Alt-Right $: Pieces of Eight

Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution 

Pieces of Eight and The Cross of Gold should be mandatory reading.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild is attributed with saying “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes the laws.”  Whether this quote was said by a Rothschild is irrelevant, the simple truth expressed is accurate, as we see very clearly with Soros.

The dysfunction endemic in our country is fundamentally tied to monetary powers having been abdicated to ideologies hostile to our well being.

Here are several reviews which adequatly sum up how I would review it:

Reviewer Andrew Jackson from Amazon says:

Dr. Vieira is the most un-Harvard-lawyer-like Harvard lawyer you will ever meet. The “Dr.” comes from his Ph.D. in chemistry from the same institution, which he earned a few years before he went back and got his J.D. He is among the foremost Constitutonal scholars in the U.S., and the undisputed expert on the history and Constitutional Law of Money and Banking.

If you *really* want to learn something about American History, the History of Money, or the devolution over the past 150 years of what passes for ‘Law’ in these united States, I cannot recommend this book highly enough. Pieces of Eight is an exhaustive, detailed, and copiously footnoted (but highly readable, and routinely fascinating) compilation, synthesis, and exegesis of the history and Constitutional Law (and un-Constitutional ‘law’!) of money and banking in the U.S, and is the result of a lifetime of research by a tenacious, literate, and scary-smart dude who is 3 for 4 in front of the Supreme Court.

If you want to know what the Framers of the Constitution *really* knew about money — actually, quite a lot, certainly MUCH more than our purported “statesmen” today — and why they put VERY specific language in the Constituton to ensure the proper rôle of money and banking consistent with a Free society, this book lays it out in stark, clear terms. In particular, if you want the definitive, airtight (and sordid) answers to politically incorrect questions such as “Why has nobody ever challenged the *clearly* unconstitutional Fed’s constitutionality in court?”, this book is the *only* place you’re going to find them….

Pieces of Eight nails the source of the wrongness indelibly to the wall. In the words of an Amazon review appearing as of this writing: “Reading the last few chapters of this the 2d edition released in 2002 is like reading prophecy about the economic situation that the US is experiencing in 2009.”

People who know me well know I’m definitely not one to go around spouting Bible verses, but in this case, one sticks out — Hosea 4:6 “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” Dr. Vieira is taking the risk that there are a sufficient number of people out there who care enough about our Republic to take the effort to learn what TRULY went wrong, and how to fix it. If there are not, and the free market of ideas (what little is left of it and the 1st Amendment, anyway) does not choose to support it, then we are all truly, utterly, and completely screwed anyway.

Is that the case? Or will you do what is necessary, NOW, to read this book, and ensure that this powerful “sword of knowledge” does not remain sheathed?

Reviewer D. P. Owen from Amazon says:

This is a mammoth, exhaustive history of the money of the United States, from before the Constitution down to the present. It is the greatest work of erudition that I have every seen by a single person. It is two volumes and over 1700 pages with 6000+ cites. The author has read and analyzed all the court cases, Congressional debates, laws concerning money, banking, etc. through out US history. He tells the places where the US went wrong economically, constitutionally, and monetarily and what to do about it to correct it. The author is a lawyer who believes in original intent interpretation of the Constitution and is of the Austrian school of economics. Reading the last few chapters of this the 2d edition released in 2002 is like reading prophecy about the economic situation that the US is experiencing in 2009. This book is highly recommended. It is expensive to buy and can only be found used at this time. I got it on interlibrary loan.

Reviwer Sunnankar from Amazon says:

Pieces of Eight is THE definitive legal treatise on monetary jurisprudence. I have trained my own economic Padawans but Dr. Vieira is the Master Yoda of this branch of learning and Pieces of Eight is his seminal and impeccable work. This is an essential reference resource for anyone interested in money, currency and American law. These books are not for the intellectually lazy or undisciplined.

Reviewer DiscipleAaron from Amazon says:

The work is assembled logically, mostly along the time-line of history that American economics has traveled over its course. From pre-Constitution epochs, through our 13 colonial paper money experiments, through the Coinage Acts of early times, through the first Greenbacks, and into the modern era of “the Fed.” No stones are left unturned in true, constitutional scholarship fashion within these covers.

Worth whatever might be the price, in new or used varieties — if you want to understand American money, this is the ONLY source of information you will likely ever need. But again, it was written by a scholar. And it should be read by scholars. Put on your thinking cap before sitting down to read it. You will never regret owning it. Every member of every state legislature ought to fully digest it before taking their oath of office. Even more so for congress-critters. You need not pawn off the subject of economics to “professionals.” Read and understand what Dr. Vieira exposes in this writing, and you will know vastly more than the “professionals” do about the monetary clauses of our common Constitution.

Pieces of Eight is more like a reference book, a treasured reference at that.

To give you an idea of what is in there, you can read Edwin Vieira’s Cross of Gold PDF, which deserves its own review as well.  This needs to be memed into weaponized form…time to buckle down and get Kek to work on making the monetary powers and disabilities of the Constitution of the United States into bite sized memes.

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Hatch Act/An Act To Prevent Pernicious Political Activities 1939

Finding this text should have been easy.  After numerous unsuccessful searches, I finally uncovered the original text. My initial search for background on the Hatch Act turned up generic and vacuous suspicious language, so I began digging.  Turns out the original language of the Hatch Act is quite readable and was hailed by a newspaper back then as a “Bill of Rights” for preventing voter fraud.  Little wonder it isn’t the top 10 of search results.  Yet another reason to avoid Google searches — I recommend DuckDuckGo.

The most interesting part in our hyper partisan environment today is: “it shall be unlawful…to deprive…or threaten to deprive, by any means, any person of any employment, position, work, compensation… on account of …any political activity, support of, or opposition to any candidate… in any election.”  Legal grounds to sue if your politically incorrect views rial the SJWs to action.  A good way to make the rubble bounce if  attacked.  I wouldn’t expect this to carry the battle in a converged organization, but useful bedrock law & principal when you have an amenable authority.

The spectre of Joseph McCarthy is enough to whip leftists into a frenzy, which is reason enough to dig into the fear.  “It shall be unlawful for any person employed… by the Federal Government… to have membership in any political party or organization which advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government in the United States.”  Powerful, unequivocal statement. Leftists have since focused on subverting the constitution with an end run, vice a frontal attempt to overthrow.  The useful question is, how are leftists actually advocating the overthrow of the constitution today?  Advocation for socalism IS advocation the overthrow of the constitution, but is not really viewed that way these days.  They hide their subversion thru incremental changes very well.  Exposing how they do this can be powerful knowledge and coupled to persuasive rhetoric.

Be it enacted, That it shall be unlawful for any person to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or to attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, or Member of the House of Representatives at any election….

SEC. 2. It shall be unlawful for any person employed in any administrative position by the United States, or by any department, independent agency, or other agency of the United States (including any corporation controlled by the United States or any agency thereof, and any corporation all of the capital stock of which is owned by the United States or any agency thereof ), to use his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting the election or the nomination of any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential electors Member of the Senate, or Member of the House of Representatives, Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories and insular possessions.

SEC. 3. It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to promise any employment, position, work, compensation, or other benefit, provided for or made possible ill whole or in part by any Act of Congress, to give consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in any election.

SEC. 4. Except as may be required by the provisions of subsection (b), section 9 of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any persons to deprive, attempt to deprive, or threaten to deprive, by any means, any person of any employment, position, work, compensation, or other benefit provided for or made possible by any Act of Congress appropriating funds for work relief or relief purposes, on account of race, creed, color, or any political activity, support of, or opposition to any candidate or any political party in any election.

SEC. 5. It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or receive or be in any manner concerned in soliciting or receiving any assessment, subscription, or contribution for any political purpose whatever from any person known by him to be entitled to or receiving compensation, employment, or other benefit provided for or made possible by any Act of Congress appropriating funds for work relief or relief purposes.

SEC. 6. It shall be unlawful for any person I for political purposes to furnish or to disclose, or to aid or assist in furnishing or disclosing, any list or names of persons receiving compensation, employment, or benefits provided for or made possible by any Act of Congress appropriating, or authorizing the appropriation of, funds for work relief or relief purposes, to a political candidate, committee, campaign manager, or to any person for delivery to a political candidate, committee, or campaign manager, and it shall be unlawful for any person to receive any such list or names for political purposes.

SEC. 7. No part of any appropriation made by any Act, heretofore or hereafter enacted making appropriations for work relief, relief, or otherwise to increase employment by providing loans and grants for public-works projects, shall be used for the purpose of, and no authority conferred by any such Act upon any person shall be exercised or administered for the purpose of, interfering with, restraining, or coercing any individual in the exercise of his right to vote at any election.

SEC. 8. Any person who violates any of the foregoing provisions of this Act upon convict ;on thereof shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

SEC. 9. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person employed in the executive branch of the Federal Government, or any agency or department thereof, to use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering ;with an election or affecting the result thereof. No officer or employee in the executive branch of the Federal Government, or any agency or department thereof, shall take any active part in political management or in political campaigns. All such persons shall retain the right to vote as they may choose and to express their opinions on all political subjects. For the purposes of this section the term “officer” or “employee” shall not be construe to include (1) the President and the Vice Presdent of the United States; (2) persons whose compensation is paid from the appropriation for the office of the President;

(l) heads and assistant heads of executive departments; (4) officers who are appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and who determine policies to be pursued by the United States in its relations with foreign powers or in the Nation-wide administration of Federal laws.

(b) Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be immediately removed from the position or office held by him, and thereafter no part of the funds appropriated by any Act of Congress for such position or office shall be used to pay the compensation of such person.

SEC. 9A. (1) It shall be unlawful for any person employed in any capacity by any agency of the Federal Government, whose compensation, or any part thereof, is paid from funds authorized or appropriated by any Act of Congress, to have membership in any political party or organization which advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government in the United States.

(2) Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be immediately removed from the position or office held by him, and thereafter no part of the funds appropriated by any Act of Congress for such position or office shall be used to pay the compensation of such person.

SEC. 10. All provisions of this Act shall be in addition to, not in substitution for, of existing law.

SEC. 11. If any provision of this Act, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of the Act, and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Equality is the opposite of quality

Over at Amerika, Removing the parasites and their Justifications:

Universal Education.
Welfare.
Human rights.
Women’s rights.
Gay rights.
Unions.
Equality.
Atheism.

All these things are entirely destructive, and none of them can be criticized.
Their removal, over time, would go a long way towards the restoration of a functional civilization.

Analysis: True.

Through equality, and the vote to legitimize parasitism as equal to contribution and therefore to justify both government power and all these great “free” benefits programs, societies destroy themselves. Equality is the opposite of quality, and without quality, you get third-world levels of social function, and eventually third-world people show up to displace you since you are not doing any better than they are, but have more wealth.

Equality is the opposite of quality — a great rhetorical play on words to throw into the mix!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Diversity + Proximity = ___

Keoni make the case that Diversity + Proximity = Miscegenation and cultural homogenization over the long term with Hawaii as the example on a small scale.

http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2014-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2015-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=31

In the 21st century, the Native Hawaiian race has been miscegenated to the brink of extinction. We are now almost completely assimilated into the globalized matrix of the Brave New World Order, and our colonization and subjugation is nearly complete. Mass miscegenation is the end result of the racial and cultural divide and conquer tactics THEY first use when they gain control of the government of any nation throughout history. Almost no modern Hawaiian today could ever seriously advocate the expulsion of the various races that have taken up permanent residence here.

No present day Hawaiian is going to support kicking out their Japanese grandmother or Chinese uncle or Filipino cousin or their Caucasian spouse’s family to reclaim Kingdom of Hawaii for the Hawaiians. Thus, multi-generational miscegenation ensures entrenched loyalty to the new system THEY adminster, for which all the various imported races are now dependent on to exist in our present reality.

What THEY have done to Hawaii, they are now doing to the rest of the West.

Many bloggers of these politically incorrect fringes of teh Interwebz have touted the equation championed by the so-called ‘race realists’ of “neo-reaction” and “the dark enlightenment”: diversity + proximity = war. That’s simply the short view of the Cultural Marxist’s use of multi-cult diversity and proximity as a social engineering tool to divide and conquer.

While enforced proximity serves the divide part of the equation in the short term, as long as the proximity is enforced over the span of multiple generations, the equation turns out quite differently: diversity + proximity = miscegenation and cultural homogenization.

This homogenized culture is no longer defined by race or ethnicity, but by the shared experiences and values of the mixed society that emerges from the blending of cultural traditions and customs by forced proximity over time.

This is the story of Hawaii, and it mirrors the story of the “white race” of America too. The history of American immigration is a history of every type of “white” immigrating from the old world and miscegenating freely in the new world.

In the 21st century, we casually refer to “white race” and the “white majority” or in $JW parlance “white privilege” or “white hegemony.” But 16th and 17th century immigrants to America certainly didn’t look at it that way. English, French, German, Spanish, Poles, Scots, Irish, Italians, Russians, et al all came in successive waves of migration, with each newcoming group of whiteskins getting the “nigger” treatment by the previous whiteskin migrants.

There was no ‘white’ solidarity and racial consciousness until several generations of Anglo-Euro-Celtic-Nordic-Aryan-Russo-Mediterranean whiteskins mixed and miscegenated into a melange of paleface uniformity, consolidated and unified by social conflict from proximity with “the others” of red, black, yellow and brown-skinned peoples.

But in another generation or two, these race-based conflicts are going to be a long distant memory, as all the various races mix, mingle and miscegenate. Soon enough we will all be nothing but a mass of intermixed peoples united under the tyranny of a global elite…an elite that are largely united by a specific religious ethos…the literal religion of Anti-Christ.

For everything THEY have done, is driven by the desire to overthrow any culture and society, whether they be composed of brown, black, red, yellow or white skinned people, that is based on the foundational teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Short term proximate diversity causes divisive conflict.  Long term the native culture is compromised or anhiliated.  Whether that is good or bad depends on the culture under siege. Native American culture has been all but anhiliated.

From the comments:

If you’re looking for a motive, it would serve them to weaken any national, tribal, or individual resistance.

A homogeneous culture is much more resistant to change as change stands out against the backdrop of cultural traditions.

A heterogenous culture is much easier to mold as people are conditioned to cultural variability.

Is there a corelation between cultural diversity and liberalism?  Hawaii is one of the most liberal states.  If Leftism is the destruction of the Father,  cultural diversity/immigration are the cucolding of the Father’s beliefs.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Alt-Right Intro

For those new to the Alt-Right, The Alt-Right’s Settled Debates

This a list of points that the six sigma spread in the Alt-Right would agree on.

Between 2008 and 2013. The great debates on male-female dynamics, race, and the future of our nations shifted into high gear in 2008 at Chateau Heartiste and related blogs. I single out the Chateau because that’s where the passion and the new ideas churned and then fanned out to the broader culture.

So here is the Alt-Right consensus:

Blacks. They require assistance in achieving and maintaining a level of civic and material comfort on par with that of other races. Quantity + Equality = Can’t Have Nice Things.

Christianity. It is not an internally settled matter. For some, Christian faith is a non-negotiable foundation of our identity with implications on the afterlife. Others see it as detrimental to our vitality.

Democracy. In its present form, it is the rule by those who control the formation of public opinion and whose interests are not aligned with the interests of the voters. The two-party system in the United States is real, just like pro wrestling.

Family. While the role of extended families varies by culture, the traditional patriarchal model is the only one that provides a healthy environment for raising children.

Immigration. It is harmful to Western nations at present levels, low-skill immigration in particular. Manifest incompatibility between host and guest populations belie the economic- or demography-based arguments in favor of mass immigration.

Institutions. Traditionally conservative or masculine institutions such as the Republican party, the military, large corporations, mainline churches, and professional sports have been coopted by liberalism.

Islam. Don’t let it in.

Jews. As self-identified minorities with an enduring identity, they have acquired — justly or not — a reputation for subverting their host nations. Israel is a model of practical nationalism.

Multiculturalism. Diversity is not our strength. The involuntary comingling of disparate peoples is not “enriching.”

Race. It is a fundamental element of a human being’s identity. The human biodiversity model is predictive on the macro scale.

Religion. A purely materialist philosophy is insufficient as a pillar of a culture or an ethical system. Nobody wants to die over a contract.

Russia. It is not a potential threat to any Western nation beyond her near-abroad European neighbors. An enemy-of-an-enemy is an ally, and our common adversary is U.S.-led globalism.

Sex. The female is attracted to male power, charm, and confidence. She has contempt for male weakness or supplication. The male is attracted to the female’s youth, beauty, and femininity and is repulsed by her physical or moral decay.

USA. Her foreign and domestic policy is controlled by interests whose ambitions are at odds with the welfare of her own citizens, the existential question of Western nations, and geopolitical stability.

Whites. Interracial obligations do not justify self-destructive sacrifice on the part of the White benefactor, nor are they mandated by any notion of historic debt. Charges of racism fail to explain the disparity between the achievements of Whites and others.

Women. They crave male leadership and go batshit without it. Given the power, they will destroy their world, especially from the voting booth. Don’t listen to what she says — watch what she does.

Comments are the gold mine of any great blog.  If you are unacustomed to browsing comments, you are missing the true gems.

As Lucius wrote in his linked commentary on this post, this post is in fact is “an ecumenical consensus in view,” which is why most of it sounds more moderate than my other writing. This post is not a list of demands, which would take an extreme starting point as per normal negotiation strategy. Rather, the points in it are (as I noted) areas of agreement.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Boo the Villians, Cheer the Heroes

The genius of Athol Kay is distilling red pill truth into understandable, memorable, actionable advice on dealing with women. Boo the Villians, Cheer the Heroes reminds us that women need to connect emotionally.

Most women have a need to verbally decompress their day. Which is a fancy way of saying they need to talk when they come from work, or you come home from work when they’ve been home all day. Women tend to be more emotionally fluid than men, and it can often seem to the guy like he’s been dropped into a verbal puking of half a dozen emotions and disconnected storylines. This is just her  clearing her daily event cache.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Alpha Jedediah

Welcome to Alpha Jedediah!

Alpha Jed for short.

Things that Fascinate me:
– God & the Bible
– Western Civilization
– US & the Constitution
– Physics
– Philosophy
– Politics
– Sex
– Economics
– Self-Improvement
– Masculinity

Exploring the foundations of truth and wisdom. The world is hard to understand without a proper understanding of the foundations that invariably lay hidden beneath the confused conventional wisdom of everyday life.  Writing this blog is an attempt to capture those understandings and get feedback as well.
Many great physicists have a penetrating philosophical outlook.  Richard Feynman certainly fits that mold.  Imagine my surprise to discover Feynman’s rumination on Western Civilization 60 years ago:

In this age of specialization men who thoroughly know one field are often incompetent to discuss another.  The great problems of the relations between one and another aspect of human activity have for this reason been discussed less and less in public. When we look at the past great debates on these subjects we feel jealous of those times, for we should have liked the excitement of such argument. The old problems, such as the relation of science and religion, are still with us, and I believe present as difficult dilemmas as ever, but they are not often publicly discussed because of the limitations of specialization.

Western civilization, it seems to me, stands by two great heritages. One is the scientific spirit of adventure — the adventure into the unknown, an unknown which must be recognized as being unknown in order to be explored; the demand that the unanswerable mysteries of the universe remain unanswered; the attitude that all is uncertain; to summarize it — the humility of the intellect. The other great heritage is Christian ethics — the basis of action on love, the brotherhood of all men, the value of the individual — the humility of the spirit.

These two heritages are logically, thoroughly consistent. But logic is not all; one needs one’s heart to follow an idea. If people are going back to religion, what are they going back to? Is the modern church a place to give comfort to a man who doubts God — more, one who disbelieves in God? Is the modern church a place to give comfort and encouragement to the value of such doubts? So far, have we not drawn strength and comfort to maintain the one or the other of these consistent heritages in a way which attacks the values of the other? Is this unavoidable? How can we draw inspiration to support these two pillars of western civilization so that they may stand together in full vigor, mutually unafraid? Is this not the central problem of our time?

Remarks at a Caltech YMCA lunch forum (2 May 1956)

Intellectual and Spiritual Humility & Heart!

How can we draw inspiration to support the pillars of western civilization.

Let the exploration begin.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment