Beyond Our Consent - By Robert Harris Brevig - Chapter Twelve: "Is Socialism Legal Plundering?"

"The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!

If this is true, it is a serious fact, and moral duty requires me to call the attention of my fellow citizens to it."

Frederic Bastiat
Dep'ty, FrenchLeg. Asmbly
In His Book -THE LAW, 1850

As it is so plainly evident that we and our American society are caught in the vise-like grip of a "modern socialistic" juggernaut, we may wish to examine more objectively the psychological attitudes, motivations and morality which govern it.

As in all things inspired by men and demi-gods, such as capitalism and communism, there are good capitalists and bad capitalists and there are good communists and bad communists.

So, in the emerging world of "modern socialism", we can also anticipate that there will be good socialists and bad socialists. The good or evil in a thing is often not so much intrinsic to the thing itself as it is in the quality of being of those who guide and practice it. It is, then a matter of intelligence or ignorance within the adherents that makes a thing good or evil. It seems there are always the cunning and wicked few who will attempt to do evil in the name of good and pretend to do good in order to accomplish evil. It would seem that evil is simply a reversal of morality that leads to conflict, anguish and suffering in the lives of its victims.

Interestingly, this might also explain why the word, evil, simply spells live backwards. It may be that there are certain divine laws which govern ignorance which leads to evil conditions (conflict, anguish and suffering) and certain divine laws which govern intelligence, the practice of which leads to improved conditions for the human family.

When we examine the endless libraries and warehouses filled to overflowing with man-made legislation, legal regulations and judicial reform, and what all this has led us to in our obviously collapsing society, we must ask ourselves if we are not simply bearing witness to evidence of man’s ignorant use of his own intelligence.

Is it possible that if we had trusted the simple, uncomplicated Ten Commandments, which God bequeathed to Moses on behalf of mankind; had man simply practiced those laws, we might have no need for our present judiciary system with all its legal paraphernalia, documents, personnel, judges, lawyers, criminal investigators and police? Military forces might be redundant. Politics might be reduced to a form of amusement or entertainment, which it has already become to anyone with any real intelligence. (Sadly, the end results are rarely laughable.) Social welfare might become the personal responsibility of each member of society.

If we were to accept the practical wisdom in the advice of Christ when he said: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," we might even accept this social responsibility willingly rather than needing to have it enforced upon us by a paternal government authority with its cumbersome cargo of laws.

Years ago, on an extended cultural and educational exchange visit to the Kingdom of Tonga, in the South Pacific, this writer was interested, and rather awed, to discover that the King’s government makes no provision for a social welfare system, because there is no need for it. While, by Western standards, there is evidence of poverty in Tonga, the Tongan people take it upon themselves to care for their own. No one, whether a direct family member or not, suffers the deprivation of having no meal to eat or having no place of shelter to sleep at night. The people themselves willingly accept this "social responsibility" without question because it is a part of their nature (and social conditioning) to do so.

Ideally, while it is not always true, it would be appropriate for the assisted party to make some form of reciprocal contribution to the domestic well being of his or her benefactors household, so that a balancing exchange is incurred. It is not considered socially acceptable to exploit such an arrangement unless the recipient is somehow physically incapable of meeting this obligation.

We find, in our capitalistic society, however, a hardened side-effect which is strictly opposed to rewarding or benefiting a lack of enterprise. To the degree that the lack of enterprise is chronically subscribed to and defended, they are correct on this stand as it soon becomes a social neurosis which cannot be responsibly defended.

In the communistic society, on the other hand, we find another predictable side effect in the form of a subdued defiance, an inner resistance to excellence in any enterprise undertaken in socio-political enslavement. This condition imposes limitations on the success of the ideal, but it is also understandably appropriate to the degree that it evidences the individuals innate desire and need to be free.

Both the capitalist and the communist are unwittingly undermining, to some degree, the ideals of the respective socio-politico-economic systems to which they are subject....the ideal of improving the conditions of human life of earth. Both "systems" are proving, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that in any ultimate, spiritual, sense of well-being, they have failed, totally and miserably. It might also be fair for us to consider, the possibility at least, that we have contributed to that failure.

If we examine our circumstances in terms of questionable Hegelian Principles, we must ask ourselves: If the "parents" (thesis and anti-thesis) have failed, why would we suppose that their "offspring", modern socialism, (synthesis) is going to be any more successful, as long as men choose to be the authority over other men and we, the people, not only allow them this privilege but actually encourage it by electing them to their greatly over-esteemed offices? History may prove to us all that such activity on our part has been "less than intelligent". (The writer hesitates, at this point, to again use the more direct term.)

As such, we, the people, may prove to be directly responsible for our own conflict, anguish and suffering. We are the authors of our own evil and the architects of our own subsequent doom. Whether we know it, like it, accept it or not, we are solely responsible for choosing or allowing the quality of leadership and authority we are subject to. In the final analysis it comes down to a matter of perception, discernment and concern. If we choose to believe lies, we get liars for leaders. If we choose to permit thievery, we get thieves for leaders. If we choose to allow murder, we get murderers for leaders. Whatever we allow, we must ourselves submit to. Before we judge our leaders, we first must examine our own desires, our own motivations, the concerns and conditions in our own lives. Who is responsible for these....our leaders, or ourselves? If we can, with sincerity, truthfulness and conviction, identify where this responsibility actually rests, we will also, at the same time, have found the key to bringing about the change that will be necessary in transforming our suffering world.

If we are able to become intimate with the source of these qualities in ourselves we will thus perceive more deeply, more penetratingly, into the lives of those who would attempt to lead us. We shall be enabled to "see" and "know" whether they are telling us lies or whether they speak the truth. We shall "see" and "know" whether they are worthy of leading us in a world we would desire and be happy to live in and bequeath safely to our children. Until (or unless) this happens we are presently doomed to suffer consequences which are the resulting design of our own neglect and lack of responsibility.

There is no need for this writer to reiterate what those consequences will be. The scriptures have prophesied, the current media is battering our senses with warnings, and our own lives are gradually becoming over-whelmed with what those consequences are to be.

The New World Order, as planned and gradually imposed by these cunning and morally deficient beings to whom we have extended the privilege of leading, will prove to be a monster in disguise, a "beast" beyond the ken of mortal imagination, a grotesque effigy of our own failures, our own neglects, our own abandonment of God and virtue from our lives.

How should God be manifest in our lives? His Presence can be measured in terms of certain qualities. The qualities of integrity, morality and excellence. Those which are opposite to these are considered evil and representative of that "Being" who would not be capable of reflecting those qualities which are of God.

This is a matter of moral choice for those who live here on earth and are afforded the opportunity to experience the effects of both good and evil and thus exercise the freedom to be as they choose. Those who have abandoned God and virture for that which is lacking in integrity, morality and excellence are likewise abandoned by God, for the time at least. It could be compared to stepping out of your own reflection in a mirror. When you are not present, neither is your image.

There is an estrangement which occurs between man and his Creator. What is the nature of this estrangement, we must ask ourselves? Is man hopelessly banished from the Presence of God forever or is he simply temporarily ensnared in a labyrinth of evil qualities which he, himself, has created? Is he simply caught in the condition of his own rationalizations which determines the state of his own perceptions and depth of his faith, until he is able to extricate himself from his unwittingly self-imposed restrictions?

Extrication from such a restricted state might require motivating oneself and educating oneself to find a way out. If this were true, individually, then it might be true, as well, of an entire society. If so, how then might we motivate and educate ourselves as a society out of our present "socialistic" state of affairs?

Thus far we have briefly examined some of the reasons why mankind would seem to have "fallen from grace" and is ending up in circumstances most of us would be forced to admit are less than desirable.

This writer’s studies have shown that in the final days of any degenerating civilization, past and gone, all efforts at increasing ones financial status, social position or political influence, no matter how urgently pursued, are never sufficient to remedy the declining trends in society.

To gain a better understanding of the forces involved, we might create a rather simplistic analogy that supposes mankind can be viewed as two fundamental types. On the one hand there are the producers (the creative types) and on the other hand there are the plunderers (the consumer types). If the reader is wondering why the writer has parenthetically sub-classified the two basic types in such a manner, it might be well to explain that there seems evidenced, as society undergoes progressive changes, there are certain extremes which appear. It seems that a process of polarization (positive/negative) occurs, which is eventually reconciled naturally through the birth or manifestation of a new concept. (synthesis)

These two extremes of polarity in society, by virtue of necessity, attempt to "control" the influences each imposes on the other. Thus, they must develop "tools" by which to facilitate this. Some of these "tools" will be recognized by the people as law, education, religion, media, militia, etc.

The "tool" we will be examining in this text is that of law, for it is one of the more subtle, yet at the same time brazenly effective, means by which one type can gain control over the other. For indeed, the "system" of law ultimately provides the producer the control needed over the plunderer, if the "system" is just, or the plunderer the control desired over the producer, if the "system" is unjust.

We may begin by recognizing that the two most common motivating forces in mankind are those of self-preservation and self-development. If it were possible for all of humanity to enjoy the unrestrained expression of all their capabilities and uncurtailed apportionment of the yields of their efforts, the growth and advancement of society would be without end, without interruption and without fault.

However, there is evidence of another tendency in mankind. This is a tendency among those who, when given the opportunity, would prefer to live and prosper at the expense of others.

This is not simply an impetuous reproach, nor am I being causelessly uncharitable toward my fellow man. The chronicles of history are fairly glutted with evidence as to the truth of this: the continuous wars, vast migrations, religious persecutions, mass enslavement, disreputable commerce, monopolistic enterprise, and corruption in government.

This fatal condition seems to have its core in the very nature of man - in that primal, universal and irrepressible instinct that compels him to satisfy his innate desires with the minimal amount of discomfort to himself. It is clearly evident that people can live and satisfy their wants only by their incessant toil; by the continuing application of their creative energies to the natural resources around them. It is from within this process that we see the beginnings of the idea of private property.

It is also true, however, that some people can live and satisfy their wants by seizing and consuming the goods resulting from the toil of others. It is from within this process that we find the emergence of the idea of plunder.

It has also become clear from history that plunder can be stopped only when it becomes more painful and uncomfortable than toil. Thus, men devised laws to protect property and to punish plundering.

We must understand, then, that the proper purpose of law is to use its collective force to curtail this fatal condition in the hearts of men: to plunder instead of toil.

Generally, however, laws are made either by one man or by one class of men, and since the law cannot be effective without the sanctions of some dominating force, this force must be entrusted to those who make the laws. It is this fact, along with the fatal condition in the hearts of men that compel them to satisfy their wants with a minimum of effort, that reveals and explains the inevitable perversion of the law.

We now begin to see and understand how law, rather than preventing injustice, becomes an indomitable weapon of injustice. It is plain to see how and why the law is used by the "legislator" to gradually destroy, among the people they supposedly "legislate to protect", their personal independence by slavery, their liberty by oppressive regulation, and their property by legalized plunder.

We see, then, in this turn around, that this is not done on behalf of those who elected them to their office, but for the benefit of those who "make" the laws, all in accordance, of course, with the amount of power and influence their office wields.

The natural tendency of those who become the victims of this betrayal and injustice is to rebel. Thus, when the "makers of the law" organize the law as a means of profiting themselves by plundering the people, however subtly they do it, those who are plundered will attempt to gain access to the means - either peaceably or violently - of making the laws. They also may attempt this in one of two entirely different ways, depending on the quality of their morality.

They may wish to either stop plunder by lawful means, or by seeking the advantage of sharing in it. Woe unto the nation wherein the latter condition prevails. Up until this happens it is merely the few who plunder the many, a correctable condition when the people become enlightened to the fact.

However, when men seek to balance their conflicting interests through universal plundering, then a violent demise of their nation is imminent. Instead of rooting out the injustices in society, they cause them to become the general trend. It will then be found that before a reign of justice can be inaugurated, a cruel retribution must be suffered by the people at their own hands - some for their outright evil, and some for their sheer ignorance. It is not possible to introduce into society a more heinous evil than that which we have just described: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.

There is no way to list or describe the innumerable perverted and destructive consequences of such a condition being insidiously introduced to a society, but the most significant is the fact that it serves to erase from everyone’s conscience the distinction between justice and injustice; the discernment of right from wrong.

A society cannot hope to exist unless its laws are respected to some degree. To insure that laws will be respected, they must be respectable. When law (legality) and morality are in contradiction with each other, the citizen is faced with either losing respect for the law or losing his moral sense. Either way it is a difficult choice and each can only lead to evil consequences.

There is a strong propensity in society to "believe" that if a thing is "legal" it, therefore, must also be "moral". Nothing could be further from the truth. Thus, in order for our "legislators" to make plunder appear to be just, and "their" sacred right, it becomes necessary for them to make the law decree and sanction it.

And so our government has become infiltrated by plunderers and, through a process of gradualism, they have successfully enslaved us by divesting us of our independence from their mandates, they have undertaken to plunder us through "unlawfully" lawful tariffs and taxation, and surreptitiously oppress us by regulating everything we do. If anyone should object, he may be incarcerated, harassed or spurned as either an outright subversive, a dangerous innovator, an alternative life-styler, or a utopian dreamer.

Yet history has shown us, repeatedly, that when the law is perverted it is fatal to society. When the law is used to defend injustice, we begin to note that some are able to use it for their own profit and gain. Thus it comes to us that we might also use it to advantage ourselves. Many will demand from the law the right to relief, which is the poor man’s plunder, and herein lie the seeds of "modern socialism" and an ever-inwardly convoluting vortex of degeneration and conflict which feeds upon itself. The point of no return is passed unnoticed and society has well and truly entered a "black-hole", collapsing upon itself, gradual as it may be.

Let us examine some statements made by a very enlightened French legislator, Messr. Frederic Bastiat, referring to the United States government in his book, THE LAW, published in 1850. He asked first, in reference to the creeping socialism of his day: "Is there any need to offer proof that this odious perversion of the law is a perpetual source of hatred and discord; that it tends to destroy society itself? If such proof is needed, look at the United States (in 1850). There is no country in the world where the law is kept more within its proper domain: the protection of every persons liberty and property. As a consequence of this, there appears to be no country in the world where the social order rests upon a firmer foundation. But even in the United States, there are two issues - and only two - that have always endangered the public peace".

"What are these two issues? They are slavery and tariffs. These are the only two issues where, contrary to the general spirit of the republic of the United States, law has assumed the character of a plunderer."

"Slavery is a violation, by law, of liberty. The protective tariff is a violation, by law, of property."

"It is a most remarkable fact that this double legal crime - a sorrowful inheritance from the Old World - should be the only issue which can, and perhaps will, lead to the ruin of the Union. It is, indeed, impossible to imagine, at the very heart of a society, a more astounding fact than this: The law has come to be an instrument of injustice. And if this fact brings terrible consequences to the United States - where the proper purpose of the law has been perverted only in the instances of slavery and tariffs - what must be the consequences in Europe, where the perversion of the law is a principle; a system?"

In connection with our examination of socialism we must recognize that there are two kinds of plunder: legal and illegal.

When the law places society's entire legal apparatus of judges, police, prisons and defense mechanisms at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim - when he attempts to defend himself - as though he were the criminal, then the "system" and its law is a participant in the plundering of the people.

Being subject to such a "system", it is only a matter of time before the people can barely discern justice from injustice and we then have, in short, legal plunder.

How, then is legal plunder to be recognized and identified? Quite easily, in fact! It exists when the law "takes" from some people what they have toiled to acquire and which, thus, belongs to them, and "gives" it to other people to whom it does not belong. It exists if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. When such is the case, it can only be in the best interests of the citizenry to abolish these laws without hesitation, with a minimum of speeches and denunciations - and despite the uproar of the vested interests. These laws are not only evil in themselves, but they are fertile soil for even greater evils because they invite a multitude of reprisals. If such laws are not repealed at once, they will spread, multiply and gradually become systematized.

Lets face it, the major problems we have in our world are rooted in economics and when we examine them carefully and with a bit of intelligence, we find they can be traced right back to how the now mega-corporate "goldsmith" banker derives his own income. We need only follow the "money trail." Firstly, he owns or controls the value of all the gold and he controls the influx of currency by "lending" it, at usury, into circulation at virtually no cost to himself. This causes the illusory deficit condition we are all daily persuaded to be concerned and fearful about because the amount of the interest (usury) is not circulated. He gradually gains control of "our" property by tricking us into signing it away as collateral in an eventual and unavoidable conversion of an unfulfillable debt obligation into a foreclosure which is the resulting "effect" of causes set in motion by himself and those of his ilk. He even manages to convince us he is "Mr. Nice-guy" when he grants us an extra ninety days to "raise the cash" (which doesn’t exist) needed to extricate ourselves from his bondage, when nobody knows better than he, only a miracle will set us free.

Perhaps we can now get a better understanding why the religions of our four greatest civilizations, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam all forbade usury. It has been explicitly stated in the Quran that trading is permitted but that usury is forbidden. Islamic principles, as are Christian principles, aimed at the betterment of mankind in all economic and social aspects of life. The basic rules are expressed as follows:

Usury, it was agreed, by these great civilizations, was forbidden in the assertion that capital should not generate profit unless accompanied by human effort or unless risk is involved. If interested, re-read the above scenario and determine where Mr. Bankers "effort" and "risk" are involved.

Our modern delusion is that the "system" is attempting to enrich everyone at everyone else’s expense; to encourage universal plunder under the pretense of organizing it. No greater folly ever could befall a nation founded upon the principles of liberty and justice.

As we bring this fallacy of legal plunder into sharper focus we find that there are an almost limitless number of ways of committing it and means of organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, grants, entitlements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, disability pensions, unemployment compensation, compulsory unionism, social welfare, free medical, right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on and so on. All of these plans as a whole - with their mutual aim of legal plunder - constitute the elements which make up the perverted doctrine of socialism. (The fundamental difference between ideal socialism and modern socialism is the free will of the people - the natural, spontaneous expression of generosity and willingness to share in the fruits of one’s own and the community’s labor as opposed to the state’s enforcement, compulsion and seizure in an effort to achieve the same ends - the overall well-being of society).

It is clearly evident that those of the modern socialistic fabric wish to practice legal plunder, not illegal plunder, so, like all other monopolists, they also desire to make the law their own weapon. Once the law is twisted to advocate modern socialism, there is no way the law can be used to fight modern socialism.

Americans need to pay particular heed to this statement. When the very government our forefathers created not only advocates, but also practices, by law, the act of plundering its people, it becomes quite absurd to think of ourselves as the "land of the free and the home of the brave".

It would seem, then, that we have somehow been trained, conditioned and "socialized" into quite the reverse circumstances our forefathers envisioned for their descendants.

Having examined, though briefly, the basic rudiments governing the notions of modern socialism and recognized the possibility that we may have fallen prey to such principles in America, we must now ask ourselves whether we believe this to be our intended destiny.

When we decide individually, as a free-thinking person, we also decide collectively, as a liberty-cherishing nation at the same instant, never to sacrifice our reverence for life, liberty, and justice (true justice) to those totalitarian megalomaniacs who have very enterprisingly imbued and distorted almost every institution which influences the American attitude toward life.

What, then, is the most effective weapon we can employ to defeat this ominously seditious process we find in our midst?

Obviously, there are at least three choices offered us: we can allow ourselves to become trained, conditioned and socialized to it by simply accepting it; we can meet it head on with violent reprisals, as many of our patriot movements suggest we do, or; we can simply take our stand, as a multitude of individuals, and "collectively" refuse to "buy into" the principles, conditions and attitudes of "collectivism" they are insidiously imposing upon our American way of life.

It is a fact that we are being "programmed" into the modern socialistic state. It might, therefore, be the greatest act of wisdom and courage to begin immediately to "educate" ourselves out of it.

The following installments touch upon what manner or plan of action an individual, who is awakened to his or her true circumstances, might cultivate in an effort to regain, once again, a real sense of independence, freedom and security.

All Written Materials Copyright 2000 Robert H. Brevig
All Rights Are Reserved, Without Prejudice.
U.C.C. 1-207.4 U.C.C. 1-103.6,.7