Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: True History  (Read 16364 times)

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2957
True History
« on: August 03, 2009, 04:30:16 pm »

I've been thinking it might be good to have a thread here about modern history and its roots in earlier history. Since I brought up LaRouche on the thread about nuclear power and since that led someone to mention FDR, I figure now might be a good time to start this thread. Since this is the Friendly Forum, I hope we can avoid name calling and other less friendly communication and stick with what each of us thinks is the most truthful history.

My own study of history started with reading newspapers and magazines like Time and Newsweek in high school in the late 60s. The only social studies course I had in high school was civics. Despite not having formally studied history up to then, I got the highest grade in our school on a Current Events test, not counting the teacher, who got 85%, while I got 78%. My team won the Current Events matches too and I was the only one on the team who answered any questions. I still remember 3 of the questions that I answered "correctly". What's the name of the nearest star? The sun. Who's the president of Southern Rhodesia? [I took a few seconds to remember after I raised my hand:] Smith; Ian Smith. Which nation recently [in 1967] launched a nuclear submarine? [Again I raised my hand, but had to think for a second; in the meantime my teammate on one side whispered Russia and a teammate on the other side whispered the U.S. But then I remembered:] Britain.

In 1970 while in the Air Force in Thailand during the Vietnam War, I read the history of Vietnam in the encyclopedia in the base library and I found that what a fellow soldier there told me earlier was apparently true: the U.S. had no right to be fighting in Vietnam. Two years later I subscribed to Ramparts, a Leftist magazine, of which the most memorable articles were about the Foundations, which showed that the Rockefellers, Fords et al used their wealth to control the government. In Ramparts I saw an ad for The Match, an anarchist newspaper, which persuaded me that non-authoritarianism is the best political philosophy, which is essentially Libertarianism or Anarchism. The Match had some good info on the history of anarchism. Around 1980 I read former Vice-President Agnew's book, called Go Quietly Or Else. In it he claimed he was set up on charges of tax evasion. He said he planned to fight it, but then Alexander Haig, a member of the Nixon administration, made vague threats against his family if he did not resign, so he went quietly. I also read Goldwater's book, With No Apologies. He said he liked JFK and greatly distrusted Nixon, whom he considered a liar. I believe he mentioned his belief that the CFR and maybe the Trilateral Commission were evil conspiracies. I read Nixon's 1978 book, called Memoirs or something. He said it was quite a coincidence that the apartment that he rented in NYC turned out to be owned by Nelson Rockefeller. Another coincidence was that he was in Dallas, working for Pepsi Co, on the day JFK was assassinated. He said he heard the news as he was leaving on a bus, I think, when some woman said the president's been shot.

I stopped believing in most conspiracies during most of the 80s and 90s I think. But in 97 I read Len Horowitz's book, Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola, which showed that such viruses were likely biowarfare weapons created in the lab by Gallo et al for population control. Peter Duesburg says those viruses are not the cause of those diiseases, but I don't know that he has disproved that they're manmade just the same. The main thing I got from Horowitz's book is his review of the history of Nazi doctors and scientists who were smuggled, along with the Nazi warchest [which went to Merck pharmaceuticals] into the U.S. from Germany by the oligarchs, who control the medical system and intelligence agencies and covert ops, including biowarfare research. It mentioned a lot of the corruption from the 1940s through the 70s, including mention of Watergate.

In 2000 I read Anton Chaitkin's book, Treason in America, which is a history of the U.S. from the Revolution to the Civil War, I think, or maybe in part up to the early 1900s under Teddy Roosevelt. In his footnotes I found that he's associated with LaRouche. I didn't know much about LaRouche till then. I had seen one of his ads on tv when he was running for President in the 1980s, in which I think he mentioned the need to explore Mars and the solar system. In reading material from the LaRouche organization then I found that they favor the American System of political economics, which is what earlier Americans used to call it, i.e. people like Henry Clay, John Q. Adams et al. They claim that British agent, Albert Gallatin, infiltrated the U.S. government during Jefferson's and Madison's terms as Treasury Secretary and that he used the excuse of thrift to strip the army and navy of funds, so that, when Britain invaded in 1812, there was almost no defense against it.

They credit the following as patriots: Franklin, Washington, Hamilton, JQ Adams, Henry Clay, Henry Carey, Lincoln, Frederick Douglas, Garfield, McKinley, FDR, McArthur, JFK, ML King, Bill Clinton et al. They consider the following as enemies: Lord Shelburne, Jeremy Bentham, Aaron Burr, Gallatin, George Peabody, Andrew Jackson, Van Buren, August Belmont, Polk, Albert Pike, Cleveland, J.P. Morgan, Teddy Roosevelt, J.D. Rockefeller & family, Woodrow Wilson, Prescott Bush & family, Dulles bros., Kissinger, Brzezinski, George Schultz et al. Here's an article on Shelburne and Bentham et al: http://american_almanac.tripod.com/bentham.htm.

I've read alternative views such as claims that Washington, Hamilton, Lincoln & FDR were not patriots, while Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt et al were patriots, but I think the evidence that I know of strongly suggests that these views are largely wrong. I personally don't think Clinton was a patriot, but I admit I'm not omniscient enough to know any of this for certain.

In discussing economics on this forum I think I learned some useful things, such as that free trade has several definitions, so, when an organization like LaRouche's criticizes free trade, they seem to refer to the British government's definition, which apparently is different from the Libertarian definition.

Hopefully, this thread can help us all learn our true history better than what we know thus far, without anyone getting too upset over differing views.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2010, 07:11:47 pm by Luck »
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: True History
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2009, 07:10:07 pm »

It would be very hard for me to place Hamilton on one side of the equation and JP Morgan on the other.
And I'm not sure the defining line between the Franklin and Teddy is really that great.
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2957
Re: True History
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2009, 11:30:32 pm »

It's more meaningful if you give reasons for your views. I can back up mine with pretty in-depth reasons [if I get time & if requested]. Teddy Roosevelt was an anglophile imperialist. FDR was an opponent of imperialism. The book I referenced by his son makes that apparent, as does much of his actions.

My view is that anglophile imperialist sympathizers who wrote history and biographies were responsible for giving Hamilton and other patriots bad raps. He persuaded Congress to try out his economic ideas and I don't think it was because the legislators in those days were brainwashed by an authoritarian education system, or because they were dumber than later generations.
Logged

Dreepa

  • First 1000
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5124
Re: True History
« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2009, 11:58:05 pm »

FDR --- new deal... pretty socialist to me.
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re: True History
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2009, 12:37:45 am »

It's more meaningful if you give reasons for your views. I can back up mine with pretty in-depth reasons [if I get time & if requested]. Teddy Roosevelt was an anglophile imperialist. FDR was an opponent of imperialism. The book I referenced by his son makes that apparent, as does much of his actions.

FDR was a huge supporter of foreign war and a massive supporter of an expansion of the welfare state.  I have a degree in history and am willing to debate you on this until the end of eternity :)
Logged

lloydbob1

  • Guest
Re: True History
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2009, 05:15:58 am »

Get a room!
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2957
Re: True History
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2009, 09:00:55 am »

Quote
FDR was a huge supporter of foreign war and a massive supporter of an expansion of the welfare state. - Keith
- What's bad about supporting a war of self-defense? The Nazis et al would have achieved worldwide dictatorship & extensive genocide. I don't excuse the terrorist tactics of Churchill et al who bombed Dresden and much of Germany's cities etc, or FDR's failure to object [or Truman's atomic bombing of Japan etc], but I support the defensive aspects of WW2. The victory over the fascists bought us some time, but, unfortunately, the oligarchs' news media, advertising, education system etc numbed the people's minds, so they didn't notice the creeping fascism that came to dominate the U.S. by the time of Nixon or earlier.
- Re "welfare" I believe Social Security was voluntary initially. It was later that the oligarchs via IRS etc made it increasingly non-voluntary. Right? I believe only about 3% of the people paid "income" taxes before the war and I believe the Victory Tax during the war was voluntary. Again, it was FDR's successors who used fraud via the IRS etc to make people think "income" taxes were no longer voluntary for everyone.
- I guess FDR created the CPA, the TVA etc. Since they were not based on forced taxes, it doesn't seem to me that they were abusive. You might say that the corporations were forced to pay taxes, but those "taxes" were merely fees in reality, because businesses were not forced to be corporations. It seems reasonable to charge corporations such fees for the privilege of limiting their liability. I don't think corporations should have the privilege of limited liability in the first place, but, if they have such privileges, then fees as a percentage of profits seem reasonable. And corporations with limited liability came along long before FDR, I think in the late 1880s.
- I think the "welfare state" was a creation of FDR's successors and I doubt that he intended that there be forced taxation on the people.

Quote
I have a degree in history and am willing to debate you on this until the end of eternity
Who wrote the history of FDR? Who has controlled the education system that teaches that history? The oligarchs who were enemies of FDR is who for the most part.

Quote
FDR --- new deal... pretty socialist to me. - Dreepa
- What do you mean by socialist? Doesn't it normally mean government ownership of industry or capital? Did that happen under FDR? I haven't heard that that happened, but I don't know.
- LaRouche people say an ancestor of FDR was an associate of Hamilton and helped set up the 1st national bank of the U.S., which was one of the types of institutions allowed in the Constitution and the Preamble, and thus considered American System. I believe socialism and communism were a brand X made to appear similar to the American System by the imperialists to fool people in much of the world who admired the American System. The people who have always criticized the national bank of the U.S. seem to be largely anglophile apologists for imperialism, like Andrew Jackson. I think it was a source of low-interest loans for strategic industries that the nation was most in need of. The U.S. founders were very concerned that the nation become strong enough to be able to defend against future imperialist attacks and I think their concerns were well-founded and the national bank seems to have helped with that.

I think there's been considerable corruption in the U.S. government for most of its history, but there was the least during the terms of the patriots, whom I listed earlier in red.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2009, 09:16:08 am by Luck »
Logged

Dreepa

  • First 1000
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5124
Re: True History
« Reply #7 on: August 04, 2009, 10:07:13 am »


Quote
FDR --- new deal... pretty socialist to me. - Dreepa
- What do you mean by socialist? Doesn't it normally mean government ownership of industry or capital? Did that happen under FDR? I haven't heard that that happened, but I don't know.
- LaRouche people say an ancestor of FDR was an associate of Hamilton and helped set up the 1st national bank of the U.S., which was one of the types of institutions allowed in the Constitution and the Preamble, and thus considered American System. I believe socialism and communism were a brand X made to appear similar to the American System by the imperialists to fool people in much of the world who admired the American System. The people who have always criticized the national bank of the U.S. seem to be largely anglophile apologists for imperialism, like Andrew Jackson. I think it was a source of low-interest loans for strategic industries that the nation was most in need of. The U.S. founders were very concerned that the nation become strong enough to be able to defend against future imperialist attacks and I think their concerns were well-founded and the national bank seems to have helped with that.

I think there's been considerable corruption in the U.S. government for most of its history, but there was the least during the terms of the patriots, whom I listed earlier in red.



Don't care about his ancestors.

FDR:

Agricultural Adjustment Act
Civil Works Administration   
Civilian Conservation Corps   
Federal Emergency Relief Act   
Glass-Steagall Act   
National Industrial Recovery Act   
National Youth Administration   
Public Works Administration   
Rural Electrification Administration      
Securities and Exchange Commission   
Social Security Act   
Tennessee Valley Authority   
Wagner Act   
Works Progress Administration

Not to mention rounding up people into concentration camps here in the US.  And don't forget price controls during the war.

socialist
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: True History
« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2009, 10:46:12 am »

Andrew Jackson's problem wasn't with Hamilton's economics...
He was upset that the US Treasury was deposited in a single bank that dramatically increased the power of a small group of men within a particular region. His 'pet' bank system simply deposited the US Treasury in several banks spread out amongst the various States.
The fact that it created the Free Bank system administered by the individual States was just largely a lack of Congress to act.
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2957
Re: True History
« Reply #9 on: August 04, 2009, 12:06:37 pm »

This article below has a lot of info on Jackson and others, showing that he was an anti-nationalist, meaning opponent of the U.S. He was a conspirator with Burr in an attempt to put the U.S. frontier into the hands of the British, and to prevent expansion of U.S. territory. When Jackson broke up the Bank of the U.S., he allowed Taney to put the deposits in banks that Taney had interests in. http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2007/2007_50-52/2007-51/pdf/50-63_750.pdf

As for the list of agencies initiated by FDR, if they weren't paid for by forced taxation, what's the problem?
« Last Edit: August 04, 2009, 12:14:29 pm by Luck »
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: True History
« Reply #10 on: August 04, 2009, 12:45:35 pm »

The United States of America were not formed as a single nation...
The intent was clear in the Articles to have sovereign States united for trade, travel, and protection.


Logged

Dreepa

  • First 1000
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5124
Re: True History
« Reply #11 on: August 04, 2009, 02:53:26 pm »



As for the list of agencies initiated by FDR, if they weren't paid for by forced taxation, what's the problem?
but they were
and most of them are also against the US Constitution.
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2957
Re: True History
« Reply #12 on: August 04, 2009, 06:26:53 pm »

Quote
As for the list of agencies initiated by FDR, if they weren't paid for by forced taxation, what's the problem? - Luck
Quote
but they were
and most of them are also against the US Constitution. - Dreepa
- I just mentioned earlier here that my understanding is that the only income taxes before WW2 were paid by corporations and that such taxes are essentially fees in exchange for the privilege of government-granted limited liability. And the Victory tax paid during WW2 was a voluntary tax. Likewise, Social Security taxes were voluntary. What forced taxation was there?
- Do you want to explain how FDR's agencies were unconstitutional? Were they even more unconstitutional than the Federal Reserve, which existed before his terms in office?
« Last Edit: August 04, 2009, 06:29:24 pm by Luck »
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: True History
« Reply #13 on: August 04, 2009, 07:48:36 pm »

Actually the Federal Reserve System was not, and is not, unconstitutional.

I think what Dreepa is leading you to is very simply. FDR threatened to expand the US Supreme Court seating should it not return the results he wished.
Logged

Dreepa

  • First 1000
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5124
Re: True History
« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2009, 08:18:08 pm »

where does the Constitution grant these powers to Congress and/or the President.

The income taxes were NOT voluntary.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up