Jeffrey E. Paul discusses the deep history, roots, and trajectory of how it came to be that the United States is now on the verge of becoming a "fascistic autocracy" and one-party state. The origins emanate from 19th century Germany and its autocratic collectivist mindset which permeated American academia and government in the late 1800s. These German authoritarian ideologues were the same who later went on to mentor Hitler and the Nazi regime. The clock is fast running out on the American experiment.
The podcast started out with me, at eleven minutes in, having some real concerns with some things the guest said…
1.) the war of northern aggression was primarily about the right of people to have self determination? Lincoln’s battle cry was to “save the union.” When he “freed the slaves” a couple years later, he freed only the slaves in the territory that was not under his authority.
Even if the war had been about slavery, I have serious questions about the ethics and morality of killing that many people to release others from slavery. I am also convinced that the war was entirely unnecessary to end slavery. Slavery in America was doomed and was bound to end here as it had - without war - in other places around the world. The writing was on the wall, as the Bible says. Slavery in America would not have lasted much longer even without Lincoln’s immoral aggression.
2.) Doctoral programs from Germany was a good thing? It was “entirely successful” in the areas of science and medicine? WOW…. I couldn’t disagree more if what he considers “entirely successful” are evolutionary science, the medical industrial complex, the taking over of natural medicine by toxic substances called pharmaceuticals…. Was the Flexner Report a consequence of this influx of German-trained scientists and medical “professionals”?
Thankfully I kept with it, and although I didn’t agree with everything, there was a lot of good in there too.
I like the point about the elite wanting to rule over others. I have a really hard time with the status people claim just for having jumped through a bunch of academic hoops. I avoid addressing people by their “titles of nobility” such as “Doctor.” That is what they do, not who they are. They don’t address me by my “title” of “homesteader” or “Basketmaker” or “gardener.” ;)
I have a little book called Remarkable Remedy by Jean Carpenter. Our family bought 500 copies back in the 90s to hand out or sell at cost ($1.18, I think). We still have about 100 left. One thing it talked about is the income tax of 1913 and the questionable situation around it. Was it even ratified by enough states to pass? Some believe not.
I’ve also heard it claimed that the definition of “income” is different from “wages.” Wages are a trade for time. Income is interest collected on “investments.” (Or something like that.) So the question is … even if the 16th amendment were actually properly ratified, would the IRS have authority to collect taxes on wages or only on income?
Another thought…. A recommendation to anyone brave enough to attempt it…. Read the book Law Without Authority or Limits: Kelsen’s Dilemma by Daniel Gruber. It is about legal philosophers and how they justify their international laws and laws that take away/undermine/disregard individuals’ ownership of themselves.
I applaud Paul for having the discernment to describe where we are and how we got here, particularly in terms of the Frankfurt School connection. And I do support those who take a stand for the truth, so I bought the book. But the rest makes no sense to me. Metaphorically speaking, if I have someone pointing a gun at my head, and I am on the verge of losing my life, I'm going to suggest that we amend the tax code? As laudable as his analysis might be, Paul doesn't understand the power structures that govern this world or how deeply entrenched they are. He could be a powerful voice, if he did.
Obviously, Paul is a sincere intellectual, but the civil war was not about standing on principle, except for the naive. Men cannot be sent to the front lines to kill their counterparts as a means to achieving good ends. Those ends will always bear the taint of the blood that was shed. Wars are fought for political and economic reasons, and that includes the civil war. Lincoln was no hero. War is pure evil with a veneer of principle or morality or heroism - whatever the public will swallow.
Paul has no obligation to follow the Bible. But I do, and I am unable to find any Scriptural support for the argument that the Christian is to bear arms, whether in the name of a war declared by the government or in personal defense. The instruction is to overcome evil with good, not with firepower. And, yes, Hrvoje, I am a Christian, even though you take it upon yourself to announce to others that I am not, simply because I will not attend or give financial support to the churches that are now teaching error and leading others to deny the true gospel.
Great podcast and I love how Hrvoje lets his guest discuss their topics. Always great to hear, and be challenged by, those who I may not normally listen to. I would add that the Prussian education model is a central theme of John Taylor Gatto's work. Richard Grove (Grand Theft World and Peace Revolution) did an illuminating 5 hour interview with Gatto while he was still alive distilling the Prussian education model and its influence on global education. Namely, that after Napoleon's amateur army beat Prussia's professional army, the failure was blamed on the Prussian military being too independently minded. Thus the mandatory public education model was instituted to provide a compliant masses to be better soldiers. Subsequently the Carnegie's and Rockefeller's saw how this would also provide great factory workers and consumers. The link provided is to Richard Grove's production of said interview.
The podcast started out with me, at eleven minutes in, having some real concerns with some things the guest said…
1.) the war of northern aggression was primarily about the right of people to have self determination? Lincoln’s battle cry was to “save the union.” When he “freed the slaves” a couple years later, he freed only the slaves in the territory that was not under his authority.
Even if the war had been about slavery, I have serious questions about the ethics and morality of killing that many people to release others from slavery. I am also convinced that the war was entirely unnecessary to end slavery. Slavery in America was doomed and was bound to end here as it had - without war - in other places around the world. The writing was on the wall, as the Bible says. Slavery in America would not have lasted much longer even without Lincoln’s immoral aggression.
2.) Doctoral programs from Germany was a good thing? It was “entirely successful” in the areas of science and medicine? WOW…. I couldn’t disagree more if what he considers “entirely successful” are evolutionary science, the medical industrial complex, the taking over of natural medicine by toxic substances called pharmaceuticals…. Was the Flexner Report a consequence of this influx of German-trained scientists and medical “professionals”?
Thankfully I kept with it, and although I didn’t agree with everything, there was a lot of good in there too.
I like the point about the elite wanting to rule over others. I have a really hard time with the status people claim just for having jumped through a bunch of academic hoops. I avoid addressing people by their “titles of nobility” such as “Doctor.” That is what they do, not who they are. They don’t address me by my “title” of “homesteader” or “Basketmaker” or “gardener.” ;)
I have a little book called Remarkable Remedy by Jean Carpenter. Our family bought 500 copies back in the 90s to hand out or sell at cost ($1.18, I think). We still have about 100 left. One thing it talked about is the income tax of 1913 and the questionable situation around it. Was it even ratified by enough states to pass? Some believe not.
I’ve also heard it claimed that the definition of “income” is different from “wages.” Wages are a trade for time. Income is interest collected on “investments.” (Or something like that.) So the question is … even if the 16th amendment were actually properly ratified, would the IRS have authority to collect taxes on wages or only on income?
Another thought…. A recommendation to anyone brave enough to attempt it…. Read the book Law Without Authority or Limits: Kelsen’s Dilemma by Daniel Gruber. It is about legal philosophers and how they justify their international laws and laws that take away/undermine/disregard individuals’ ownership of themselves.
I applaud Paul for having the discernment to describe where we are and how we got here, particularly in terms of the Frankfurt School connection. And I do support those who take a stand for the truth, so I bought the book. But the rest makes no sense to me. Metaphorically speaking, if I have someone pointing a gun at my head, and I am on the verge of losing my life, I'm going to suggest that we amend the tax code? As laudable as his analysis might be, Paul doesn't understand the power structures that govern this world or how deeply entrenched they are. He could be a powerful voice, if he did.
Obviously, Paul is a sincere intellectual, but the civil war was not about standing on principle, except for the naive. Men cannot be sent to the front lines to kill their counterparts as a means to achieving good ends. Those ends will always bear the taint of the blood that was shed. Wars are fought for political and economic reasons, and that includes the civil war. Lincoln was no hero. War is pure evil with a veneer of principle or morality or heroism - whatever the public will swallow.
Paul has no obligation to follow the Bible. But I do, and I am unable to find any Scriptural support for the argument that the Christian is to bear arms, whether in the name of a war declared by the government or in personal defense. The instruction is to overcome evil with good, not with firepower. And, yes, Hrvoje, I am a Christian, even though you take it upon yourself to announce to others that I am not, simply because I will not attend or give financial support to the churches that are now teaching error and leading others to deny the true gospel.
Great podcast and I love how Hrvoje lets his guest discuss their topics. Always great to hear, and be challenged by, those who I may not normally listen to. I would add that the Prussian education model is a central theme of John Taylor Gatto's work. Richard Grove (Grand Theft World and Peace Revolution) did an illuminating 5 hour interview with Gatto while he was still alive distilling the Prussian education model and its influence on global education. Namely, that after Napoleon's amateur army beat Prussia's professional army, the failure was blamed on the Prussian military being too independently minded. Thus the mandatory public education model was instituted to provide a compliant masses to be better soldiers. Subsequently the Carnegie's and Rockefeller's saw how this would also provide great factory workers and consumers. The link provided is to Richard Grove's production of said interview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQiW_l848t8&list=PL463AA90FD04EC7A2