North Carolina One Step Closer to Joining States Banning CRT

Paul Collier August 30, 2021

On a mostly partisan vote of 25-17, the North Carolina Senate passed new rules that would seek to limit race relations lessions from schools. The billis called the Ensuring Dignity & Nondiscrimination/Schools. Act.

The key red flag in this bill from a Bill of Rights standpoint is this, (7) the belief that the United States is a meritocracy is racist or sexist or was created by members of a particular race or sex to oppress members of another race or sex.

For a school to teach that particular perspective as objective fact might be highly problematic to a pluralistic Democratic-Republic bounded by a Bill of Rights based Constitution. But for a school to teach that particular perspective as a perspective, and not fact, seems to go beyond protecting the rights of children to not be discriminated against because of their gender, their sexual orientation, their race, their religion, or even their political views.

For the most part, this bill seems to mostly do just that.

Here is the key summary from that act:
Prohibits public school units from promoting seven specified belief concepts as follows: (1) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex; (2) an individual, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; (3) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex; (4) an individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex; (5) an individual, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex; (6) any individual, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex, should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress; and (7) the belief that the United States is a meritocracy is racist or sexist or was created by members of a particular race or sex to oppress members of another race or sex. Defines promote to include three types of actions: (1) compelling students or school employees to affirm or profess the seven described belief concepts; (2) including the described belief concepts in educational or professional settings in a way that reasonably appears to sponsor, approve or endorse them; or (3) contracting, hiring, or engaging persons for the purpose of advocating the described belief concepts. Specifies that the statute does not prohibit constitutionally protected speech; individually accessing materials that advocate the described belief concepts for research or independent study; or stating the described belief concepts or assigning materials that incorporate such concepts for educational purposes in contexts that make clear the public school unit does not sponsor, approve, or endorse such concepts or work.

Read the full bill here.

But this last part might even assuage some of the fears I expressed above, “Specifies that the statute does not prohibit constitutionally protected speech; individually accessing materials that advocate the described belief concepts for research or independent study; or stating the described belief concepts or assigning materials that incorporate such concepts for educational purposes in contexts that make clear the public school unit does not sponsor, approve, or endorse such concepts or work.”

Here, it seems the bill is careful to alllow for the expression of opinion and the introduction of ideas that might reflect even some of the beliefs this bill is specifically targeting the schools not to teach kids.

This bill seems to be as good a faith an effort as you can make to trying to walk the line between assuring government-run schools are not fundamentally violating the rights of its students and their parents by teaching children ideas that are violations in and of themselves of our Bill of Rights foundation as a people, as Americans.

As I’ve said many times before, we are a pluralistic land, in point of fact, and we need, as a people who are here, who can exchange value with one another across multiple political, religious, philosophical divides, so long as we share the same civic governance standards, and for this nation, those standards are the Bill of Rights. These are the only remaining standards that make us American at all. Without them, no one is American anymore.

And for me, America is worth attempting to hold on to, at her core, if not her outward veneer, the most recent one of the past, and certainly not the one we have today, a new veneer, where the Bill of Rights values are extended not just in governmental halls, but in public squares and marketplaces as well, for all who interact in those spaces, the owners, the workers, the customers, etc.

Of course, the devil is in the details, and it remains to be seen what final form this bill will take, but, for now, while I do not believe they need item seven, I think the ‘does not prohibit’ clause leaves plenty of room to express a multiplicities of perspectives on what was, what is, and might be, in an American context, respecting the Bills of Rights of the students and the parents regpardless of your personal beliefs as an agent of the government.

I think this is a reasonable request.

Who Are The Real World Powers?

Bill Collier August 30, 2021

Most of us don’t really, consciously, know who the REAL world powers are. Most of us have been fooled and manipulated into joining a political tribe, led by bogeyman fears and empty promises, to support personalities, a party, or policies that actually don’t represent our interests, respect our human dignity and human rights, exhibit any concern for our well-being or happiness, or seek to advance our human flourishing!

If someone asks who the real world powers are and if we then reply with a list of countries, then we truly don’t understand the nature of the world and who runs things. Not understanding the nature of the true world powers leads us to bad information and even worse potential responses to the things that are going on around us.

Countries are powers in their own right, but as a coherent class with its own self-interest, most countries, or the political apparatus that rules them, aren’t represented even by their own governments. When we say, for instance, “America bombed ISIS” we assume the interests of the country, as in most all Americans, were served and the intentions and consensus of their people were represented by the action. But most of the time, since the dawn of the 21st century, and even earlier in many cases, countries like America or Germany or Indonesia aren’t represented as a coherent class with its own self-interest by their respective governments.

The true powers that use the governments of various countries as vehicles of wealth and aggrandizement for themselves alone have parochial interests that are diametrically opposed to the pure self-interest of the vast majority of the people in those countries. In short, “America” isn’t invading all these countries to fight “terrorism”, that’s just the excuse, the lie. Americans, as in service members, who have been fooled to believe they are fighting for “America” are being used in these misadventures, but “America” as a country, in its interests and informed sentiment, is actually being harmed by these things.

The true “powers” ruling most countries are non-state entities, in some cases a coherent whole, like the Communist Party of China which is essentially a mob-like operation, or, as in America and the West, mega corporate monopolies, or those aspiring to be monopolies, who have gained control over all the major political parties until almost all politicians serve on the corpostate factions.

Public sentiment, easily manipulated and exploited, often reactive to misinformation or a lack of information, is the medium of combat, but it isn’t the prime mover in events. The machinations of the true corpostate powers and all their factions is what controls, manipulates, and exploits public sentiment. Most “political contests” which we see as “right versus left” battles fought between the voters who decide who wins, are a sham. Neither the sentiments expressed nor the engagements in political debate, are the real prime mover in what is happening.

Stipulating that Trump lost the election and Democrats won all by legal means, if also helped by unethical but legal unfairness, we might think the citizenry voted for leftism over rightism, or something like that. In reality, a faction of corpostate powers defeated another faction through controlling the election outcome by various means, including using falsehoods and concealing truths so that almost every “voter” was essentially programmed by their faction to vote a certain way, and not in their own self-interest.

It’s not that voters are stupid or venile, thinking everyone who voted for a Biden or a Trump is thus and so type of person is actually fostered by the factions to keep people at each other’s throats instead of focusing on the actual forces at play. Voters only know what they know and many don’t have a few minutes a day, let alone the hours many of us who engage in political work do, to analyze or assess. Many don’t know the right questions and don’t have all the facts: none of the partisan opinion molders, left or right, even attempt to serve their audience fairly or ethically with objective truth.

Demonizing or denigrating voters, calling them names and questioning their mental acuity, is wrong-headed because those people are acting on powerfully manipulative influences that combine fear and promises and that make those people form a tribal identity with a person and/or a party. To pretend that this is inexcusable on the part of these voters is to pretend that this isn’t absolutely the normal way the true ruling class control the masses.

It is not Trump versus Biden or Democrats versus Republicans, it is multiple factions within a corpostate structure manipulating public sentiment to acheive their own parochial aims at the public expense.

Whether you declaim against “Trumpdavidian cultists” who follow Q or woke cancel culture kool-aid drinkers, you are focused on the results of what has happened, a battle to corral public sentiment and control it, rather than what is really happening. Your instinct should be to distrust and be suspicious of any mass wave sentiment or the blaring headlines which claim a crisis or serious “political fight.” When everyone in an entire camp seems to be in lockstep, consider that it is most likely everything about this is manufactured for intentions which are designed to remain hidden.

The word “corpostate” can be triggering to some who feel it sounds too “conspiratorial” or too “out there”, but it’s really a true expression of the unholy marriage between corporate bosses and the political state, with the corporate bosses having the upper hand because the political class need their money and support. And by “corporate bosses” we don’t mean CEO’s, we mean the people who directly or indirectly own the shares and who, often quietly and in shadow, call the shots.

You can name a George Soros or Warren Buffet as the poster children for the corpostate, but we suspect these front-facing actors are merely the tip of the iceberg. Making Soros a bogeyman is misguided, it may stem in part from a latent antisemitism, and it’s unproductive. His preachments and legerdemain are noxious to be sure, but he is definitely not the sole or major bad actor and the nature of his investment and financial empire means he is more likely dancing to the tune of those he depends on than his own tune.

What we call the corpostate is not a cohesive entity, they don’t have a board or secret council, it is more a description of how power is shared and used. “The corpostate” is shorthand for a system whereby corporate shot-callers engage in and control the political class and the apparent political battles that seem to be based on public sentiment are actually the seesaw battles between corpostate factions. The political class has ideology and/or their own parochial interests and tries to harness the corporate backers without ceding too much power to them while the corporate shot-callers back various politicians to essentially buy them as clients who must do their bidding.

So we have this battle between factions, including corporate and political class factions, and we also have the battle between the political class and the corporate class. The political class want to use corporations to advance their ideological and parochial interests while the corporate class want to use the political class to get the state to back their corporate interests.

It’s not as simple as saying the corporate ruling class control the politicians or that the politicians are now using corporations to do things the state cannot legally do, like spy on people or cancel their political opponents. It is essentially “both and”, and the multitude of factions and conflicting interests can seem inscrutable to the casual observer. Public sentiment expressed in polls and votes isn’t meaningless per se, but it is mostly manufactured and manipulated and isn’t the true driving force in the political or corporate spheres. It is a factor and cannot be ignored, hence the reason various factions lavish billions on the “press”, platforms, entertainment, and academia, even at great losses, in order to control that sentiment as much as possible.

The true powers are, basically, a combination of corporate ruling class factions and their corresponding but competing political class factions. The people or the country as a whole are merely the pawns all factions must seek to manipulate and control and even to fling at their opponents from time to time.

This isn’t a conspiracy. It is something that has always been present in some form but that has never, at least in America, been so obvious and prevalent. In the past, though the vote was limited to mostly wealthier white males, the voters had more power than the factions, because it was hard to conduct mass hypnosis campaigns and brainwash people. The organns of acculturation such as academia and the press were too decentralized and localized to allow such top-down control.

These factions are defined as groups of the ruling class who connect and collaborate, usually informally on on a more temporary basis, but sometimes through more permanent alliances, and who share similar interests in particular or general outcomes. For instance, those who profit from weapons and defense supplies desire endless wars to keep demand high, while others may desire a certain country be diminished because its policies hurt their bottom line. Certain political class factions may actually desire an ideological outcome and convince some corporations to alter their “community standards” to make it easier to manipulate voters in their favor, but those same platform owners may have other financial interests, including fat government contracts, that they can gain through doing the bidding of that political class faction.

The political warfare landscape is a whirlwind of competing factions, usually classified as corporate or political class shot-callers, but sometimes a single faction may include a coterie of both political class and corporate class shot-callers.

While gaining and mobilizing public sentiment is the chief field of action, and while those who oppose this corpostate hegemony over the national interest must engage in that arena, the public sentiment itself isn’t the prime mover in this battle. When we assess public sentiment our goal is to understand which faction or factions has the upper hand. Public sentiment reveals who has the upper hand, it doesn’t predict who will have the upper hand because it is acted upon more by the factions than it acts upon them.

As we assess this, a problem emerges in that we cannot readily define the factions or their “order of battle”, the factions are rarely permanent, and their alliances are shifting. If you think the political fight in America is between “Democrats and Republicans” then you are observing the after-effects rather than the causes of the conflict, you aren’t observing the actual factions per se.

Any issue, from “the virus”, to “climate change”, to communists in government, to “white supremacy” and anything else there is a crescendo of alarmism regarding should be viewed through this lens: is it TRUE and what factions benefit from whatever “solution” is presented to “solve” the so-called “crisis.” If we are ever caught on a bandwagon in which major acculturation agents all parrot the same narrative we should be deeply suspicious that we are being played because, chances are, we are.

Our concept and use of the term “corpostate” represents the true nature of the ongoing battle to harness and control the country’s resources and people for the interests of corporate class and political class factions, it doesn’t mean there is some grand conspiracy of a corpostate empire that meets every Friday to determine events and outcomes. It describes the way things are done, through the legerdemain of and competition between these often shifting and temporary factions.

If we understand this we may see that public sentiment, which is a potent tool all factions seek to harness and control, has become the field of battle but it isn’t itself the main driving force in what that battle will be over and what the objectives are. We may also see that “countries” are rarely the actors on the world stage but their resources are harnessed by corpostate factions for interests that often run countet to the interests and well-being even of those who “vote for” that faction’s candidates.

Defining Freedom and Building Freedom

Bill Collier August 29, 2021

Defining and building freedom in our lives, relationships, associations, and communities is a vital necessity in this unforgiving time of troubles. Freedom is being hunted by a complex junta of corporate and political rulers and America is devolving into a land of serfs where everyone who isn’t a ruler is a slave.

We must not allow the controversies and blaring breaking news headlines distract us from the fundamentals or keep our eyes off our true course, we must resort, again and again, to the sacred and just standards of freedom as intended by our Creator. If you do not have this focus and intentionality you will become too easily distracted by the bogeyman fears and utopian promises and by your own partisan identity to notice yet another war crime against the cause of freedom.

Leaving behind the sophistry and nuance of wordsmiths who may debate the meaning of freedom in some sort of bloodless, academic, and detached tone, we should define freedom in a more practical, everyday manner.

For Freedomists, freedom is the domain of the free, people created in the image of God and who own an inherent spiritual sovereignty from which all other individual and shared forms of sovereignty are derived. In practical terms, freedom is a condition in which most all decisions and common norms or standards that govern your life emanate mostly from you, then those you freely associate with, then your very local community of all your fellow citizens, and, finally, and in a minor capacity, the states, the corporate world, and the federal government.

From the perspective of how one obtains and maintains freedom, and all these things must be voluntary, not imposed, it is necessary to exercise and achieve civic and moral virtue, liberty as defined by the original spirit and intent of the US Bill of Rights, and independence through material autonomy and self-reliance at the individual to local scale. In short, one needs virtue, liberty, and independence to obtain and maintain freedom, but the pursuit of these things must be strictly voluntary.

Whatever bogeyman you fear or whatever utopian promises you crave, if the policies and actions devised materially hinder one’s ability as an individual in free association with others to obtain the conditions of and exercise the practices of virtue, liberty, and independence, then one is committing a crime against humanity. Everything must be judged through this litmus test: does it IMPEDE any individual in free association with others from exercising or obtaining virtue, liberty, or independence?

The condition of freedom, obtained and maintained through virtue, liberty, and independence, is a condition every person and every community of people own all sovereign authority as unto God to seek and obtain and then maintain without hindrance. Every hindrance thereto is in fact a crime against God Himself, whose own sovereignty is conveyed to and through each individual human being.

We define freedom in these terms. We understand the world of sophists and philosophers, the world of pundits and politicians, will continue to debate freedom, often in stark partisan rhetorical terms with all participants missing the point and only using freedom as a cover for their hidden agenda.

One might argue, and many do, that the left wants “freedoms” that obliterate independence, the right want freedoms that obliterate virtue. Whether or not you see it this way, neither the left nor the right in American politics has advanced the cause of freedom or consistently lived up to the freedom standard as defined by virtue, liberty, and independence. For example, the right gave us “the Patriot Act”, the left gave us the IRS!

Building freedom is not easy or simple. To build freedom one must also engage in civic and political activism, at least to try and mitigate the overstep of corporations and the state, both of which wield an unhealthy amount of power and tend to make the three standards of freedom difficult to obtain.

The above being said, it is urgent that you understand that the foundation of freedom building is that which you do as an individual and in free association with others. If your civic and moral virtue is lacking, why do you think a more civically and morally virtuous person will rise to power in the corporate and political worlds which essentially run your life? Without your own respect for the liberty of all, sans favoritism or prejudice, how then can you expect such respect for yourself from more power corporate and governmental authorities? Without the intentional and deliberate pursuit of your own material independency how can you expect independence from the influence and control of the corporations and government?

If we want to build freedom we cannot eschew civic or political activism, but neither must we allow ourselves to be or feel limited to these venues of action. Understanding and using virtue, liberty, and independence first as an individual and then in freewill participation with others is the foundation of building freedom in your own life, relationships, and associations.

Perhaps you should more diligently study what freedom is in its standards and what practices one must engage in to actualize those standards in a meaningful way in your own life. Building freedom is a deliberate act that will be an inconvenience and sacrifice, especially because this present sociocultural and socioeconomic structures, governed by corporate and political rulers from the top down, is designed to keep people down as serfs. For those who refuse to be serfs, just using what is convenient and handy and trying to fit in isn’t a viable option: only rulers are served and serfs are managed by these structures and arrangements. If you neither seek to be ruler nor accept your role as a serf, then everything from how you spend your time and money to who you do this with just radically change.

Everyone who doesn’t have a way of defining freedom that is similar to this way we are defining it and who doesn’t actively seek to build it, even when it is not convenient, is a serf or a ruler, and is most likely a serf. Don’t be a serf. Define your freedom and build your freedom in your own life and relationships, be deliberate and intentional, and make respect for freedom the litmus test for who your inner circle are.

We Must Build New Communities

Bill Collier August 28, 2021

Bill Collier- Without support from other people who share the same culture and who are materially self-sustaining, a culture will die. This requires the development of new communities that have norms and standards of conduct, as well as decision-making structures, that strongly reflect their own cultural convictions and way of life.

You must realize that the top-down political culture that permeates your society and imposes barbaric norms that previous generations rightly saw as moral depravity. The formation of new communities, which can be in one contiguous space or distributed, is essential to preserving our Judeo-Christian worldview and way of life. The ability to form such clusters of people who have their own material independency and their own sociocultural and socioeconomic norms and standards is an inherent right that no person or government has any morally justifiable jurisdiction over.

The ability to form such community with others who are of the same mind is being hounded and limited by authoritarianism, but, regardless of the law, our rights to self-determination are inviolate and come from God. Our tendency to work within the law inasmuch as we are able doesn’t mean we morally concur with any notion that the state has legitimate power over our freewill participatory communities.

The barbaric savages and their alt-gendered atomization not only desire this hedonistic and perverted way of life, based on animalistic self-gratification, but they most definitely want to destroy any mechanisms by which a culture founded upon millenia of historic Christian moral and doctrinal orthodoxy can preserve itself. But to God we must be true.

Our goal must be to create sociocultural and socioeconomic structures in the form of local intentional communities, even if they are distributed, that nurture this Judeo-Christian worldview and way of life. The legal structures and means may require quite a creative and multi-faceted approach with multiple different types of legal entities with different functions all coordinating to essentially, de facto, creat a materially and economically autononous community where the social, cultural, and economic standards and norms are still strongly guided by a Judeo-Christian worldview.

Again, the barbarian savages don’t want Judeo-Christian communities to emerge because they know these communities will thrive and will provide a strong freedom option to their alt-gendered authoritarianism. We don’t have to fear them because the God of Creation is not their God, they are not on His side, we are on His side, and we are doing his work. Therefore God will guide and protect us but we MUST take the first bold steps.

The call to form communities based on some form of Christian nationhood defined by Kingdom essentials and His standards of righteousness and justice with freedom and prosperity is the radical imperative of our time.

Politics Is NOT Downstream of Culture In A Dysfunctional Society

Bill Collier August 28, 2021

Politics should reflect culture and not the other way around, but in a dysfunctional society, politics dictates culture from a top-down position and often through some combination of manipulative, coerciolve, or outright authoritarian measures. To fix this in the long term requires a building of alternative sociocultural and socioeconomic structures that somehow become independent in a material way from the politicized structures, but in the short to mid term, merely abdicating the political arena is not a solution.

Today politics, that is ideological agendas, are guiding most American institutions, from monopoly corporate cartels like Silicon Valley to the so-called press and academia, and even much of the church establishment. Political policies, laws and regulations, are driving a societal devolution to libertine anarchy, the atomization of individuals, the breakdown of faith and family, and the increasingly monopoly power of one party and a few corporations.

The Supreme Court ruling on “gay marriage” did not in any sense flow from culture, but most people embraced it rather than defy it and the culture bowed to politics in a really gross manner that further erodes faith and family. Everyone who thought they could prop up marriage and family by purely cultural activities and that this would somehow prevent the state from using “gay marriage” to assault religious freedom and further atomize the individual within a hedonistic culture, was wrong.

The issue as to whether two adults can form any bond they wish and the issue as to whether other adults must recognize that bond are separate, but the Supreme Court enshrined a new definition of marriage, which has always been a sociocultural construct, which it is now “illegal” to even speak against. Politics intruded into the family and transformed marriage into a purely political institution dictated and regulated by the state. The goal was never for people to choose who they loved, it was to eliminate the sanctuary of the home and the sanctity of marriage which offer a ready-made bulwark against totalitarianism.

Our stance on marriage has always been that different sociocultural groups should be free to define marriage and family on their terms without state intervention, beyond enforcing any contracts made. On the other hand, no group or person should be forced or coerced in any way to accept or validate any form of marriage they feel morally opposed to. The goal of the Supreme Court was not to enshrine a right to self-determination in such matters, it was to shift the definition of marriage on ideological grounds and to positively force that definition on everyone. In short, the goal was to end marriage as a sociocultural construct outside political control.

So now we have culture literally being created through ideological litmus tests as to that which is allowed. Your sociocultural and socioeconomic reality and norms are coming through a combination of politically engaged monopoly corporations, who control the economy and discourse in a monopolistic manner, and by politicians and government bureaucrats, whose edicts replace the normal and organic process of consensus and freewill participation in sociocultural and socioeconomic structures outside the control of corporations or the state.

To simply say, as the late Andrew Brietbart once said, that “politics is downstream of culture” is wishful thinking. His emphasis on getting into various structures, like the media, entertainment, and academia, was generally sound, but the channels by which one might re-take these hijacked structures are limited and controlled by authoritarian ideologues.

Political and especially local civic engagement coupled with the intentional creation of alternative parallel sociocultural and socioeconomic structures that reflect our Judeo-Christian worldview and way of life are equally necessary to begin carving out new gaps for freedom where political control over culture is largely absent.

Plea Dealer in Whitmer Kidnapping Case Faces Sentencing

Mark Clouse August 27, 2021

Here is just a look at how the MSM is covering the conviction of a Michigan man who took a plea deal where he had to admit being part of a plot to kidnap the Governor.

This is a case that, for a lot of reasons, we at the Freedomist have yet to break down, and information on the what’s what of the machinations going in in the courts from the filters, the media, and, for the most part, independent news blogs, whom overwhelmingly pitch the worst and best that conveniently affirms their factional will, so to speak.

What stands out for me is the lack of complete over-the-type vilification of the man, or any overt attempt to couple this man to the ‘far right’ or, even, to Donald Trump. This is worth taking note, though only if such a trend were to continue.

The last headline in this report brings the blood and bone reality of the plea this man made,

The defense says Garbin “will be particularly vulnerable to physical assault or even death in prison due to his cooperation in the case.” – michiganradio.org

Man sentenced to 6 years in prison for Michigan Governor kidnap plot

From www.usatoday.com
2021-08-26 11:45:22

Excerpt:

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — A man upset over state-ordered coronavirus restrictions was sentenced to just over six years in prison Wednesday for planning to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a significant break that reflected his quick decision to cooperate and help agents build cases against others.

Ty Garbin admitted his role in the alleged scheme weeks after his arrest last fall. He is among six men charged in federal court but the only one to plead guilty so far. It was a key victory for prosecutors as they try to prove an astonishing plot against the rest.

Garbin apologized to Whitmer, who was not in court, and her family.

“I cannot even begin to imagine the amount of stress and fear her family felt because of my actions. And for that I am truly sorry,” the 25-year-old aviation mechanic told the judge.

In his plea agreement, Garbin said the six men trained at his property near Luther, Michigan, constructing a “shoot house” to resemble Whitmer’s vacation home and “assaulting it…

Read Full Article

Admitted Whitmer kidnap plotter to be sentenced Wednesday

From www.michiganradio.org
2021-08-24 14:37:30

Excerpt:

One of the men accused of plotting to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer is scheduled to be sentenced Wednesday.

25 year old Ty Garbin is the only federal defendant in the kidnapping case to plead guilty. He’s cooperating with the investigation, which is why prosecutors are asking the judge to only sentence Garbin to nine years in prison.

In the prosecution’s sentencing brief, they say Garbin “knew what he had done, knew it was wrong.”

Prosecutors say prior to taking part in the kidnapping plot, Garbin had been a law abiding, productive member of society.

Garbin’s defense attorney is asking for a sentence “well below the federal guidelines.”

Read Full Article

US Seeks 9-Year Prison Term For Gov. Whitmer Kidnap Plotter – CBS Detroit

From detroit.cbslocal.com
2021-08-20 05:00:42

Excerpt:

Federal prosecutors recommended a nine-year prison sentence Wednesday for a man who said he worked on a wild plan to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Read Full Article

Gov. Whitmer kidnapping plotter Ty Garbin deserves break, feds say

From www.detroitnews.com
2021-08-18 07:00:00

Excerpt:

A Hartland Township man who admitted plotting to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer deserves a break for providing an insider’s view of a kidnapping conspiracy that involved weapons of mass destruction, prosecutors said Wednesday.

Ty Garbin, 25, should be credited for recounting conversations and criminal acts that happened outside the presence of at least a dozen informants and undercover FBI agents and for confirming the kidnapping plot was real, not merely tough talk, prosecutors said.

“Third, he dispelled any suggestion that the conspirators were entrapped by government informants,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Nils Kessler wrote in a court filing Wednesday. “Months before any of them began suggesting it in pretrial motions, Garbin testified that (Barry) Croft and (Adam) Fox were the ringleaders of the plot, and that he and the other conspirators joined it willfully.”

Garbin pleaded guilty in January, securing the first conviction in a high-profile case involving violent…

Read Full Article

Ty Garbin, Michigan Man Sentenced For Kidnapping Plot of Governor Whitmer – CBS Detroit

From detroit.cbslocal.com
2021-08-25 18:00:00

Excerpt:

Thursday, a Hartland Township man is learning his fate for his role in the kidnapping plot of Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

Read Full Article

South Korean Anti-Google Law Paused….For Now

Parker Davis August 27, 2021

For so many reasons, nation-states are waking up to the reality that so long as the filters of commerce, trade, and discourse, are run through those hired by international corpo-states with no direct accountability to the states they operate in, the fundamental ability to mold the citizens into their own image is out of their hands.

Google Inc and Facebook will redefine the human into its own global moral supremacist form, even if it works against your nation-states sovereign power and interest, even if it works against the interest of the most powerful families that represent the real power advantage in your lands.

South Korea appeared ready to drop a mega hammer on the Digital Empires with no loyalty to any one land when all of the sudden a pause was announced. What could be happening, perhaps, would be wild speculation on my part, but I suspect what’s going on is a little horse trading behind the scenes.

What the families want to know is this, can you create a world in our image that our citizens can’t break? And will you give us a fat cut of that sweet coin you’re getting, and also, and perhaps most of all, give us your date, please. For the love of all power and prestige, give us your data.

The families of power of this century, should we wary on this coercive path, will be the ones that hold server farms of micro-data on micro-actions of the things and the agents that could potentially be manipulated if you had their secret codes, the mathematical patterns of their being.

Let’s see if I’m right, as the days march on, and an announcement is made for a deal, or if the hammer falls. If it’s not South Korea, it will be someplace else, and even as we speak many nation-states are preparing to build or ban social media to re-establish their control of what might be within the frames that serve THEIR vehicles of power, not silicon valley, the valley of Empire Capitals, but not the only one like it in the world.

South Korea’s parliament delays final vote on ‘anti-Google law’ – TechCrunch

From californianewstimes.com
2021-08-25 22:15:47

Excerpt:

If passed, TechCrunch’s own Kate Park wrote, “Korea will be the first country to ban such global tech giants from imposing a billing system on in-app purchases.” Not surprisingly, Apple and Google are against this move.

Read Full Article

More headlines on South Korean Fake news Law

Apple, Google App Store Models Face New Threat in South Korea – Bloomberg

From www.bloomberg.com
2021-08-25 09:48:26

Excerpt:

President Moon Jae-in’s Democratic Party used its parliamentary supermajority to push out of committee a bill that would ban companies from forcing developers to use their online payment systems. The ruling party’s heft in the National Assembly suggests the Telecommunications Business Act is highly likely to pass Monday when the next full session takes place.

The legislation threatens to undercut a lucrative revenue stream for two of America’s largest companies, which between them control downloads and payments for the vast majority of smartphone apps. That dominance has drawn lawsuits from developers like Epic Games Inc. who accuse Apple and Google of charging unfairly high commissions and blocking competing services.

Read Full Article

South Korean parliament committee votes to curb Google, Apple commission dominance

From thestarphoenix.com
2021-08-25 08:44:40

Excerpt:

SEOUL — A South Korean parliamentary committee voted on Wednesday to recommend amending a law, a key step toward banning Google and Apple from forcibly charging software developers commissions on in-app purchases, the first such curb by a major economy.

Apple Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google have faced global criticism because they require software developers using their app stores to use proprietary payment systems that charge commissions of up to 30 per cent.

In a statement on Tuesday, Apple said the bill “will put users who purchase digital goods from other sources at risk of fraud, undermine their privacy protections,” hurt user trust in App Store purchases and lead to fewer opportunities for South Korean developers.

Read Full Article

South Korea may ban Apple, Google from forcing store payment systems on app devs • The Register

From www.theregister.com
2021-08-26 18:23:00

Excerpt:

South Korea is potentially on its way to tweaking its Telecommunications Business Act to stop Apple and Google from taking a cut of in-app purchases after a bill was approved by a committee of its National Assembly.

The bill was put to a vote on Wednesday by the country’s legislation and judiciary committee, but it still has to go through a final vote in parliament, pencilled in for Monday.

If it does pass, the tweak to the Act will mean that companies with dominant market positions – like Apple and Google – will not be allowed to require software developers on their platforms to choose their respective app store’s payment systems for users to download paid-for apps or make in-app purchases.

The move comes after Google clarified to Korean devs in September last year that they would be required to “use the Google Play payment system when offering in-app purchases of digital goods and pay a certain…

Read Full Article

Facebook used facial recognition without consent 200,000 times, says South Korea’s data watchdog • The Register

From www.theregister.com
2021-08-26 04:57:00

Excerpt:

Facebook, Netflix and Google have all received reprimands or fines, and an order to make corrective action, from South Korea’s government data protection watchdog, the Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC).

The PIPC announced a privacy audit last year and has revealed that three companies – Facebook, Netflix and Google – were in violations of laws and had insufficient privacy protection.

Facebook alone was ordered to pay 6.46 billion won (US$5.5m) for creating and storing facial recognition templates of 200,000 local users without proper consent between April 2018 and September 2019.

Another 26 million won (US$22,000) penalty was issued for illegally collecting social security numbers, not issuing notifications regarding personal information management changes, and other missteps.

…

Read Full Article

Will the Myanmar Junta Reboot the Country?

Paul Collier August 27, 2021

This is a headlines report on the continued crisis in Myanmar, following the February 21 coup by the military that has launched the nation into civil war. The junta is attempting to transition to a legitimate permanent status as the reality of govoernment in Myanmar, a reality that kills any semblance of a democratic-republican form of government. Myanmar would be a military government going forward, with the military not promising to even consider elections for at least two more years.

The question is, has the Junta won the hearts and minds of enough people to help them coercive the few who are not won over? By the headlines you will see in this report, I think it might be fair to say signs point to no on that front. Myanmar is of particular interest to me because of its testing of a theory that the technological is on the side of the small scale. Where ideational conviction meats physiological reality, will a people who reject fundamentally the authority imposed on them be able to resist the advantage of death force that near-monpolistic powers can exert against their ‘citizens?’

Myanmar is a key bellweather for the reality of power of tech. Does it still favor centralized large-scale systems, or can large-scale systems no longer prevent small-scale systems from, in a sense, offer a better product, be it less restricted governance that offers reasonable security and pluralistic equality or a neighborhood factory that prints you an open-sourced video console that plays open source video games for a quarter of the cost of the large-scale systems but with the same, if not more, quality.

That’s quite a leap from Myanmar to Video Gaming, and I don’t mean to undermine the tragedy befallen in Myanmar and the real cost of life and quality of living so many in that nation are suffering today. But the connections are relevant, as I see them, and speak to the signficance of this moment in human history unfolding in Myanmar. You have a highly developed people, where even the lower middle class has access to high quality, low-cost tech, and many people in that country who know already how to create self-sustainability, from defense to farming are emerging and leading even as we speak.

They have the theoretical physiological means to overcome the Junta. They have the social constructs that make it easy for them to sustain the moral undergirding such defiant social acts require. They are used to not being under so much control. They have the means to convert material to self-sustaining use being a highly technologically-developed country. Thus, they are the perfect storm for a people who dissent from being controlled by a centralized authority that commands large-scale advantages over what might resist them.

Junta attempts to reopen steel mill once dismissed as debt trap

From www.myanmar-now.org
2021-08-26 11:57:50

Excerpt:

Myanmar’s army chief said on Monday that he is considering changing the country’s electoral system from the existing majoritarian model and toward a form of Proportional Representation (PR).

Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing, who ousted the country’s elected civilian administration in a coup on February 1, made the remarks during a meeting in Naypyitaw with members of his military council, according to state-run media.

In accordance with the country’s military-drafted 2008 Constitution, Myanmar currently uses First Past the Post (FPTP), a system in which the candidate who receives the most votes is the winner of the parliamentary seat in question.

Min Aung Hlaing said that the PR system would be “all-inclusive” and allow for constituents’ voices to be better represented.

“It is necessary to consider the Proportional Representation—PR—system with all participants. It is necessary to amend the way representatives are elected and the election system….

Read Full Article

A NEW Pathway For Liberation From The Authoritarian Cancel Culture

Bill Collier August 27, 2021

As society turns to authoritarianism and a cancel culture waging war in Christianity, we must make hard choices. We must choose between liberation and modern serfdom. As most people choose serfdom, even if by default, we have an opportunity to go a different route.

If you don’t decide to pursue as much material independency as possible from the controlling structures of the ruling class then you and your children and their children will be serfs in their dystopian imperium!

Material independency requires maximum collaboration and intimate association between people who are led and guided by an organic cohesiveness as opposed to top-down hierarchical systems of command and control. We cannot defy and be liberated from such systems if we build another version of them!

Do you really want to become a serf? Do you want your rights to live a lifestyle in harmony with millenia of Christian moral and doctrinal orthodoxy to be denied by a cabal of depraved rulers who think they can erase history and change human nature itself to fit their alt genedered, hedonistic, atomized, and collectivist top-down social structures?

It is one thing for these Nimrodian tyrants, who imagine they can tear God Himself down from heaven, to desire such a perverted and abysmally decadent life for themselves! No, they go further, they demand we, who know better, applaud their barbarism and, eventually, participate as the only way to prove our “wokeness”, which is a euphemism for being brainwash and dehumanized.

If you think you can simply not comfirm and opt out, YOU ARE WRONG.

You can’t.

You can’t replace an entire sociocultural and socioeconomic structure or your material dependency thereto with “nothing” but your own individual whims and wishes. You cannot do this alone! It is ONLY through the unilateral intentional, and disciplined creation of alternative structures at scale that we can obtain material independency from the ruling class.

This is what we propose the value and purpose of spiritual nationhood is. It is a spiritual construct in which millions of people individually choose to adopt a shared identity defined in terms of spiritually sound ideals, principles, practices, and mandates for individual living and for living in community with others. This is not about race or politics, such a form of nationhood is able to be adopted by any human being who learns of it and chooses to adopt it as their own by making its ideals and etc a guide in how they act and interact with others.

Through the individual, freewill adoption of our unique and novel form of spiritual nationhood anyone can begin a hero’s journey of liberation and as they then connect to others who also count themselves peers of this spiritual nation their opportunity for maximum collaboration, collaboration and mutual self-reliance is great. Using our blueprints and frameworks within the guidance of our clearly defined 17 Protocols, individuals can connect and build their own alternative structures that can also organically emerge and evolve into scaled-up alternative structures for material independency.

While Upadaria is not the sole path to liberation from being dominated by our corrupt ruling class, for Christians in America especially, it may be the only ready-made alternative that presents itself as something one may tap into and utilize immediately. Thousands of hours over almost 40 years spent with the most experienced and proven experts in many fields, along with decades of experience in many fields and many years of intense Bible study have resulted in a comprehensive presentation of just how a new spiritual nation will become the vanguard people of a new civilization.

For those who embrace and adopt the Upadarian nationality, as part of a Christian nation of people who live all over the world and whose founders come from many diverse ancestries, the future is defined as freedom with justice, righteousness, peace, and prosperity for all. Our efforts to create the vanguard nation of a new civilization predicated on Kingdom ideals are entirely based on freewill participation and envision absolutely no coercion of any kind: we do not demand society conform to us, we only demand society cease asking us to conform to it!

The birth of Upadaria as a spiritual nation has already begun. More and more people are coming forward to adopt this nationality and become the pioneer founders of both a new nation and a new civilization that will emerge regardless of what the ruling class over the present moribund civilizations does. They cannot stop this vision.

People are drawn to participate in our vision as they encounter our 17 Protocols and our ideals and etc they find themselves agreeing, because all this is Biblical and timely, and they find themselves wishing the fictional world we present to impart this vision, could be actualized in spirit, even if it isn’t literally reproduced in exact detail.

Through Upadaria one does not subordinate their own calling and passions or individualism and spiritual sovereignty to anyone else, not even to our shared vision. The reason many embrace Upadaria is because they see it as a vehicle and means of enhancing their life and facilitating their own dreams and ambitions.

The need for a national identity and purpose one may organically and freely share with others is a fundamental, if neglected, human need that is essential to civilization and that is the foundation for things like family and community in general. The perversion of this need, its elevation above our identity in Yeshua, and it being conflated with political citizenship and/or race has produced a form of nationalism that tends toward denying basic human dignity, human rights, and human flourishing.

Upadarians are “Ecclesians”, Christians who faithfully follow Jesus and count themselves part of the whole Body of Christ as joint-heirs with Christ in His Kingdom and local citizens of the spiritual city-state that is the Ecclesia. We come from many lands, so-called “races”, ancestries, and political states and while not all Christians are Upadarians, all Upadarians by spiritual nationality are followers of Yeshua first and foremost.

We are intentionally creating the genesis structures of a new nation of people who are the vanguard nation of a new civilization predicated itself on Kingdom ideals. We don’t need permission to do this nor do we want society around us to conform to this, we just demand to be left to worship and serve our God in peace.

Elon Musk’s AI Dystopia Shows Us Why Alternative Structures Are A Critical Necessity

Bill Collier August 27, 2021

Elon Musk has been recorded basically describing a future in which artificial intelligence replaces humanity, for him any form of consciousness existing is fine even if humanity itself disappears. The path to this “progress” is authoritarianism, using things like universal basic income to keep those who have lost jobs to robots happy. He dreams of replacing carbon based like with artificial silicone based intelligence.

The time to jump off the train men like Musk are guiding is right now, but the path isn’t simple and direct.

Creating parallel, alternative structures that engender material independency from the present ruling class is an essential. Using the organic cohesiveness that shared nationhood, as a spiritual and not a racial or political construct, is going to be vital to making these alternative structures viable and robust without becoming as authoritarian as those they are meant to help people escape from.

Musk’s stance here is essentially authoritarianism, including “universal basic income”, which is basically a system of abject dependency that can only end with you as a human being becoming a mere cost to the ruling class who don’t need your labor but use basic income to keep you from rioting or something. Population control and genocide are the logical extensions of this.

The vision we call “Upadaria” foresaw this world emergence of authoritarianism as a cooperation between monopoly corporations and political power holders, the ruling class. This vision also foresees the solution, which is the intentional creation of alternative structures that engender material independency from the systems used by the ruling class to control people and turn them into modern serfs.

The worldview of Western Civilization in its genesis and foundations may be solid and good, because it is largely a Judeo-Christian worldview rooted in ancient truth and open to great advancement through logic and science. But in order to preserve the essence of the core ideational framework of Western Civilization one must think of constructing the genesis structures of a new civilization. We cannot save the West. This and other extant moribund civilizations will collapse into a totalitarian morass and we cannot change this.

The only way to escape the starkly authoritarian vision men like Musk envision and embrace, because they stand to gain thereby, is to begin now building our own alternative structures that stand outside the influence and control of men like Elon Musk, a man who represents the zeitgeist of a dying civilization. But, we further propose, without the organic cohesiveness of shared nationhood, and an intentional shared nationhood at that, we will struggle to create truly decentralized structures that prevent the emergence of authoritarianism for generations to come.

Through the vision of Upadaria and its frameworks and blueprints we have the tools and ideas needed to promote and nurture the development of these alternative structures for human flourishing. Such a comprehensive and internally cohesive ideational framework coupled with a strong shared identity anyone can adopt is what is needed BEFORE alternative structures can be created.

For many, as they become acquainted with the vision of Upadaria, the choice will be between being reduced to a useless person on basic income, dominated by a ruling class who use AI and robots to produce fantastical wealth for them, and being free and self-sustaining in a way that nurtures your dignity, respects your rights, and engenders your flourishing.