In other words, in a constitutional republic established upon the rights of the People as supreme, the people will assume the role of masters of their own destiny and thus take on the responsibilities of rulers instead of being ruled. The people are ultimately responsible for the actions of the government, so it is natural that they would pay more attention to these matters as participants rather than passengers.

Mike, another clarification about Buddha's teachings: Buddha spoke at great length about 'liberation' from that which binds us. For the most part, these binds are self-imposed and include desires, addictions, indulgences, superstitions, greed, avarice, envy, violence and lack of self-control. Buddha even identified an 'Evil One' called Mara (like the devil) that deludes people and leads them to bondage (spiritually and physically). Jesus said 'the kingdom of God is within you' -- Buddha is saying something similar. The truth shall set you free -- both Buddha and Jesus agree. People the world over pray to Jesus and Buddha, but who did Jesus and Buddha pray to/for? Isn't that what both of them are trying to instill in the individual? Spiritual awakenings take many forms, but inevitably require letting go of false notions and false security, taking the wheel, and choosing your destination. Enlightenment is like searching for yourself for years, then upon discovering what you have really always known and seeing yourself, you go "that's it? well, I know that!" Then laugh. That's waking up! That's being saved from one's own misconceptions and thus being empowered like never before -- doesn't God help those that help themselves, too? 'Liberation' is not the end, it is the way. ;-)

Yes, well, tell that to Congress which now primarily does nothing but tax and spend on objects of benevolence despite no Constitutional authorization to do so.

The list of all the misinterpretations is too long, but here are a few. Wages are not income -- you cannot tax the labor of the people, but tell that to the IRS. Corporations are not persons, but tell that to the bureaucrats in Washington. The States are sovereign, the People are sovereign, but tell that to the Congress-critters in DC. Americans can own land free and clear of any liens or encumbrances and it cannot ever be taxed, but tell that to the Bureau of Land Management who have all but forgotten about the land patents that were registered when a State joined the Union -- and the federal government cannot own land in a sovereign state, it can only facilitate its transfer to real people, not corporations or a 'dead hand'. Instead of maintaining one of the only free republics on Earth, America has gradually re-introduced all the corruptions of monarchical and socialist Europe. And last but not least, gold and silver are the only lawful money in the US -- and the penalty for debasing the currency is death -- what is the penalty for replacing gold and silver with debt instruments?! Americans, stand up for your republic and its laws!

Very true. That is the banker's trick. The USA has had several central banks -- central banking is the use of debt-backed paper money for currency, as opposed to gold or silver certificates. The US opted for a central bank during times of war because there is never enough money to wage a war when you need it. The problem is that the bank ultimately dictates to the government what it can and cannot have. Who is the boss now?

Fevered dreams indeed! FDR christened debt-spending as the New Deal, and stretched the federal jurisdiction over the entire USA (instead of just DC). The interstate highway system and railways brought DC to every corner of the nation. This is a direct copy of Hitler's acts in Germany with the same results. These variants of socialism / authoritarianism are the real corruption to freedom, independence, and self-determination. How to enslave a nation? Take over the money supply and its issuance. Do you know that income taxes were a requirement of the Federal Reserve in exchange for the 'privilege' of using THEIR currency in order to pay the interest on OUR debt to them for its issuance? All money has become an indicator of debt -- the more money in circulation, the more in debt the country is in -- wealth is simply an accumulation of others' debts. But the govt can print up 1 trillion dollars with the flick of a pen and purchase armies and weapons to subdue anyone that resists -- and that is exactly what they do.

It is never discussed in the media that the Arab countries still use gold as their currency. In the war against Islamic countries, the Western and Communist countries print up the money with which they pay for war. What if the real reason for warring with the nations who still use the dinar is to force central banking upon these countries, effectively stealing the nations' gold in the process -- that is what happened to the West, including the USA.

Usury is illegal in Muslim countries, and the West absolutely depend on usury for power. Because the US has totally succumbed to this monetary order, we cannot trade without it. In the battle for the world, those still using gold as their currency will forever be the enemy of the bankers that hold the debts of the world in their hands. The Arabs very well know this, and for them the fight is honorable.

The scriptures of the Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus and others have all condemned usury as the tool of the powers-that-should-not-be. A study of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation reveals the truth of it.

Why was this a rule so long ago? Because breaking it can lead to servitude.

Lending money at interest is usury. Printing money, lending it, and charging interest on it is counterfeiting -- this takes usury to a whole new level, i.e. servitude.

Robert, please, name 3 socialist ideals of the founders. Nonsense.

Robert, that makes no sense.

It is a common tactic of a losing debate to require the opposing speaker to use different words rather than address their content. You have merely tried to claim moral high ground. Again rather than proffering your argument, you speak only to deride rather than enlighten. I do not think you have an argument at all.

Absolutely, right on. It can't happen here? It's been happening for decades! The poison of authoritarianism in the guise of social justice is the death knell to liberty -- which is the true goal of the financiers (like Geroge Soros). Global socialism (which would swing between communist and fascist like a pendulum) is the goal, under the thumb of the international banking system and UN (whose members are mostly found on the communist/fascist scale). The rules for the government designed to protect the liberty of the People have been turned against the People, such that the rules are designed to protect the State and its organs, at the expense of the People. America can't be the only country defending the liberty of the Individual, the movement will have to be embraced by other countries under the thumb of their own systems of governance. The battle for Freedom is not over, in fact it rages on.

Just a reminder, habeas corpus has been suspended in the US as per the Patriot Act, still being renewed every year by the president. And all talk of the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers has effectively ceased.

Robert, with regards to 'ownership' of land and resources, I too am troubled about the obvious risk of all the land being owned by a few who ultimately rent it back to us or keep us off it altogether. I understand that Ted Turner owns 3 Rhode Island's worth of property, a lot of it closed off to development. What happens if by accident or design all the property is owned/controlled by wealthy/powerful people? In England, all the land is owned by the Crown, it is not for sale. The Crown grants title to territory with conditions attached. Revenues are to be generated from these lands either by production or taxation. But what the King can grant, he can also take away.

Native American tribes competed for territory as well, although they did not claim to 'own' the land -- all the world being a gift from the Creator. People had a responsibility to live in harmony with the land and its resources. Great attention was paid to the watersheds of their territory as these are ecosystems of their own.

Who shall lay claim to the rain, lakes and rivers? Who shall get to make their homes here or there, and who says? Will there ever be agreement between all? This is the age old issue before humankind, it has never been truly resolved. 'Yours, Mine, Theirs, Ours' -- these concepts are what define a culture and a people. The freedom to choose one's own way is the only respectable and honorable way. Still working on it! ;-)

Robert, thanks for the explanation. The reason there are still wealthy classes in China and Russia is because your ideal of communism is fundamentally flawed -- it has never been fully realized because it still requires management and regulation from a council or ruling junta. So much power cannot be trusted in so few hands -- they inevitably funnel wealth and power to themselves. Show me a communist revolution and I will show you hundreds of millions dead -- and they aren't the rich, they are the poor souls who starved mostly because they were dependent upon the state for survival, their property and farms ravaged. Pick one, there are dozens to choose from. This is the history of communism, there is no other. There never was a time when communism was the good old days.

What you are calling capitalism is actually international communism with the world's central banks as the aristocracy -- the common people don't really know who the Czar is, but there are only a handful of people in the world who control the wealth of nations through manipulation of currencies -- this is a central plank of communism. Central fiat banking is NOT capitalism, it is communism with the banks as the czars!! China and Russia do not follow real communism, you say, but are capitalists, but I assert that this IS communism as all the planks of communism are observed. Orwell's take on "some are more equal than others" was not a critique of capitalism but of the lie of communism. Sheesh, how have you twisted this well-known analogy to its polar opposite.

A republican form of government is not centralized but naturally distributed among the people and the communities they voluntarily form/join. Their organization is predicated upon the natural born rights of humankind to life, liberty, and yes, their property. Those county 'republics' form a State. Those sovereign state republics form a confederacy, and that confederated republic deals with other nations and confederacies. There is no centralized management of the affairs of the people -- they are free to pursue their happiness as long as they respect the same rights in everyone else. Please remember that Christians and homosexuals were persecuted by communists/fascists, why would you ever let some council regulate you? Or do you see yourself as on the council?

Your ideal of communism would be great if everyone joined their commune willingly, as a free choice for this way of life. Monks and nuns have been doing this for eons, India has ashrams, even America has communes. But the life of a renunciate is not for everyone, and certainly if the law imposes it, it is oppression. The primary flaw of communism is the absence of any recognition that you are free to choose your own way -- there is no liberty or individualism with communism and its variants -- the state/government is supreme. You would hate it, Robert!

"Community economics will be the only savior for the world - communism without centralization - like it use to be before we all became greedy and self important."

When/where was it like this before, Robert?

Robert, crony capitalism ain't capitalism. Crony capitalism is what you get with a rigged Monopoly game -- which is fundamental to totalitarianism (whether in the form of socialism, fascism, communism, oligarchy, dictatorship). Without the communist slave laborers in China, the Western nations would collapse. And hey, America was not founded upon capitalism, it was founded upon private enterprise and individual rights in-born and unalienable -- our People fought a war to secure these rights, and won.

Define capitalism! The use of the word is not found in any of America's founding documents. When defining capitalism you will also have to define its supposed opposite communism because Marx coined the term capitalism in order to define communism. Note, Robert, that these are not 'labels' but political ideologies seeking to be accepted as the rule of law.

Robert, Dr. Bella Dodd was a woman, lawyer, and teacher -- becoming head of the New York State Teachers Union. Read her bio, she was an organizer for the CPUSA from 1932-48, and sat on the CPUSA's National Council from 1944-48.

Again, your ad hominem remark does not address the content. You do understand that calling something stupid and the speaker unintelligent without any explanation to back it up is the very definition of snidely remarks, right?

Her comments absolutely ring true, with plenty of evidence to back it up. So help me out here, are communists 'liberal' just as you have said the founders were 'liberal'? I know you don't believe in labels, I am just trying to understand your use of them.

Robert, you will not reply to an honest dialogue, but do in fact reply and make further assertions without any argument. The typical 'liberal' response to a straight question about what you stand for and how you would do it is inevitably considered an insult -- "I will not dignify that question with a response" essentially. You do not believe in labels? ;-) That's rich coming from a self-declared gay atheist liberal progressive. You are identity-obsessed with a grand focus on reinventing language to suit. If you do not believe in labels then I suggest you stop using them ...

My goodness, Robert, you have demonstrated the double-think required to hold such a view. Good luck with that! Are you for national democratic socialism? So were the Nazis -- hence their acronym meaning national democratic socialism. I'll ask again, is Venezuela more your cup of tea? Or how about Cuba? Or are you talking about a Norway-type of socialism? Or how about Russia, aren't they exactly what you have been asking for?

Get it through your head: America was not founded upon socialism, or even capitalism or democracy, it was founded upon the natural born rights of humankind to protect themselves from being ruled by others. Up until that point, every person was considered the property of the Crown, with rights and privileges determined by the King/Czar/Fuehrer with a subservient parliament (if any).

The socialist millionaire class merely replaces the current aristocracy in whatever its form -- still living off the taxing of production, labor, and property without limit. The Clinton's, Pelosi, Gore, and many, many other Democrats have made fortunes from their political influence -- none of them make anything to sell, but they apparently make a lot of money making speeches that no one can stay awake for. Insider trading, land deals, real estate deals, energy deals, carbon taxes, all matter of corporatism with the full support of Wall Street -- this is the standard profile of a Democrat career politician.

The "organized perpetuation of the identity grievance industry" is right on. A business in which envy and blame are currency.

"To know how to be free is not given equally to all men and all nations." The focus on 'freedom' is a distraction from the 'responsibility' from which it springs, not the other way around. I don't mean 'accountability' which is another word for 'blame.' Liberty University sounds kind of pie-in-the-sky ... rather, what would students learn at Responsibility University? What about the Responsibility Party? Why is the word responsibility so off-putting? I suppose because the implication that there is some work involved, while the word 'freedom' is, well, free.

But I assert that the only reason the world hasn't gone completely to hell-in-a-hand-basket is because of all the people taking responsibility for themselves with plenty of energy to spare. They are already members of the Responsibility Party and come from all walks of life. They are as free as they can be, which may be all one can ever expect in this life. Such is their work.

Robert, socialism is TOTAL welfare statism for the biggest corporations -- usually energy, weapons, communications, technology, transportation and ALL manufacturing. Look at Putin, commanding trillions of dollars worth of corporations. Because the US does not have an independent money system those entities that can acquire unlimited credit rule the world -- and the system is designed around this fiat debt-as-money system -- THAT is communism! The reason the USA is the biggest welfare state for corporations is DUE TO SOCIALISM! That is how it works. Doing more of the same only tightens the noose. The central bank is the granddaddy of ALL the corporations underneath it -- it is Monopoly money. Wake up, man.

Republican movements must counter democratic movements. The press and schools are instilling Marxist values within the general populace. Despite the Constitution declaring "Congress shall make no law ..." Congress has made PLENTY of laws that directly violate Constitutional protections -- and the People are powerless against it now! Where are the public forums of debate? When will Congress redress our grievances? When will the States exercise their sovereignty? When will Americans throw off the Marxist shackles of central fiat banking, income taxes, property taxes, mandatory 'education,' mandatory 'service,' mandatory 'health care,' private trade monopolies in medicine, law, energy? It is time for Americans to realize who they are, throw off the yoke, and spit out that bad medicine. Something has got to give...