:
Q. Whence is the word “non-resistance” derived?
A. From the command, “Resist not evil.” (M. v. 39.)
Q. What does this word express?
A. It expresses a lofty Christian virtue enjoined on us by Christ.
Q. Ought the word “non-resistance” to be taken in its widest sense–that is to say, as intending that we should not offer any resistance of any kind to evil?
A. No; it ought to be taken in the exact sense of our Saviour’s teaching–that is, not repaying evil for evil. We ought to oppose evil by every righteous means in our power, but not by evil.
Q. What is there to show that Christ enjoined non-resistance in that sense?
A. It is shown by the words he uttered at the same time. He said: “Ye have heard, it was said of old, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. But I say unto you Resist not evil. But if one smites thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also; and if one will go to law with thee to take thy coat from thee, give him thy cloak also.”
Q. Of whom was he speaking in the words, “Ye have heard it was said of old”?
A. Of the patriarchs and the prophets, contained in the Old Testament, which the Hebrews ordinarily call the Law and the Prophets.
Q. What utterances did Christ refer to in the words, “It was said of old”?
A. The utterances of Noah, Moses, and the other prophets, in which they admit the right of doing bodily harm to those who inflict harm, so as to punish and prevent evil deeds.
Q. Quote such utterances.
A. “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.”–GEN. ix. 6.
“He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death…And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” –Ex. xxi. 12 and 23-25.
“He that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor, as he hath done, so shall it be done unto him: breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth.”–LEV. xxiv. 17, 19, 20.
“Then the judges shall make diligent inquisition; and behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother, then shall ye do unto him as he had thought to have done unto his brother…And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”–DEUT. xix. 18, 21.
Noah, Moses, and the Prophets taught that he who kills, maims, or injures his neighbors does evil. To resist such evil, and to prevent it, the evil doer must be punished with death, or maiming, or some physical injury. Wrong must be opposed by wrong, murder by murder, injury by injury, evil by evil. Thus taught Noah, Moses, and the Prophets. But Christ rejects all this. “I say unto you,” is written in the Gospel, “resist not evil,” do not oppose injury with injury, but rather bear repeated injury from the evil doer. What was permitted is forbidden. When we understand what kind of resistance they taught, we know exactly what resistance Christ forbade.
Q. Then the ancients allowed the resistance of injury by injury?
A. Yes. But Jesus forbids it. The Christian has in no case the right to put to death his neighbor who has done him evil, or to do him injury in return.
Q. May he kill or maim him in self-defense?
A. No.
Q. May he go with a complaint to the judge that he who has wronged him may be punished?
A. No. What he does through others, he is in reality doing himself.
Q. Can he fight in conflict with foreign enemies or disturbers of the peace?
A. Certainly not. He cannot take any part in war or in preparations for war. He cannot make use of a deadly weapon. He cannot oppose injury to injury, whether he is alone or with others, either in person or through other people.
Q. Can he voluntarily vote or furnish soldiers for the government?
A. He can do nothing of that kind if he wishes to be faithful to Christ’s law.
Q. Can he voluntarily give money to aid a government resting on military force, capital punishment, and violence in general?
A. No, unless the money is destined for some special object, right in itself, and good both in aim and means.
Q. Can he pay taxes to such a government?
A. No; he ought not voluntarily to pay taxes, but he ought not to resist the collecting of taxes. A tax is levied by the government, and is exacted independently of the will of the subject. It is impossible to resist it without having recourse to violence of some kind. Since the Christian cannot employ violence, he is obliged to offer his property at once to the loss by violence inflicted on it by the authorities.
Q. Can a Christian give a vote at elections, or take part in government or law business?
A. No; participation in election, government, or law business is participation in government by force.
Q. Wherein lies the chief significance of the doctrine of non-resistance?
A. In the fact that it alone allows of the possibility of eradicating evil from one’s own heart, and also from one’s neighbor’s. This doctrine forbids doing that whereby evil has endured for ages and multiplied in the world. He who attacks another and injures him, kindles in the other a feeling of hatred, the root of every evil. To injure another because he has injured us, even with the aim of overcoming evil, is doubling the harm for him and for oneself; it is begetting, or at least setting free and inciting, that evil spirit which we should wish to drive out. Satan can never be driven out by Satan. Error can never be corrected by error, and evil cannot be vanquished by evil.
True non-resistance is the only real resistance to evil. It is crushing the serpent’s head. It destroys and in the end extirpates the evil feeling.
Q. But if that is the true meaning of the rule of non- resistance, can it always put into practice?
A. It can be put into practice like every virtue enjoined by the law of God. A virtue cannot be practiced in all circumstances without self-sacrifice, privation, suffering, and in extreme cases loss of life itself. But he who esteems life more than fulfilling the will of God is already dead to the only true life. Trying to save his life he loses it. Besides, generally speaking, where non-resistance costs the sacrifice of a single life or of some material welfare, resistance costs a thousand such sacrifices.
Non-resistance is Salvation; Resistance is Ruin.
It is incomparably less dangerous to act justly than unjustly, to submit to injuries than to resist them with violence, less dangerous even in one’s relations to the present life. If all men refused to resist evil by evil our world would be happy.
Q. But so long as only a few act thus, what will happen to them?
A. If only one man acted thus, and all the rest agreed to crucify him, would it not be nobler for him to die in the glory of non-resisting love, praying for his enemies, than to live to wear the crown of Caesar stained with the blood of the slain? However, one man, or a thousand men, firmly resolved not to oppose evil by evil are far more free from danger by violence than those who resort to violence, whether among civilized or savage neighbors. The robber, the murderer, and the cheat will leave them in peace, sooner than those who oppose them with arms, and those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword, but those who seek after peace, and behave kindly and harmlessly, forgiving and forgetting injuries, for the most part enjoy peace, or, if they die, they die blessed. In this way, if all kept the ordinance of non-resistance, there would obviously be no evil nor crime. If the majority acted thus they would establish the rule of love and good will even over evil doers, never opposing evil with evil, and never resorting to force. If there were a moderately large minority of such men, they would exercise such a salutary moral influence on society that every cruel punishment would be abolished, and violence and feud would be replaced by peace and love. Even if there were only a small minority of them, they would rarely experience anything worse than the world’s contempt, and meantime the world, though unconscious of it, and not grateful for it, would be continually becoming wiser and better for their unseen action on it. And if in the worst case some members of the minority were persecuted to death, in dying for the truth they would have left behind them their doctrine, sanctified by the blood of their martyrdom. Peace, then, to all who seek peace, and may overruling love be the imperishable heritage of every soul who obeys willingly Christ’s word, “Resist not evil.”
In our last correspondence, we began to explore the nature of Empire and found that it is necessarily founded and maintained by a prevailing “Might makes right,” mentality. This mentality has, as its logical end, the effect of destroying the capital stock of a society. This is accomplished by the wasteful consumption of resources by employing them in both warfare, whose destructive nature need not be further explored, and welfare, which by nature rewards sloth and penalizes productivity.
{Editor’s Note: Here we must make the clear distinction between charity, which is a voluntary action taken by a willing individuals to help their fellow human beings and welfare, which is a system of Imperially mandated aid which ends in enslavement both for the recipient and provider.}
When confronted with the fatal defect of Empire, the destruction of the capital stock of a society, the Imperial apologist offers support of the Empire as either the lesser of two evils, implying that the ideological alternative, namely: Anarchy, would lead to chaos and an even greater destruction of life and capital or may find support in any number of religious texts for Imperial rule and conclude that submission to government is God’s will.
We offered this refrain a mere three months ago as we explored inconsistencies between a belief in God and a belief in the world’s government. Today, we will take this idea a step further as we present the better way that civil persons over the centuries have searched for and, in their better moments, embraced.
We’ve been inspired to do so by a recent post by Joel Bowman over at the Daily Reckoning entitled: We’re all Anarchists Now.
One of Mr. Bowman’s points is that Anarchy is a concept that has been hijacked. In the same way that the term Liberalism has come to be associated with social progressives, anarchy has come to be associated with rebellious hoodlums. However, when properly understood, Anarchy, devoid of the “Might makes right” mentality, is the perfect antidote for the problem of Empire. As Mr. Bowman explains it:
“Properly understood, the term anarchy, which derives from the Greek anarchia, literally translates an, “without” + arkhos, “ruler.” Freedom from being owned…enslaved…forced against one’s will. Freedom to act voluntarily. Freedom to associate with whomever one so desires and under whatever conditions he or she sees fit…provided they do not diminish the ability of another to enjoy the same freedom.”
In other words, Anarchy declares that, all at once, there are no sovereigns and that every individual is sovereign. You can understand why this may upset those who cannot begin to imagine this worldview.
As for those who would support the “necessary evils” of perpetuating the Empire on religious grounds, we offer the following: Were the Empire to truly be God’s agent on earth, it would cease to exist.
“The Kingdom of God is Within You”
From the beginning, God has desired communion with mankind. It is from a state of perfect communion with God that mankind has fallen, and it is to this state of perfect communion that mankind will return. How can this perfect communion exist if God requires an earthly, Imperial authority to act on His behalf?
Yet the ultimate solution of Anarchy, where there is no sovereign save God himself or where every individual is a sovereign subject to God, depending upon one’s preferred theology, would be the embodiment of a perfect communion with God. In fact, it would be the only way in which it is possible.
The problem, then, is not the existence of Empire, the Empire is simply the manifestation of man’s failed belief system that “Might makes right.” It is this failed belief system that must be vanquished.
The better way
Sadly, to study most of human history is to study the violent and destructive embodiment of the “Might makes right” mentality as Empires rise and fall, either to external Empires on the rise or from revolutions from within. With every violent upheaval, most recently observed in what is now referred to as the Arab Spring, it becomes clear that the populace has simply exchanged one oppressive regime for another.
In fact, as one examines history, it becomes clear that the only true, permanent changes have come about when they are brought about through the use of peaceful resistance. Who amongst us are not familiar with the name Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr.? These men found the key to permanent change lies deep within themselves.
It is the way revealed to us by Jesus, who chose to suffer and die in order to break the disease of ‘Might makes right” in the hearts of everyone. To open the way for a perfect communion with the Father.
This is the better way. His action trumped every argument that could ever be made in favor of Empire, and opened the doors to God’s Kingdom, the reign of a Holy God over a perfect Anarchy where the only rule is emblazoned on every heart:
You must be logged in to post a comment.