Showing posts with label Martial Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Martial Law. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 28, 2018

Chicago commissioner requests U.N. troops patrol, fight violent crime, ‘genocide,’ on the streets

Full-fledged martial law may be coming to Chicago in the near future, county commissioner requests the United Nations to police city streets


CHICAGO (INTELLIHUB) — Cook County Commissioner Richard Boykin and his team meet with the Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations on Friday to request the organization deploy armed troops into the streets in an effort to curb violent crime and sidestep Posse comitatus which bars the U.S. military to be deployed on domestic soil.


Such a measure would be the first in a new era of globalization and militarization inside of the United States and sets an extremely dangerous precedent. Not to mention, proponents of such a deployment feel the current level of gun violence and ‘genocide’ has become far too expansive and dangerous for state authorities to handle alone as the problem continues to spiral out of control with “horrific levels of shootings,” as pointed out by the commissioner.


“There is a quite genocide taking place in too many of our communities,” Boykin told the press Friday. “Eighty percent of those who are being killed by gun violence are African-American and are often killed at the hands of another African-American.”



Commissioner Boykin said that he feels the U.N. would be a good fit for “peacekeeping efforts” inside of the city to help make sure that residents are safe and says that “we can’t afford to wait.”


“We have had over 600 people killed by gun violence this year alone,” he said. “In my community of Austin, we have had 450 people shot and 80 people killed in this year alone.”


The commissioner said the bottom line is if local authorities can not protect the minority population then something has to be done about it.


“We are loosing to many of our young people, we’re losing too many senior citizens and we quite frankly we have people in this neighborhood that are afraid to walk down the streets,” Boykin explained. “We can never let this become the norm.”


Related:


Executive Order — United States Policy on Pre- and Post-Strike Measures to Address Civilian Casualties in U.S. Operations Involving the Use of Force — WhiteHouse.gov


Featured Image: Office of Public Affairs/Flickr

©2017. INTELLIHUB.COM. All Rights Reserved.

The post Chicago commissioner requests U.N. troops patrol, fight violent crime, ‘genocide,’ on the streets appeared first on Intellihub.

Monday, March 12, 2018

Ebola vaccine is a fear-driven product, global health professor warns

(INTELLIHUB) — One university study shows that more than 50% of people are people willing to pay for an Ebola vaccine after the 2014 West African outbreak was highly publicized by western media causing a contagion scare.


A recent piece published by EurekAlert gives the details:



George Mason University researchers conducted a study during the height of the epidemic and found that a majority of participants (59.7 percent) would pay at least $1 for an Ebola Vaccine. Those who were willing to pay at least $1 had typically traveled internationally in the last 12 months, were interested in getting an Ebola vaccine, and believed that the U.S. government should spend money to control Ebola and assume worldwide leadership in confronting emerging epidemics.


The nationally representative survey of U.S. adults was published in January in Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics. It included questions on Ebola-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors as well as background information (e.g., demographics, international travel) to test for indicators of willingness to pay for a vaccine.


Dr. Julia Painter, an assistant professor in Mason’s Department of Global and Community Health (GCH) led the study with support from assistant professor Dr. Michael von Fricken; graduate student Suyane Viana de O. Mesquita (now an alumna of the Master of Public Health program); and professor Dr. Ralph J. DiClemente from Emory University.


“We believe this is the first study to assess willingness to pay for an Ebola vaccine in the United States,” Painter explains. “This is important because previous studies conducted in West Africa are not generalizable to the U.S. population. Once developed, a licensed vaccine against Ebola “We were unsure of what to expect. The actual risk of Ebola infection among the general U.S. population was low, which could have led to lack of willingness so spend money on a vaccine. On the other hand, the outbreak garnered extensive media coverage, leading to a national contagion of fear. This fear could have driven people to be willing to pay for a vaccine.”



The professor’s statements are profound and will likely one day become a reality.


Will the powers-that-be release the Ebola virus onto the U.S. populace in order to sell hundreds-of-millions of vaccines?




Please take the poll, comment below, and share!


Related Tweet:




Related post:


Military industrial complex prepares mass graves for U.S. citizens


Featured Image: DFID – UK Department for International Development/Flickr

©2018. INTELLIHUB.COM. All Rights Reserved.

Shepard Ambellas is an opinion journalist, analyst, and the founder and editor-in-chief of Intellihub News & Politics (Intellihub.com). Shepard is also known for producing Shade: The Motion Picture (2013) and appearing on Travel Channel’s America Declassified (2013). Shepard is a regular contributor to Infowars. Shepard is the leading journalist covering the Las Vegas Massacre, logging over 1100+ hours, 160+ reports, during his ongoing investigation. Read more from Shep’s World. Follow Shep on Facebook. Subscribe to Shep’s YouTube channel.


The post Ebola vaccine is a fear-driven product, global health professor warns appeared first on Intellihub.

Tuesday, February 27, 2018

Monday, February 26, 2018

Selco on Martial Law: Forget Your “Movie Illusions About Being a Freedom Fighter”

This report was originally published by Daisy Luther at The Organic Prepper



Selco interviewed by Daisy Luther


Let’s talk about martial law. This is when the normal law of the land is suspended and the authority comes from the military or federal government.


One recent example of undeclared martial law in the US was when the police were looking for the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing and went door to door, forcing innocent people to come outside with their hands on their heads at gunpoint, while their homes were searched without warrants. 


It turns out that many of us have some serious misconceptions of what it’s really like to live through a martial law situation. I asked Selco, who has personally been through it, to clear up the myths and tell us what it’s actually like. You can always count on him for the unvarnished truth, and that’s what we need to be prepared to survive extreme situations.


Would you say that your city in Bosnia was under martial law for any part of your ordeal? How long did it last?


During Yugoslav wars, in different regions (states) based on particular timing and events you can say that martial law was in place, or “state of direct war threat” as some call it here.


There were different “stages” or even levels of it, but one common fact is that during that all normal civil rights and laws were completely and absolutely a matter of the will of the “war government.” (Or “military council” or “war headquarters”.)


The names were different for different regions, even cities, but the results were the same.


In the case of my city in that particular time, it was “war government” that had little influence on ordinary citizen simply because there were too many factions.


But prior to that time and after that year I experienced and went through something that looks more like real “martial law” as your readership imagines it.


Many people in the prepper community think they’ll be able to take on the militarized police or army rather than bending to the new rules. How do you think that will go? Can you give any examples of people attempting to defy the military?


Yes, I am aware that lot of preppers imagine martial law to be like some black and white situation (with clear causes, solutions, and views). In reality, it is quite different.


It is a situation where all stakes are much higher, and solutions-actions  that the government ( ruling  party, military leaders or whoever in your case) wants to achieve will be attempted with all means. That can include some new rules where what you think about it usually does not mean anything.


Lot of preppers think about “martial law” but in reality they think about it still in normal terms, with rights, law, constitution, and rules…


You cannot defy military , at least not openly, because they will deal with you fast and efficiently. In times like that it is so easy to get labeled that you are dangerous, an enemy of the state, a terrorist or anything similar, and most probably you will not have any help.


Forget about the movie illusions of openly being a freedom fighter.


No matter how well-organized you are, those who impose martial law have better organization than you. Remember that martial law usually means an information blackout.  “They” will own information and present it to the public the way that they want to present it.


There are a lot of myths about martial law in prepper lore.  Can you discuss a few of them?


In my opinion here are few really widespread myths in prepper movement about martial law:


“The UN will somehow “occupy” my land, impose martial law.”


When it comes to martial law I would choose to be worried about my own government first when times get really hard. That’s because most probably your freedom will be taken by those people through the martial law so they can achieve they own goals, or in order to stay in power when all goes to s..t.


It is not about who lives where, and what kind of system you have, and how much you love your country. It is about powerful people staying in power when times get really hard, even if that means taking all your rights and eliminating all possible threats from the common folks.


Patriotism does not have anything to do with that.


While you are looking for some outside “exotic” threat, the danger may be next to you all the time.


“I will recognize the threat (coming martial law, repression etc), and fight against it.”


Most probably you won’t because it will be arranged into something easily “digestible.”


For example, it will be a fight against terrorism, foreign threat, patriotism euphoria, or something similar, and then one day you’ll realize you are living in the middle of “no more rights” situation. Maybe even you’ll even be labeled as an enemy of the state simply because you have a weapon, or an off-grid retreat or similar.


Do not expect to see one day a big neon sign that says “martial law is coming”, because it will be smartly packaged into something reasonable and understandable. And most probably it will not be called martial law.


It will be packaged in a way that most people will actually welcome it, because they will not recognize what is actually, and those who openly recognize it and call it by its real name will be the first in danger.


The majority of people will look for it and ask for it, because they will think it will resolve a hard situation.


If you are going to be able to fight it, most probably you’ll have to fight it in a silent way, like a real underground resistance movement.


“I just need to obey the rules and look after my own business and all will be fine.”


Actually yes, this is true. But it is hard to obey rules when those rules actually take all of your freedoms.


One of the first actions in martial law situations is to eliminate possible threats – or let’s say “subversive elements”.


It can be done in a soft way by shutting down free press. for example. Or making you obedient (docile) by taking away your resources, and making you dependant on resources that they will give you. Or it can be done the hard way by making “problematic” people “disappear” after raids for example.


You can be that problematic man if you are openly opposed to them taking your rights, if you have other political opinions, are in the prepper movement, or similar.


Maybe you are already on some list of “emergency detention people” in case of an event.


Run away, or obey publicly while you are silently working whatever you can against it.


You simply need to be grey.


What is life really like under martial law?


There are two faces of it:


The outside face: martial law is there because of whatever reason. There are new rules, and if you obey all will be fine.


The real face: martial law means whatever they want at a particular moment. For example, the military may confiscate all your food and meds and you’ll be hungry and sick the day after. Or you may be detained for as long is necessary, or even killed.


The real problem is that in the case of serious martial law for a prolonged time (nothing like bad weather event or similar) people will hear only information that “they” want you to hear (remember free press and speech is gone). So it will be quite easy to after some time to make the majority of people to believe in whatever they want them to.


It is really scary how easy it is to make people believe in something ridiculous if that is repeated enough times and i the situation is out of ordinary.


There was a period in time during martial law here in my region when the order was that people were to leave all doors (on houses and apartments) unlocked and only partially closed (ajar) because the authority issued an order that all folks are subject to house searches at any moment. The authority did not want to lose time breaking through the door. Any closed and locked door would be considered a threat and would be attacked.


Now you can say “I will defend my home”, but I will say that if you are already caught in that situation (you did not bug out somewhere or you do not have a big organization) you will simply die, and everybody else in that house will too, because you’ll be labeled an enemy of the state or a terrorist.


Homes like that did not even get searched or checked. They were blown up from the outside.


You were labeled simply as a threat.


Just obey in situations like that.


How much do the laws change?


There are no “laws.” There are proclamations which direct your aspects of living. You obey or you are a target.


In some of the regions here where martial law was in rule but still no real war or violence, the press that still worked had completely identical headlines, full of praise for the rulers, generals or those in power.


It was ridiculous to see the same stuff in every newspaper, but people read it. Actually, most people, after some time, believed it.


That is scary.


I remember the case of one journalist who opposed ruling people in some article in his newspaper.


A few days after, he disappeared. Later he was found dead. He had been tortured.


Years later the truth emerged that the ruling party leader paid a few criminals to do that.


But what was really scary is fact that in the moment of his death most of the common folks commented with words like, “He got what he deserved” and  “he was traitor.”


The point is that after some time of living in martial law conditions, a lot of people start to believe all that is “for their own good.” They are ready to get rid of everybody who thinks differently, even if that means one day they will be next who will “disappear.”


The sad truth is that a majority of people are sheep.


How does martial law hamper your efforts to survive?


It is completely opposite to what survival movement is about.


A big part of survival is having the means to be independent, self-sufficient, and ready all the time.


Martial law is about having people under control, with less than needed resources(so they can be controlled by it), with constant fear and threats of the unknown. It is about taking your rights and freedoms.


It is about control.


You are not in control anymore. You are not in control of your life.


Were there ways that people got around the rules of martial law or were able to fight back? 


Yes, but you are going to be “outlawed” and hunted like a mad dog. You’ll be labeled as a “great danger” and you will not have any rights at all in terms of expecting to be spared.


It is (again) how strong you or your group is, if you are common man with family, you need to obey or look like you obey.


If you have some organization, maybe a prepper group, and you belong to something bigger and stronger, then your options are different.


But the big thing here that you’ll be labeled by the majority of folks as a “enemy” or “terrorist” or” lunatic” or whatever because it is what majority of folks are going to believe. In times like that, the majority of folks will obey because of blind trust, fear, or simple stupidity.


Are members of the military held to different standards of behavior during a martial law situation?


Yes, there were different actions from them based on the individuals who were in charge during the particular situation.


There were cases of soldiers rejecting orders from some officers because they felt it was against everything they were taught.


Usually those soldiers disappeared too.


Military was big machinery, and parts of that machinery operated on orders like any military. In martial law times, orders are rarely questioned because punishments for that were hard.


Can you tell us anything else about this?


Do not adopt opinions about some romantic version of martial law, because that does not exist.


You as an individual may have huge preps and means and plans, but in a martial law situation, you are way to small to count on any real results if you try taking your rights and freedoms back.


More from Selco 



More information about Selco


Selco survived the Balkan war of the 90s in a city under siege, without electricity, running water, or food distribution.


In his online works, he gives an inside view of the reality of survival under the harshest conditions. He reviews what works and what doesn’t, tells you the hard lessons he learned, and shares how he prepares today.


He never stopped learning about survival and preparedness since the war. Regardless what happens, chances are you will never experience extreme situations like Selco did. But you have the chance to learn from him and how he faced death for months.


Real survival is not romantic or idealistic. It is brutal, hard and unfair. Let Selco take you into that world.


Read more of Selco’s articles here: https://shtfschool.com/blog/


And take advantage of a deep and profound insight into his knowledge and advice by signing up for the outstanding and unrivaled online course. More details here: https://shtfschool.com/survival-boot-camp/




The Pantry Primer


Please feel free to share any information from this article in part or in full, giving credit to the author and including a link to The Organic Prepper and the following bio.


Daisy Luther is the author of The Pantry Primer: A Prepper’s Guide To Whole Food on a Half Price Budget.  Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy on Facebook and Twitter, and you can email her at daisy@theorganicprepper.ca


Thursday, November 23, 2017

"Out Of Control Genicide" In Baltimore, Residents Support Martial Law

While in Baltimore City, Maryland, death and despair are a few things that are plentiful as the region descends into chaos. Deindustrialization coupled with depopulation started in the 1960s stripping the city of economic wealth. Many don’t want to admit, the city is shrinking as their looking glass is clouded with Kevin Plank’s gentrification narrative.


Wealth inequality in the area is some of the widest in the United States with more than 100,000 African Americans with zero dollars to their name, according to JPM. Baltimore is a skeleton of what it once was many decades ago when it had its industries.


Now, 46,800 homes are vacant– almost 16% of the housing stock as citizens are either leaving the area or being pushed into multi-family complexes by the city. Neighborhoods are rotting away as the local economy crumbles giving way to a surge in homicides. Baltimore is on track for the worse year ever with a homicide rate the highest in the United States.



Baltimore is home to about 615,000 people, but the city has more homicides than New York or Los Angeles, both of which have far larger populations. Earlier this year, Mayor Catherine Pugh called in the Federal Government in hopes to restore order. She was even quoted, “violence in the city is out of control”…



With the police department hemorrhaging officers, local community organized groups have taken to the streets in attempt to slow the momentum of out of control homicides.


The movement is called Baltimore Ceasefire and the group has held two weekend city-wide ceasefire campaigns of “Nobody Kill Anybody”… Both ceasefires have failed.


According to WSJ,




Most murder victims are African-American men, and shootings happen largely in areas where residents live surrounded by poverty, unemployment, drug addiction and crime, city police records show.





WSJ interviews Jackie Moodie, a resident of Baltimore who said 


“I’m always looking around at my surroundings”.... Moodie’s 27-year old son, Sir Jamareo Moodie, was fatally shot in February.


 


“These children are so crazy. They get on drugs, they don’t care and they have guns. This is nothing but a bunch of genocide,” she said.




According to WSJ, Moodie supports “martial law” on the streets to stop out of control homicides,




At this point she would support “martial law” on the streets.


 


“They need it in the areas that are highly targeted as shooting zones, killing zones,” she said, noting that this month, three people were shot, one fatally, a short distance from a Northwest Baltimore police station.





In a preview of what’s to come, we reported on an incident over the weekend where the “police declared martial law” according to one citizen, after an entire neighborhood was shut down with the installation of checkpoints. The 4-5 day lockdown started late last week and ended Monday, after a police detective was executed in broad daylight.








Tuesday, November 21, 2017

Entire Baltimore Neighborhood Under Lockdown: "Police Declared Martial Law"


Five days ago, Det. Sean Suiter, a married father of five and an 18-year veteran with the Baltimore Police, was patrolling the streets of West Baltimore around 5pm last Wednesday when he saw suspicious activity. Suiter approached a man and was shot point blank in the head, in a summary execution. He was rushed to the hospital in critical condition where he later died of his injuries.



In response, Baltimore Police reacted with ‘fire and fury’ turning the neighborhood where Suiter was shot into an “open-air prison”, shutting down city streets and enabling checkpoints for citizens while officers in tactical gear went door to door, according to Baltimore Brew. Residents were prohibited from entering their own neighborhood unless they showed proper identification, these extreme measures have been in place for 4-5 days.


“They’ve been to my house three times asking, ‘Did you hear anything? Do you know anything,’” said Edward Stanley, a local resident, who had to show a yellow slip before entering the neighborhood.



Baltimore Brew said, the neighborhood was tuned into “open-air prison”, as the complete lockdown was in attempt to collect evidence and search for the shooter.








Police initially said they needed to cordon off the area to try to capture the shooter. Police have said Suiter was in the 900 block of Bennett Place, investigating a previous homicide, when he was shot on Wednesday. So far, no arrests have been announced in the case. This morning, homicide detective Mike Newton told The Brew that the lockdown was necessary to collect evidence.



One community group took pictures of a checkpoint in West Baltimore.




Another twitter account describes how ‘the police declared marital law’, as one police officer with an assault rifle guards a corner.




Citizens describe how their day lives have been disrupted as West Baltimore remains under police control, as per Baltimore Brew:








Two women walking down Franklin Street to get to their cars, parked blocks away because of the lockdown, complained that they had been harassed by officers.


 


“They know I live here. They’ve seen me come and go. But this one had to pat me down. He [the officer] went like this to my jacket, grabbing it,” said Shelly, 25, who asked that her last name not be used.


 


“They wanted to know where I had been. Why do I have to tell him that? It’s just me in my flip-flops trying to go to my own home.”


 


“We haven’t been able to get our mail for four days,” said the woman with her, Samantha, 50, who also asked not be identified. “Is the city going to pay the late fees on my bills?”


 


“It’s so sad what happened to the officer and I hope they catch whoever did it,” another woman said. “But this is really overboard. I’ve never seen anything like it.”



The ACLU of Maryland released a statement yesterday, who are “troubled by reports that some persons entering or leaving the area have been subject to pat down searches, and that non-residents have been barred from entering the area”.








“While the search for a killer is, of course, a high priority for the police, the limits on lawful police behavior do not disappear even when engaged in that pursuit.  And at least one federal appellate court has said that a similar police cordon and checkpoint system was unconstitutional.


 


“The residents of Baltimore, and, in particular, the residents of the affected community, deserve a clear explanation from the City as to why this unprecedented action has been taken, what rules are being enforced, and why it is lawful.  The need to secure a crime scene from contamination to preserve evidence does not, on its face, explain the wide area to which access has been restricted for days after the incident.”


 


On-the-ground information is scarce to those outside the cordon because access to residents, including by the media, has also been restricted. For that reason, we encourage anyone who has this kind of information to contact us at curtis@aclu-md.org.



WBALTV11 visited one checkpoint in West Baltimore:



According to one citizen, ‘this is the 3rd time in less than 3 years that West Baltimore has been occupied by police’…



Baltimore Brew concludes by saying the Baltimore Police will “clear the crime scene” on Monday, so in a few hours.


Perhaps in a preview of things to come, the 4-5 day siege of West Baltimore by Police has been described by one resident as ‘Martial Law’. Readers concerned about social tensions in the US are urged to monitor events in Baltimore, which better than Chicago or Detroit now demonstrates just how the United States is marching straight into a new, Orwellian era.









Saturday, November 4, 2017

What To Do If All Hell Breaks Loose During Tomorrow"s "Antifa Uprising"

Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,


Tomorrow is November 4th, the date that has been bandied about by wannabe Communists and people who hate the President since last summer as the starting date of their uprising.



Cities across the country have planned events (find the list of locations here) and I’ve gotten photos from people in small towns all over the place of signs with the ominous warning, “November 4th It Begins.”


Now, before we delve into prepping for this, please know that there is every chance this is a tempest in a teapot. It’s most likely that anywhere from 20 to 200 people will show up with their signs, chant mean things about the President, maybe throw a rock through a window, and go home. If you aren’t near these locations, you probably won’t even know it’s going on unless you check the news. So, while you should be prepared for anything (as usual), you shouldn’t be afraid.


But…considering the fact that this is on every media outlet everywhere (the NY Times actually allowed it to be promoted with a full-page ad on November 1), the possibilities of all hell breaking loose should at least be considered.



I’ve cited before Newton’s Third Law of Physics which states “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” From Antifa, the threats of violence are becoming more extreme. And if this gets crazy, there WILL be a reaction. 


A lot of folks are sick and tired of being pushed around, threatened, and censored by these ironically named Anti-Fascists. You need only check out the comments section on any article about the potential event to know that some fed-up Americans intend to push back and counter-protest. Hard. I  have talked to more than one member of the military who says, “Bring it on.” Tensions have the potential to boil over.


If your goal is to be out there in the thick of things because you believe it is your obligation to do so, this article probably isn’t for you and I offer you my very best wishes for your safety.


If you are planning to avoid any conflict and focus on keeping your family away from trouble, you can be prepared for the possibility that civil unrest erupts. By planning ahead, we can avoid the fear, panic, and confusion that leads people to rush to the store and clear the shelves like a horde of hungry locusts.  We can stay away from the angry masses, the rioters who will use any excuse to steal, and the hungry people who are determined to feed their kids no matter who stands in their way.



Whether the next few days lead to pandemonium or even martial law to crack down on unrest, a prepared mindset, a defense plan, and a well-stocked home can help to keep you and your family out of harm’s way. My personal goal is the safety and security of my family. This is my primary responsibility.


In her article Anatomy of a Breakdown, Tess Pennington wrote:


“When you take the time to understand how a breakdown behaves and how it progresses, only then can you truly prepare for it.


 


This glimpse into a systemic breakdown is based on an isolated, limited disaster or event where emergency responders have been deployed. I must emphasize that all bets are off if the event is wide spread, affecting multiple tens of millions of people simultaneously.”



Spend today getting ready, just in case. Here are the most vital things that you can do to be prepared for civil unrest.


Get home


In a perfect world, we’d all be home, watching the chaos erupt on TV from the safety of our living rooms.  However, reality says that some of us will be at work, at school, or in the car when unrest occurs.  You need to develop a “get-home” plan for all of the members of your family, based on the most likely places that they will be.


  • Devise an efficient route for picking up the kids from school.  Be sure that anyone who might be picking up the children already has permission to do so in the school office.

  • Keep a get-home bag in the trunk of your car in case you have to set out on foot.

  • Stash some supplies in the bottom of your child’s backpack – water, a snack, any tools that might be useful, and a map.  Be sure your children understand the importance of OPSEC. (Here’s a school kit that won’t get your kid expelled, but in this situation, your children should NOT be encouraged to set off on their own.)

  • Find multiple routes home – map out alternative backroad ways to get home as well as directions if you must go home on foot.

  • Find hiding places along the way.  If you work or go to school a substantial distance from your home, figure out some places to lay low now, before a crisis situation.  Sometimes staying out of sight is the best way to stay safe.

  • Avoid groups of people.  It seems that the mob mentality strikes when large groups of people get together.  Often folks who would never ordinarily riot in the streets get swept up by the mass of people who are doing so.

  • Keep in mind that in many civil disorder situations the authorities are to be avoided every bit as diligently as the angry mobs of looters. Who can forget the scenes of innocent people being pepper sprayed by uniformed thugs in body armor just because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Stay home


Once you make your way home or to your bug-out location … STAY THERE.


By staying home, you are minimizing your risk of being caught in the midst of an angry mob or of sitting in stalled traffic while looters run amok.  In most scenarios, you will be far safer at home than you will be in any type of shelter or refugee situation. (Obviously, this isn’t true in all cases – you must use common sense before hunkering down.)


This is when your preparedness supplies will really pay off. If you are ready for minor medical emergencies and illnesses, a grid down scenario, and a no-comm situation, you will be able to stay safely at home with your family and ride out the crisis in moderate comfort.


Be sure you have a supply of the following:


  • Water

  • Necessary prescription medications

  • Food and an off-grid way to cook it (Do NOT rely on mail order stuff for an event starting tomorrow – get your supplies locally)

  • Or food that requires no cooking

  • First aid supplies

  • Lighting in the event of a power outage

  • Sanitation supplies (in the event that the municipal water system is unusable, this would include cleaning supplies and toilet supplies)

  • A way to stay warm in harsh winter weather

  • Over-the-counter medications and/or herbal remedies to treat illnesses at home

  • Survival and first aid manuals (hard copies in case the internet and power grid are down)

  • Alternative communications devices (such as a hand-crank radio or a ham radio) so that you can get updates about the outside world

  • Off-grid entertainment:  arts and craft supplies, puzzles, games, books, crossword or word search puzzles, needlework, journals

Be prepared to defend your home


Sometimes despite our best intentions, the fight comes to us.  Even though we stay home, something about our place draws the attention of an unsavory person or group.  Defense is two-fold.  Your best defense is avoiding the fight altogether. You want to stay under the radar and not draw attention to yourself.


The extent to which you strive to do this should be based on the severity of the unrest in your area. Some of the following recommendations are not necessary for an everyday grid-down scenario but could save your life in a more extreme civil unrest scenario.


  • Keep all the doors and windows locked.  Secure sliding doors with a metal bar.  Consider installing decorative gridwork over a door with a large window so that it becomes difficult for someone to smash the glass and reach in to unlock the door.

  • Put dark plastic over the windows. (Heavy duty garbage bags work well.)  If it’s safe to do so, go outside and check to see if any light escapes from the windows. If your home is the only one on the block that is well-lit, it is a beacon to others.

  • Don’t answer the door.  Many home invasions start with an innocent-seeming knock at the door to gain access to your house.

  • Keep cooking smells to a minimum.  If everyone else in the neighborhood is hungry, the meat on your grill will draw people like moths to a flame.

  • Keep pets indoors. Sometimes criminals use an animal in distress to get a homeowner to open the door for them. Sometimes people are just mean and hurt animals for “fun”.  Either way, it’s safer for your furry friends to be inside with you.

  • Remember that first responders may be tied up.  If the disorder is widespread, don’t depend on a call to 911 to save you – you must be prepared to save yourself.  Also keep in mind, as mentioned earlier in the article – the cops are not always your friends in these situations.

  • Don’t be drawn outside. Sometimes, thugs will try to engage people by damaging their car or property outside.  Going outside, you will likely be outnumbered.  In most cases, you’ll be better off just calling the insurance company the next day.

If, despite your best efforts, your property draws the attention of people with ill intent, you must be ready to defend your family.


  • Many preppers stockpile weapons and ammunition for just such an event.  When the door of your home is breached, you can be pretty sure the people coming in are not there to make friendly conversation.  Make a plan to greet them with a deterring amount of force.

  • Have a safe room established for children or other vulnerable family members.(Here are instructions – you may be able to put something together quickly, depending on your home.)

  • Plan an escape route.  If the odds are against you, devise a way to get your family to safety.

  • Have a plan to deal with a fire. Fire is often used in situations like this. Be sure to have well-maintained fire extinguishers in case of a small blaze.

What about a martial law event?


While many of the officers involved most likely just want to resolve the situation and go home to their families, the methods that are often used are not methods most of us wish to encounter.


In a highly charged situation like this, police and military are trained to use the most efficient methods to speedily shut down a conflict. These methods can include tear gas, sound cannons, and outright physical assaults on citizens. It’s important to note that fear can be a powerful motivator when deciding how much force is appropriate when addressing a threat. Cops are just as subject to fear as the rest of us. 20 cops with shields and batons would be quite reasonable to fear an angry mob of hundreds of shouting people.


Your safety when interacting with officials during a martial law situation does not rely on the intentions of police officers and military. It really doesn’t matter if they are trying to crush your rights under a jack-booted heel, or whether they are trying to benevolently keep people safe and re-establish peace and harmony.


Here are some suggestions to help keep you safe when dealing with cops and soldiers.


  • Avoid crowds. If you are in the midst of a crowd, you’ll be considered part of the crowd and treated exactly like everyone else in that group. If they get tear-gassed, so will you. It’s guilt by association. If the crowd is violent, and you are part of the crowd, you will also be considered violent, and you’ll be dealt with accordingly. Legally, you are actually guilty if you are part of a group that is violent.

  • Be polite. If you have to interact with officers, be courteous. You won’t restore the Constitution by arguing with them or threatening them. It’s fine to assert your rights – you don’t have to allow them to search your house without cause, for example, but do so civilly. Belligerence will get you nothing but a beat-down.

  • You don’t get to explain. In a highly charged situation, the cops probably aren’t going to listen to you when you try to explain that you’re just taking that baseball bat in your hand over to your nephew’s house so he can hit some balls in the backyard. No matter how innocent your intentions are, if you’re walking like a duck, you’re going to be treated like a duck. Training will kick in, and perceived threats will be immediately neutralized by whatever means the cops find necessary.

  • Stay home. It really isn’t worth risking your physical safety to go see what’s going on.

Underneath the uniform, cops are human.  I’m not justifying the brutality, the methods they sometimes use, or the assaults on journalists. Cops are just as likely to be swept up in a herd mentality as protesters and rioters are during a high-stress situation. By understanding this, you can be better prepared.


*  *  *


Every civil unrest scenario is different.  You must make a personal plan based on your environment, your neighbors, and the type of situation that is occurring in your area.  By thinking ahead, you’ve already improved your family’s chances of surviving unscathed.









Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Future Headlines...

Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,


The following is a random assortment of headlines that we may see in the future.



However, they’re not fanciful; they’re based upon historical, political actions taken by past empires when they were in decline.


The wording, however, has been modernised to reflect current media presentation.





“President Announces Executive Order to Keep US Dollars at Home”


The accompanying article then goes on to describe that a financial crisis could be on the horizon, as US dollars are exiting the country. This is due to those people who are retired and who receive Social Security courtesy of the government but live overseas, where they spend America’s money. In order to ensure that a crisis doesn’t occur, the president declares that those who “threaten the country’s solvency” in this way will have their cheques ceased until they return to US soil, so that they can reinvest in the Greater Good of all their countrymen.



FBI Warnings Come to Pass—Domestic Terrorist Attacks in Five States. President Announces Emergency Measures”


Shootings occur in several states, all within a brief time period. The president orders martial law, citing the already established authorization under the Patriot Act and National Defense Authorization Act, which allows the suspension of habeas corpus. Although it’s initially announced as a temporary emergency measure, the country becomes a permanent police state.



“Recent Domestic Terrorism Incidents Linked to Inadequate Control of International Travel”


The accompanying article describes what FBI and CIA intel has “revealed”—that domestic terrorists travel in and out of the country at will and that, therefore, terrorist incidents could have been prevented if international travel were curtailed.



Most people today would agree that governments are becoming more restrictive and many of them are fearful that, in the future, there’s a danger that their liberties will be increasingly removed - a development they say they wouldn’t accept, were it to happen.


Yet, each time another liberty is impaired or removed, these same people shrug their shoulders and accept that the latest loss of liberty is “necessary” for the safety of all.


Why does this occur?


Well, each time a government seeks to curtail a freedom, the spin doctors devise a plausible explanation that suggests that the new restriction is being imposed for the good of the public.


This technique has worked well throughout history. Whenever a government chooses to oppress its people beyond the level that they’d normally accept, one of the most popular solutions is to capitalise on an existing event that instils fear in the people. If no such event occurs, it’s created, often as a false-flag incident—one where the government itself stages a threat to the security of the people, blames it on others, then offers to remove the threat by removing freedoms.


As John Adams said on many occasions, “Those who trade liberty for security have neither.” Quite so.


Whenever a country implements capital controls, migration controls, or any other significant loss of freedom, it’s a sure bet that that government is slipping in its ability to hold on to the customary cooperation of its people. Any government that’s steadily robbed its people of their ambition and/or prosperity finds that, at some point, those people begin to vote with their feet. They tend to first move their money to a jurisdiction that’s less restrictive. At some point, they tend to move themselves to a jurisdiction that allows them greater freedom and opportunity.


The US was built upon this principle. Originally, colonists who were prepared to be hard-working and self-reliant left England, Holland, Germany, etc., willing to accept the hardships of frontier life for the hope of greater self-determination. Later, in the 19th century, millions of similarly minded people from all over Europe migrated west for the same reason. These people became the backbone of the industrial revolution, turning the US into the world’s most productive nation.


But, today, the shoe is clearly on the other foot. America has become grossly over-regulated and both money and people are quietly migrating elsewhere. As this trend becomes more prominent, we shall surely see greater restrictions on such people, who have inherited the pioneering spirit and are now seeking other countries where there’s greater opportunity for self-determination.


Again, none of the above is anything new. This scenario has played itself out time and again, throughout history. And, always, there have been warning signs, if the people were able to read them.


Invariably, the justification of greater restrictions, such as in the above hypothetical headlines, means the removal of freedoms. In every case, the spin used is that the removal is for “the greater good.”


Morris and Linda Tannehill, in The Market for Liberty, phrased it this way:





“Enslaving men ‘for the good of society’ is one of the most subtle and widespread forms of slavery.”



And again, historically, such restrictions are typically a last-ditch effort on the part of a declining country to trap their citizens like sheep in a pen, to be available for a final shearing before the collapse. Ayn Rand described it as follows:


We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.


Should we at some point in the near future see headlines like those above, we would be wise to take it as a warning (if we have any vision) that dramatically increased controls are, in fact, the death-knell of freedom.


The choice then will be whether to accept subjugation or vote with our feet.


This by no means suggests a change in our ideals. On the contrary, it means making a move in order to continue to live by our ideals, as exemplified in this final quote, from Thomas Paine:





“My country is wherever liberty lives.”



(Mister Paine was born in England, but moved to America in 1774 and never regretted his flight to freedom.)


Throughout history, there have always been countries that were in decline at the same time as there were countries that were opening up. The present time is no different. The principle remains the same; only the names of the countries change.


*  *  *


Wealth confiscation and shrinking personal liberty are virtually inevitable as an economy collapses. They go hand in hand. That’s why we put together the Guide to Surviving and Thriving During an Economic Collapse for our readers. Click here to download your free PDF copy now.

Thursday, October 5, 2017

Catalan Independence: Why The Collective Hates It When People Walk Away

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,


I have written many times in the past about the singular conflict at the core of most human crises and disasters, a conflict that sabotages human endeavor and retards critical thought. This conflict not only stems from social interaction, it also exists within the psyche of the average individual. It is an inherent contradiction of the human experience that at times can fuel great accomplishment, but usually leads to great tragedy. I am of course talking about the conflict between our inborn need for self determination versus our inborn desire for community and group effort — sovereignty versus collectivism.



In my view, the source of the problem is that most people wrongly assume that "collectivism" is somehow the same as community. This is entirely false, and those who make this claim are poorly educated on what collectivism actually means. It is important to make a distinction here; the grouping of people is not necessarily or automatically collectivism unless that group seeks to subjugate the individuality of its participants. Collectivism cannot exist where individual freedom is valued. People can still group together voluntarily for mutual benefit and retain respect for the independence of members (i.e. community, rather than collectivism).


This distinction matters because there is a contingent of political and financial elites that would like us to believe that there is no middle ground between the pursuits of society and the liberties of individuals. That is to say, we are supposed to assume that all our productive energies and our safety and security belong to society. Either that, or we are extremely selfish and self serving "individualists" that are incapable of "seeing the bigger picture." The mainstream discussion almost always revolves around these two extremes. We never hear the concept that society exists to serve individual freedom and innovation and that a community of individuals is the strongest possible environment for the security and future of humanity as a whole.


Thus, the mainstream argument becomes a kabuki theater between the "ignorantly destructive" populists/nationalists/individualists versus the more "reasonable" and supposedly forward thinking socialists/globalists/multiculturalists. The truth is, sovereignty champions can be pro-individual liberty and also pro-community or pro-nation, as long as that community is voluntary.


Collectivists will have none of this, however, and despite their intellectual and "rational" facade, they will often turn to brutality in order to disrupt any movement to decentralize power.


The civil unrest in the Spanish region of Catalonia is an interesting example of the tyranny of the collectivist ideology. According to mainstream doctrine, Spain is supposed to be a "decentralized unitary state" made up of "autonomous communities," all with their own statutes and self governing bodies "loosely" regulated by the Spanish constitution of 1978. Catalonia, along with a couple other regions and cities in Spain, has long fought for true autonomy from the central government in Madrid. This separatist culture was crushed under the heel of Francisco Franco"s dictatorial regime after the Spanish Civil War which started in 1936.


After Franco"s death in 1975, Spain began its "transition to democracy" (democracy being the tyranny of the majority rather than tyranny by military regime). Once again, Catalonia"s push for independence returned.


The reasons for a Catalan secession are multitude and are of course noble or nefarious depending on which side you talk to. From my research, it would seem the primary drive for Catalonia is economic. Spain is one of the more indebted member states in the European Union with a national debt near 100% of GDP. The "great recession" starting in 2008 struck Spain particularly hard, with around 21% of the general population officially in poverty and over 40% of all children officially in poverty. Unemployment according to government statistics hovers near 18%.


Catalonia is the most prosperous region in Spain"s economy, accounting for nearly 20% of total GDP. Catalans also assert that taxation in their region is a primary pillar for the Spanish government, which has not returned the favor with sufficient investment in infrastructure in the region. In essence, there is a "taxation without representation" feel to the conflict, and Americans in particular know very well how that kind of situation can end.


On the other side of the debate, it is clear that if Catalonia leaves the Spanish system on negative terms, then Spain"s already crumbling economy will be destroyed. The motivation for Spain to keep control of Catalonia is high just on the grounds of economic disaster.


Beyond the economic issue, another interesting side note on Spain is its intense social justice (cultural Marxism) programs. While Europeans often suggest Spain as being a "conservative" government, in policy and action this is simply not true.  Spain is notorious for being one of the most militantly feminist governments in the EU aside from Sweden, and this is saying something given the socialist nature of the EU. Gender laws and divorce laws in the country offer some of the most draconian double standards against men I have ever witnessed. Perhaps this will give you a kind of litmus test for the sort of culture we are dealing with here, and maybe it accounts for some discontent in certain portions of the Spanish population.


Catalonia itself is often cited as being "more liberal" in its political orientation in comparison to the rest of Spain. Of course, the term "liberal" can mean many different things in Europe depending on the nation, and American definitions do not necessarily apply. Just as Europeans tend to have no understanding whatsoever of what "conservatism" means in the U.S., Americans have a hard time understanding all the intricacies of the various levels of "liberalism" in Europe.


That said, what side of the political spectrum Catalonia sits on is irrelevant to greater discussion.


What I actually enjoy pointing out here is the fact that whether you look at the Franco era of nationalist totalitarianism, or the "semi" socialist and hyper-cultural Marxist era of today, the Spanish government STILL acts the same in its despotism against Catalan separation or independence.  It is not as if the socialists set out to right the wrongs of the Franco regime once it fell. Not at all. Instead, they merely perpetuated the same attitude of centralization while wearing a smiling face. Once again, we see that there is very little difference between fascism and communism/socialism when we get down to core behaviors and policies.


Collectivists, regardless of what other labels they use to identify themselves, have certain rules that they consistently follow in order to maintain power. One of those rules is that the collective is indivisible. They might pontificate endlessly about their superior democratic ideals, but when some people vote to leave en masse, either in polling booths or with their feet, the mask of benevolence always comes off and the true monster behind collectivism is revealed.


As we have seen in Catalonia, this monstrous behavior is undeniable. The Spanish government has set out to prevent not just separation, it has sought to prevent the very act of voting on separation using police and military force. In essence, martial law was been declared in Catalonia in order to stop the people from enacting the very democratic ideals the Spanish government claims it enshrines.




Despite the vicious measures of interference, reports suggest that the vote was still successful, with 90% of the citizenry in support of independence. What happens now is unclear, but I can tell you two things are relatively certain.


First, a 90% vote in favor will result in a militarized response from the Spanish government. If the vote was less overwhelming, the government might attempt to pit one side of the population against the other, causing internal strife and disrupting secession. This strategy is unrealistic given the mass movement for independence. So, the only other option for the government is full blown martial law.


Second, such a crackdown will result in a violent counter-response. This happened in the 1970s in Catalonia and I see no reason why it would not happen again. When you have almost an entire population in agreement on separation and you use force to stop them from attaining it, they will become violent. Civil war is inevitable if martial law is declared.


It is vital that we examine the root ideological catalyst in this scenario.


The most rational solution would be for the Spanish government to accept the Catalan vote (if they believe in "democracy" as they claim, then they have to accept it, otherwise they appear extraordinarily hypocritical). This could result in a more harmonious economic relationship and less drastic damage to Spain"s fiscal structure. However, this is not going to happen. Instead, Spain is going to use the age old collectivist tactics of intimidation and carnage to oppress the Catalan"s and subsume their economic production (as socialist governments always do).  When civil war erupts, and it will, production in Catalonia will grind to a standstill and Spain STILL loses 20% of its GDP.


You see, this is a lose/lose scenario for Spain, all because the collectivist doctrine demands a jackbooted reaction to any movement for decentralization. Collectivist systems are parasitic in nature; they see the citizenry as food, as units of production for the state that cannot be allowed to leave, for the "greater good of the greater number." Collectivists rationalize their behavior as essential to the well being of the society at large, but this is dishonest, for their behavior more often harms society by crushing individual innovation and instigating wars that might not have ever happened in the first place.


There is at the same time the matter of sovereignty movements across Europe. The only people who benefit from stopping these movements are globalists/collectivists. They may also benefit by sabotaging these movements after the fact, making an example of them and holding them up to the rest of the world as symbols of the "failures of populism."


It is important to point out here that Catalonia is not necessarily seeking independence from the EU, only Spain.  Some might argue that this makes the Catalan vote irrelevant.  I disagree. 


Some people might also argue that if secession happened in the U.S., the response would be the same. I would argue that just because it might happen the same way, this does not mean it is right. If leftist Californians, for example, followed through with their latest threats to secede from the U.S. and a massive shift of leftists and cultural Marxists move to the state, frankly I would be ecstatic. Let these people separate and congregate. Let them fail or succeed on the merits of their own ideas and ethics. If they are allowed to organize without interference and they fail, then this is simply more proof that their ideology was unsound and impractical. California"s large percentage of U.S. GDP would simply transfer to other states if in fact the productive people there are not leftists and they migrate away, leaving the separatists to wallow in their naive ideology.


If Catalonia separates without interference and succeeds economically and socially, then perhaps it is not for Spain to try to subvert or destroy the region, but to emulate their model and learn from them. If people wish to walk away from a community, they should be allowed to do so. This is very simple. Self determination is not dependent on political expediency or mutual benefit. It is an inherent human right.  Communities and borders should be based on principles that the population stands by and every system should remain voluntary. If they do not stand by said principles and they work to thwart voluntarism, then those communities are worthless and should not exist at all.


When a collective acts to stop people from leaving, all they are doing is exposing the fact that their reasons for existing are inadequate and unconvincing. This goes for Spain, it goes for the EU and it goes for the rest of the world. Globalists and collectivists should take note  decentralization is the true model for the future.


In the long run, forcing people into participation in the system is a losing battle.

Saturday, September 23, 2017

Will The Deep State's War On Trump Lead To An Actual Civil War?

Authored by Andrew Karybko via Oriental Review,


Oriental Review is publishing the English original of Andrew Korybko’s interview with an Iranian newspaper from earlier this month.



After only eight months after entering into office, we have witnessed the resignation and dismissal of 15 high-ranked people from the White House. In view of this, do you think that Trump will be able to finish his first term? Some analysts suggest that he won’t, so how unstable do you think the political situation in the US, and how serious of a threat does it pose to Trump’s presidency?


There have been over a dozen high-level and much-publicized personnel shifts in the Trump Administration in the past 9 months, but they shouldn’t be interpreted as signaling that the President himself will be leaving anytime soon. These are all just casualties of Trump’s war with the “deep state” (permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies), whereby the vested power interests in the US are fighting to defeat the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement. Throughout the course of this conflict, Trump has clearly been thrown on the defensive as he’s had to compromise on his promised foreign policy platforms in order to retain a chance at succeeding on the domestic front, but even that looks uncertain right now in some respects as the “deep state”, aided by the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only), relentlessly continues to chip away at MAGA in order to retain their power and influence.


If they can force Trump into submission and turn him into their puppet, as they’re trying to do, then there would be no need to attempt to remove him from office; likewise, if he continues to resist in some capacities, as he’s doing on domestic issues, then this scenario because more possible. Even so, it’s unlikely to succeed except in the event that Trump’s enemies can pull off turning him into the “fascist dictator” that they’ve fear mongered he’d become even before he was elected.


The only conceivable way for this to happen is if the domestic unrest in the US between the Alt-Left and Alt-Right becomes so uncontrollable that Trump is forced to implement limited martial law, and if (or likely when) a racial minority or group thereof is killed during this time, regardless of the circumstances, this would be used to swiftly bring about attempted impeachment charges on whatever trumped-up pretext can be made. It’s not being implied that this will succeed, but just that if one talks about the impeachment scenario, then this is the only one out of the wide array that are being bandied about which has any realistic chance of succeeding, though the odds are nevertheless still slim.



“The New Yorker” recently published an article which said that racism and fascism have been on the rise after Trump’s election, pointing to the incident in Charlottesville as proof of that. In your view, what’s the risk that this will spark a war between the left and right in the US?


“The New Yorker”, given its liberal-progressive and endemic anti-Trump bias, shouldn’t be trusted as a reliable source of information, but the fact that it’s pushing the Mainstream Media narrative about Trump coming to power on the backs of racists and fascists deserves to be elaborated on. This is a false stereotype which suggests that “white” (Caucasian) people are racists simply because of their skin color, and therefore voted for Trump on that basis alone, which isn’t the case at all and is condescending to the tens of millions of people who supported him for his policies.


That being said, there are indeed some actual racists and fascists who openly support Trump, but they’re such a small minority of the population as to be statistically irrelevant. For instance, the notorious Ku Klux Klan only has several thousand members nationwide, which pales in comparison to the at least 100,000-200,000 members of the Alt-Left militant group “Antifa”, which has proven to be much more violent and dangerous than their Alt-Right counterparts.


The reason why the “deep state” is trying to link racists and fascists to Trump is to discredit his election victory, so their affiliated Mainstream Media proxies amplify the voices and numbers of a tiny minority of a minority of individuals in order to promote this perception. Nevertheless, they are dangerous and deserve to be condemned, though to be fair, so too should most of their Alt-Left counter-protesters, and for even more urgent reasons.


When “Antifa” is heralded as “heroes” despite their wanton destruction and actual fascist-like violent intolerance for any dissenting views, this lends “legitimacy” to their tactics and “normalizes” them, essentially turning Far-Left street destabilizations into an accepted part of life for the elite because of their weaponized instrumentalization in intimidating the vast majority of Trump’s non-racist non-fascist base.


In turn, this can only provoke a defensive reaction from these people which spikes the chances of Left-Right clashes becoming as common in the future in America’s cities as gangland shootings are today.


To tie all of this in with the previous question, the reason why the “deep state” and Soros-affiliated Alt-Left groups want to spark such pronounced disorder and chaos in the US is to fuel a Color Revolution which would then rapidly descend into an Unconventional War of urban terrorism and political killings, all with the intent of driving Trump to become the “fascist dictator” that they fear mongered he’d become so as to have a basis for pushing through impeachment proceedings against him should racial minorities be killed if he implements limited martial law in response.

Friday, September 22, 2017

If The Majority Votes To Secede - What About The Minority?

In recent years, left-wing groups have often been the driving force behind secession movements. This has been the case in Scotland, in Catalonia, and in California. 


In each case, the secession movements have been initiated in part to forward left-wing goals, such as the creation of a larger welfare state or to escape limitations imposed by political interest groups and institutions deemed to be too right-wing. 


Within the American context, the loudest calls for secession right now are coming from California where leftists are eager to assert their independence from the Trump administration in Washington.


Generally speaking, these California secessionists want single-payer health care, an even larger welfare state, confiscation of private firearms, and an ever larger environmental "protection" bureaucracy. That is, they want a European-style welfare state. 


California as Case Study 


This case presents Americans - and especially libertarian-minded Americans - with a question that continues to come up in recent years on secession matters: should they support a left-wing secession movement? 


Is it right or moral to support a secession movement that, in the short- and medium- terms is almost guaranteed to adopt policies that are counter to the cause of freedom and free markets? 


The answer must first and foremost be compared against the reality of forcing political union on a separatist region. That is, the cost of allowing a region to separate must be compared to the cost of keeping it in — i.e., military invasion, occupation, mass arrests, government surveillance, martial law, and worse.


Not surprisingly, we"re forced to conclude the answer is the same whether we"re talking about secession in Scotland, in California, or in Catalonia: the answer is yes.


What About the Minority Interests? 


Often, the immediate retort to this position is to point to those groups in the minority who are left stuck in the seceding territories. 


The argument goes something like this: "Now that you"ve cut California loose, what about those poor conservatives, gun owners, and business owners who will now be negatively impacted by a newly empowered California government? Before, California was at least somewhat restrained by its membership in the United States. Now the California government is even more free to inflict misery on the hapless taxpayers and productive people who are stuck there." 


To this criticism, there are at least two responses.


One: California Independence Means More Freedom for the Rest of the Country 


Those who wish to focus on merely what happens to those who are in California take a parochial and far-too-limited view. Yes, it"s true that business owners, religious Christians, and gun owners in California (to name just three groups) would likely be negatively impacted by California independence. The California government has long illustrated an open hostility to these minority groups. 


The other side of the coin, however, is that California secession would lead to a significant expansion of freedom for the "rump" United States left behind. Freed of the influence of California on American politics, the remainder of the United States would likely move significantly in the direction of more freedom in markets. Federal regulations would likely be scaled back, and presidential candidates would no longer need to cater to interest groups with sizable memberships in California. 


California"s 53-member delegation in Congress (39 of them Democrats) would be gone, and voting patterns in Congress would likely shift in a direction more hospitable to freedom and free markets. 


In other words, the nation would be freed from a great weight tied around its neck. One might even say the situation is analagous to the removal of an infected appendage. It wouldn"t be the first time such a thing had happened. In 1861, when Southern States began seceding from the Union, New Yorker George Templeton Strong welcomed the prospect of being freed from the political influence of the slave drivers down south. He concluded "the self-amputated members were diseased beyond immediate cure, and their virus will infect our system no longer."


But, unlike Strong who might have been induced by conscience to think of the slaves left behind in the seceding territories, we face no similar scruples. Obviously, comparing modern California to a slave state of old is laughably inappropriate, and unlike the slaves, Californians are free to move away. Nor is it the moral obligation of Texans, or Floridians, or Coloradans to protect the Californians from the excesses of their own government.


Thus, when we think of post-secession California subject to the whims of a hard-left government there, we must also think of the 285 million remaining Americans who would benefit from the separation. 


Note also that this situation even has advantages for the taxpayers and business owners in California who wish to escape the California regime. 


Now that the rump United States has been improved by California"s absence, those in California who seek a more business-friendly legal environment can dramatically change their fortunes for the better by moving across the new national boundary to Arizona or Nevada. For these migrants, the net gain achieved by leaving California has grown larger thanks to California"s departure. 


Two: More States are Preferable to Fewer States 


The second response to the objection lies in the fact that secession already brings with it a solution to the problem. That is, the problems caused by one secession are solved by more secession. 


As I"ve explained here, here, and here, a larger number of states is preferable to a smaller number. A larger number of small states provides more practical choices to taxpayers and citizens in choosing a place to live under a governments that more closely match their personal values. 


Thus, in considering the problems of an independent California, we find that the primary problem faced by taxpayers and productive residents in California is that the state is simply too large and contains too diverse a population within its boundaries. 


As noted by numerous commentators over the years — including supporters of the Six Californias initiative — California"s population is quite politically and culturally diverse, although it has been dominated for decades by a hard-left coalition of voters based around the Bay Area. Compared to these voters, Southern California residents appear downright centrist, but one would not know this by looking at statewide politics because Northern California is so adept at throwing its weight around. 


The solution to this problem lies in breaking up California into still smaller pieces. We can see many of these political lines ripe for decentralization in the voting patterns revealed by statewide votes such as those for Propsition 187 and Proposition 8. We can see it in the map of legislative districts. Nor is this just a matter of metropolitan areas versus rural areas. Many suburban areas within the metroplexes of California are quite right-of-center in their own rights, and would surely benefit from further political decentralization. 


Urban core cities ought to be their own self-governing territories, with suburan and rural areas kept separate and self-governing in their own ways. 


The net result of all of this would be to offer a multitude of choices among taxpayers, entrepreneurs, gun owners, and moral traditionalists as to where they might live and enjoy the benefits of self-determination within their own communities. 


But before any of this can happen, we must first establish and extend the moral and legal legitimacy of self-determination through secession and decentralization. Clinging to the status quo of existing regional and national boundaries is reactionary in the extreme. Insisting that no community ought to be allowed self government unless its leaders are hard-core libertarians is impractical, irresponsible, and doomed to failure. 


Nevertheless, when confronted with new attempts at decentralization and secession, even some of those who claim to be for freedom and self-determination cling to ideas of imposing nationalistic control over others. They invent emotion-laden fictional slogans claiming "we are one nation" or "secession is treason" or other sayings designed to justify using the power of the state to impose political unity.  Ultimately, this is an ideology of monopoly and coercion, and tramples the very ideals of freedom that the nationalists claim they hold dear.