Buying a Society
by Brent Johnson
One of the most subtle and insidious methods used by governments such as the United States to socially program the population involves offering money in exchange for participation or cooperation. We see it all the time.
For example, if a state accepts Title 1 federal funds for education, then it must abide by the rules and regulations established by the federal government that are related to education. This includes setting the curricula for classes, methods of disciplining difficult students (i.e. what schools can and cannot do to disruptive students), prohibitions regarding prayer in schools, etc. If a given school wants to keep the money it is given by the federal government, then it must comply with federal controls.
Occasionally, a state will not buy into United States’ blackmail. The state of Utah rejected federal funds so that it can opt out of the federal No Child Left Behind program, which the state considers to be counterproductive and detrimental to a genuine and healthy education. Good for you, Utah!
I call this tactic insidious because it undermines the fabric of the Constitution, which does not empower the federal government to become involved in education. The United States has circumvented constitutional objections by making its education programs “voluntary” to the states. In effect, the federal government is “offering” something to the states, with strict conditions attached to the acceptance of its offers.
The problem is that in today’s materialistic society, it is extremely rare to find even one state or a single politician who will not surrender the protections of liberty in exchange for money, especially when it is others’ liberty being surrendered.
The American people, and each state of the Union, reserve to themselves the vast majority of their rights to life, liberty and property, granting only some very few powers to the federal government.
Yet, by using money as bait - ironically, money taken by taxes from the same people being disenfranchised by the government’s actions - the federal government has gotten state representatives to waive their citizens’ rights, unbeknownst to those same citizens! What a scam!
Last year, Congress passed and the President signed into law, the REAL I.D. Act (insert bill #). This law requires that by the end of 2006, all States must have streamlined their driver’s license and State I.D. programs to conform to federal standardization for such documents. These standards are to include biometric identification technology, which means DNA, retina scan and/or fingerprints.
Failure to comply will result in a State losing some or all of its federal highway funds.
Thankfully, at least one state so far has rejected the federal dictum concerning this issue (fortunately, there is often one stand-out that takes a position against these types of intrusive regulations). Montana has announced that it will not conform to the provisions of the REAL I.D. Act, even though it will lose federal highway funds. Hooray for Montana!
The other reason I characterize this standardized political process as insidious is that it attacks its target through indirect means. The United States government is not trying to hurt the States by its actions. Rather, it is seeking to control the people of each state, and is using the corporate State representatives to achieve its purpose. The people are the actual victims here, though most of the time they never know it.
You may wonder as to what is wrong with these federal programs. Can I provide you with specific aspects of these programs that are harmful to the people they are supposed to protect?
My answer would be a qualified “yes”. In other words, I can give you specific objections to each of the programs mentioned in this commentary. But that doesn’t matter, even if I had no specific objection to a particular federal program.
The problem is endemic. Whenever the federal government induces a state to waive its sovereign rights in exchange for federal gifts, it becomes the governing body of that state and its people. This is always true, because the acceptance of a federal gift of any kind requires the subjection of the donee to the federal government. In other words, if you take our money you must obey our rules.
It all comes back to priorities. Where do yours lie? If money, a “free” education, or government sponsored job security are more important to you than your rights to life, liberty, property, and self-determination, then you will probably not resonate to this message. But if you value liberty like the American Founding Fathers did, then you will not hesitate to reject federal funding for anything, because the cost to your independence is more than you are willing to pay.
The same is true for your state legislature. If it can develop sufficient values, if it can find the courage to deal with its needs and concerns without going to the federal government for help, then your state can and set an example for other states of how to function without federal assistance.
When it all comes down to it, this is all about the love of money. Will you live your life at the effect of your desire for money and comfort? Or will you hold true to a system of values and principles, even though it might mean living with less? Will your state show character and defend its citizens’ rights from federal control? Or will it give in to the temptation of accepting federal largesse, with all of the regulatory strings attached?
The love of money is the root of all evil. Using the allure of money to engineer social change or manipulate a society is evil. Evil should always be resisted and rejected by good people. Are you a good person? Will you reject evil?
We must not allow the United States or any other government on Earth to buy a society. We must stop this practice at all costs, if we are to retain our individual rights to life, liberty, and self-determination.
One of the most subtle and insidious methods used by governments such as the United States to socially program the population involves offering money in exchange for participation or cooperation. We see it all the time.
For example, if a state accepts Title 1 federal funds for education, then it must abide by the rules and regulations established by the federal government that are related to education. This includes setting the curricula for classes, methods of disciplining difficult students (i.e. what schools can and cannot do to disruptive students), prohibitions regarding prayer in schools, etc. If a given school wants to keep the money it is given by the federal government, then it must comply with federal controls.
Occasionally, a state will not buy into United States’ blackmail. The state of Utah rejected federal funds so that it can opt out of the federal No Child Left Behind program, which the state considers to be counterproductive and detrimental to a genuine and healthy education. Good for you, Utah!
I call this tactic insidious because it undermines the fabric of the Constitution, which does not empower the federal government to become involved in education. The United States has circumvented constitutional objections by making its education programs “voluntary” to the states. In effect, the federal government is “offering” something to the states, with strict conditions attached to the acceptance of its offers.
The problem is that in today’s materialistic society, it is extremely rare to find even one state or a single politician who will not surrender the protections of liberty in exchange for money, especially when it is others’ liberty being surrendered.
The American people, and each state of the Union, reserve to themselves the vast majority of their rights to life, liberty and property, granting only some very few powers to the federal government.
Yet, by using money as bait - ironically, money taken by taxes from the same people being disenfranchised by the government’s actions - the federal government has gotten state representatives to waive their citizens’ rights, unbeknownst to those same citizens! What a scam!
Last year, Congress passed and the President signed into law, the REAL I.D. Act (insert bill #). This law requires that by the end of 2006, all States must have streamlined their driver’s license and State I.D. programs to conform to federal standardization for such documents. These standards are to include biometric identification technology, which means DNA, retina scan and/or fingerprints.
Failure to comply will result in a State losing some or all of its federal highway funds.
Thankfully, at least one state so far has rejected the federal dictum concerning this issue (fortunately, there is often one stand-out that takes a position against these types of intrusive regulations). Montana has announced that it will not conform to the provisions of the REAL I.D. Act, even though it will lose federal highway funds. Hooray for Montana!
The other reason I characterize this standardized political process as insidious is that it attacks its target through indirect means. The United States government is not trying to hurt the States by its actions. Rather, it is seeking to control the people of each state, and is using the corporate State representatives to achieve its purpose. The people are the actual victims here, though most of the time they never know it.
You may wonder as to what is wrong with these federal programs. Can I provide you with specific aspects of these programs that are harmful to the people they are supposed to protect?
My answer would be a qualified “yes”. In other words, I can give you specific objections to each of the programs mentioned in this commentary. But that doesn’t matter, even if I had no specific objection to a particular federal program.
The problem is endemic. Whenever the federal government induces a state to waive its sovereign rights in exchange for federal gifts, it becomes the governing body of that state and its people. This is always true, because the acceptance of a federal gift of any kind requires the subjection of the donee to the federal government. In other words, if you take our money you must obey our rules.
It all comes back to priorities. Where do yours lie? If money, a “free” education, or government sponsored job security are more important to you than your rights to life, liberty, property, and self-determination, then you will probably not resonate to this message. But if you value liberty like the American Founding Fathers did, then you will not hesitate to reject federal funding for anything, because the cost to your independence is more than you are willing to pay.
The same is true for your state legislature. If it can develop sufficient values, if it can find the courage to deal with its needs and concerns without going to the federal government for help, then your state can and set an example for other states of how to function without federal assistance.
When it all comes down to it, this is all about the love of money. Will you live your life at the effect of your desire for money and comfort? Or will you hold true to a system of values and principles, even though it might mean living with less? Will your state show character and defend its citizens’ rights from federal control? Or will it give in to the temptation of accepting federal largesse, with all of the regulatory strings attached?
The love of money is the root of all evil. Using the allure of money to engineer social change or manipulate a society is evil. Evil should always be resisted and rejected by good people. Are you a good person? Will you reject evil?
We must not allow the United States or any other government on Earth to buy a society. We must stop this practice at all costs, if we are to retain our individual rights to life, liberty, and self-determination.
