Ron Paul's Farewell Speech: Call to Liberty

I thank you, Mr. Speaker. I ask you now as consent to revising stem my remarks. Without objection, sir. Mr. Speaker, this may be the last time I speak on the House floor. At the end of the year, I'll leave Congress after 23 years in office over a 36-year period. My goals in 1976 were the same as they are today, promote peace and prosperity by restricted hearings to the principles of individual liberty. It was my opinion that, of course, the U.S. embarked on in the latter part of the 20th century would bring us a major financial crisis and engulf us in a foreign policy that would over extend us and undermine our national security. To achieve these goals, I saw it, the government would have had to shrink in size and scope, reduce spending, change the monetary system, and reject the unsustainable costs of policing the world and expanding the American Empire. The problem seemed to be overwhelming and impossible to solve yet from my viewpoint, just following the constraints placed on the federal government by the Constitution would have been a good place to start. Just how much did I accomplish? In many ways, according to conventional wisdom, my often-on career in Congress from 1976 to 2012 accomplished very little. No-name legislation, no-name federal buildings or highways, thank goodness. In spite of my efforts, the government has grown exponentially, taxes remain excessive and a prolific increase of incomprehensible regulations continues. Wars are constants and pursued with our congressional declaration, deficits rise to the sky, poverty is rampant and dependency on the federal government is now worse than any time in our history. All this with minimal concerns for the deficits and unfunded liabilities that common sense tells us cannot go on much longer. A grand but never-mentioned bipartisan agreement allows for the well-kept secret that keeps the spending going. One side doesn't give up one penny on military spending, the other side doesn't give up one penny on welfare spending. While both sides support the bailouts and the subsidies for the banking and the corporate elite, and the spending continues as the economy weakens and the downward spiral continues. As the government continues filling around, our liberties and our wealth burn in the flames of a foreign policy that makes us less safe. The major stumbling block to real change in Washington is the total resistance to admitting that the country is broke. This has made compromising just to agree to increase spending in-available since neither side has any intention on cutting spending. The country and the Congress will remain divisive since there's no loot left to divv yop. Without this recognition, the Spenders in Washington will continue to march toward a fiscal cliff much bigger than one anticipated this coming January. I've thought a lot about why those of us who believe in liberty as a solution have done so poorly in convincing others of its benefits. If liberty is what we claim it is, the principle that protects all personal social economic decisions necessary for maximum prosperity and the best chance for peace should be an easy sell. Get history has shown that the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which are rarely, if ever, fulfilled. Should we have authoritarians or liberty? If authoritarian is at least to poverty and war unless freedom for all individuals and is controlled by rich, special interests, the people should be begging for liberty. There certainly was a strong enough sentiment for more freedom at the time of our founding that motivated those who were willing to fight in the revolution against the powerful British government. During my time in Congress, the appetite for liberty has been quite weak. The understanding of its significance negligible. Yet the good news is that compared to 1976, when I first came to Congress, the desire for more freedom and less government in 2012 is much greater and growing, especially in grassroots America. Tins of thousands of teenagers and college students are with great enthusiasm welcoming the message of liberty. I have a few thoughts as to why the people of the country like ours once the free is in most prosperous allowed the conditions to deteriorate to the degree that they have. Freedom, private property and enforceable voluntary contracts generate wealth. In our early history, we were very much aware of this. But in the early part of the 20th century, our politicians promoted the notion that the tax and monetary system had to change. If we were to involve ourselves in excessive domestic and military spending, that is why Congress gave us the Federal Reserve and the income tax. The majority of Americans and many government officials agreed that sacrificing some liberty was necessary to carry out what some claim to be progressive ideas. Pure democracy became acceptable. They failed to recognize that what they were doing was exactly opposite of what the colonists were seeking when they broke away from the British. Some complained that my arguments make no sense since great wealth and the standard of living improved for many Americans over the last hundred years, even with these new policies. But the damage to the market economy and the currency has been insidious and steady. It took a long time to consume our wealth, destroy the currency, and undermine productivity, and get our financial obligations to a point of no return. Confidence sometimes lasts longer than deserved. Most of our wealth today depends on debt. The wealth that we enjoyed and seemed to be endless allowed concern for the principle of a free society to be neglected. As long as most people believe the material abundance would last forever, worrying about protecting a competitive productive economy and individual liberty seemed unnecessary. The age of redistribution, this neglect ushered in an age of redistribution of wealth by government, countering to any and all special interests, except for those who just wanted to be left alone. That is why today money and politics far surpasses money, currently going into research and development and productive entrepreneurial efforts. The material benefits became more important than the understanding and promoting the principles of liberty and a free market. It is good that material abundance is a result of liberty, but materialism is all that we care about problems are guaranteed. The crisis arrived because the illusion that wealth and prosperity would last forever has ended. Since it was based on debt and a pre-tense that debt can be papered over by an out-of-control fiat monetary system, it was doomed to fail. We have ended up with a system that doesn't produce enough even to finance the debt and no fundamental understanding of why a free society is crucial to reversing these trends. If this is not recognized, the recovery will linger for a long time, bigger government, more spending, more debt, more poverty, for the middle class, and a more intense scramble by the elite special interest will continue. We need an intellectual awakening. Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be driven by economic law. A dollar crisis will bring the current out-of-control system to its knees. If it is not accepted that big government fiat money, ignoring liberty, central economic planning, welfareism, and warfareism caused our crisis, we can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even fascism with even more loss of our liberties. Prosperity for our arch middle class, though, will become an abstract dream. This continuous move is no different than what we have seen in how our financial crisis of 2008 was handled. Congress first directed with bipartisan support bailouts for the wealthy. Then it was the Federal Reserve with his endless quantitative easing. If it first doesn't succeed, try again, QE1, QE2, QE3, and with no results we try QE indefinitely. That is, until it too fails. There is a cost to all of this, and let me assure you, delaying the payment is no longer an option. The rules of the market will extract the pound, its pound of flesh, and it won't be pretty. The current crisis elicits a lot of pessimism, and the pessimism adds to less confidence in the future. The two feed on themselves making our situation worse. If the underlies and cause of the crisis is not understood, we cannot solve our problems. The issue of warfare and welfare, deficits inflationism and corporatism, bailouts and authoritarianism cannot be ignored. By only expanding these policies, we cannot expect good results. Everyone claims support for freedom. But too often, it's for one's own freedoms and not for others. Too many believe that there must be limits on freedom. They argue that freedom must be directed and managed to achieve fairness and equality thus making acceptable to curtail through force certain liberties. Some decide what and whose freedoms to be limited, to be limited. These are the politicians who go in life is power. Their success depends on gaining support from special interests. We don't need more isms. The great news is the answer is not to be found in more isms. The answers are to be found in more liberty, which costs so much less. Under these circumstances, spending goes down, wealth production goes up and the quality of life improves. Just this recognition, especially if we move in this direction, increases optimism, which in itself is beneficial. The follow-through with sound policies are required, which must be understood and supported by the people. But there is good evidence that the generation coming of age at the present time is supportive of moving in the direction of more liberty and self-reliance. The more this change in direction and the solutions become known, the quicker will be our return to optimism. Our job for those of us who believe that a different system than the one that we have had had for the last 100 years has driven us to this unsustainable crisis is to be more convincing that there is a wonderful, uncomplicated and moral system that provides the answers. We had a taste of it in our early history. We need not give up on the notion of advancing this cause. It worked, but we allowed our leaders to concentrate on the material abundance that freedom generates while ignoring freedom itself. Now we have neither, but the door is open, out of necessity for an answer. The answer of that is based on the Constitution, individual liberty, and prohibiting the use of government force to provide privileges and benefits to all special interests. After over 100 years, we face a society quite different from the one that was intended by the founders. In many ways, their efforts to protect future generations with the Constitution from this danger has failed. Skeptics at the time of the Constitution was written in 1978, warned us of today's possible outcome. The insidious nature of the erosion of our liberties and the reassurance are great abundance gave us, allowed the process to evolve into a dangerous period in which we now live. Dependency on government-largests. Today, we face a dependency on government-largests for almost every need. Our liberties are restricted and government operates outside the rule-dlaw, protecting and rewarding those who buy or coarser government into satisfying their demands. Here are a few examples. Undeclared wars are commonplace. Well, fear for the rich and poor is considered an entitlement. The economy is over-regulated over tax and grocery distorted by deeply flawed monetary system. That is growing exponentially. The Patriot Act and FISA legislation passed with much debate have resolved in a steady erosion of our fourth amendment rights. Tragedically, our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression with no complaints from the American people. The drone warfare we are pursuing worldwide is destined to end badly for us as the hatred builds for innocence lives lost in the international laws flaunted. Once we are financially weakened and militarily challenged, there will be a lot of resentment thrown our way. It is now the law that land that the military can arrest American citizens, hold them indefinitely without charges or a trial. Ramping hostility toward free trade is supported by a large number in Washington. Supporters of sanctions, currency manipulation and WTO trade retaliation call the true free traders isolationists. Stakes in our used to punish countries that don't follow our orders bailouts and guarantees of all kind of misbehavior or routine. Centroeconomic planning through monetary policy, regulations and legislative mandates has been acceptable policy. Have a few questions. Excessive government has created such a mess it prompts many questions. Why are sick people who are who use medical marijuana put in prison? Why does the federal government restrict the drinking of raw milk? Why can't American manufacturers, manufacturers, rope and other products from hemp? Why are Americans not allowed to use gold and silver as legal tender as mandated by the Constitution? Why is Germany concerned enough to consider repatriating their gold held by the Fed for her in New York? Is it that the trust in the US and dollar supremacy beginning to wane? Why do our political leaders believe it's necessary to thoroughly audit? Why do our political leaders believe it's unnecessary to thoroughly audit our own gold? Why can't Americans decide which type of light bulbs they can buy? Why is it the TSA permitted to abuse the rights of any American traveling by air? Why should there be mandatory sentences even up to life for crimes without victims as our drug laws require? Why have we allowed the federal government to regulate commodes in our homes? Why is it political suicide for anyone to criticize a-pack? Why haven't we given up on the drug war since its an obvious failure in violates the people's rights? Has nobody noticed that the authorities can't even keep drugs out of the prisons? How can making our entire society a prison solve the problem? Why do we sacrifice so much getting necessarily involved in border disputes and civil strife around the world and ignore the root cause of the most dangerous deadly border in the world? The one between Mexico and United States? Why does Congress willingly give up its prerogatives to the executive branch? Why does changing the party and power never change policy? Could it be that to use the both parties are essentially the same? Why did the big banks, the large corporations and foreign banks and foreign central banks get bailed out in 2008 in the middle class, lost their jobs and their homes? Why do so many in the government and the federal officials believe that creating money out of thin air creates wealth? Why do so many accept the deeply flawed principle that government bureaucrats and politicians can protect us from ourselves without totally destroying the principle of liberty? Why can't people understand that war always destroys wealth and liberty? Why is there no so little concern for the executive order that gives the president authority to establish a kill list, including American citizens of those targeted for assassination? Why is patriotism thought to be blind loyalty to the government and the politicians who run it rather than loyalty to the principles of liberty and support for the people? Real patriotism is a willingness to challenge the government when it's wrong. Why is it claim that if people won't or can't take care of their own needs that people in government are able to do it for them? Why did we ever give the government a safe haven for initiating violence a give against the people? Why do so many members defend free markets but not civil liberties? Why do so many members defend civil liberties but not free markets? Aren't they the same? Why don't more defend both economic liberty and personal liberty? Why are there not more individuals who seek to intellectually influence others to bring about positive changes? Those who seek power changes than those who seek power to force others to obey their commands? Why does the use of religion to support a social gospel and preemptive wars? Both of which require authoritarianists to use violence or the threat of violence go unchallenged aggression and force redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with the teachings of the world's great religions. Why do we allow the government and the federal reserve to disseminate false information dealing with both economic and foreign policy? Why does democracy held in such high esteem when it's the enemy when it's the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? Why should anyone be surprised that Congress has no credibility since there's such a disconnect between what politicians say and what they do? Is there any explanation for all the deception, the unhappiness, the fear, the future, the loss of confidence in our leaders, the distrust in the anger and frustration? Yes, there is and there's a way to reverse these attitudes. The negative perceptions are logical and a consequence of bad policies bringing about our problems. Identification of the problems and recognizing the cause allow the proper changes to come easily. We should have more trust in ourselves less in the government. Too many people have far, far too far too long, placed too much confidence in trusting government and don't enough in themselves. Fortunately, many are now becoming aware of the seriousness of the gross mistakes of the past several decades. The blame is shared by both political parties. Many Americans now are demanding to hear the plain truth of things and want the demagoguing to stop without this first step solutions are impossible. Seeking the truth and finding the answers in liberty and self-reliance promotes the optimism necessary for restoring prosperity. The task is not that difficult if politics doesn't get in the way. We have allowed ourselves to get into such a mess for various reasons. Politicians deceive themselves as to how wealth is produced. Excessive confidence is placed in the judgment of politicians and bureaucrats. This replaces the confidence in a free society. Too many in high places of authority became convinced that only they, armed with arbitrary government power, can bring about fairness while facilitating wealth production. This always proves to be a utopian dream and destroys wealth and liberty. It empowers the people and rewards the special interests who end up controlling both parties. It's no surprise that much of what goes on in Washington is driven by aggressive partisanship and power seeking with philosophical differences being minor. Economic ignorance is commonplace. Cansianism continues to thrive, although today it is facing healthy enthusiastic rebuttals. Believers in military canesianism and domestic canesianism continue to desperately promote their failed policy as the economy languishes in a deep slumber. Supporters of all government eDx use humanitarian arguments to justify them. Humanitarian arguments are always used to justify government mandates related to the economy, monetary policy, foreign policy, and personal liberty. This is on purpose to make it more difficult to challenge. But initiating violence for humanitarian reasons is still violence. Good intentions are no excuse and are just as harmful as when the people use and force with bad intentions. The results are always negative. The immor or use of force is the source of man's political problems. Sadly, many religious groups, secular organizations and psychopathic authoritarianists endorse government initiated force to change the world. Even when the desired goals are well-intentioned or especially when their well-intentioned, the results are dismal. The good results sought never materialized. The new problems created require even more government force as a solution. The net result is institutionalizing government-initiated violence and morally justifying it on humanitarian grounds. This is the same fundamental reason our government uses force for invading other countries at will, central economic planning at home and the regulation of personal liberty and habits of our citizens. It is rather strange unless one has a criminal mind and no respect for other people in their property. No one claims it's permissible to go into one's neighbor's house and tell them how to behave, what they can eat, smoke and drink, or how to spend their money. Yet, rarely is it asked? Why is it morally acceptable that a stranger with a badge and a gun can do the same thing in the name of law and order? Any resistance is met with brute force, fines, taxes, arrests, and even imprisonment. This is done more frequently every day without a search warrant. No government monopoly over initiating violence is what we need. Restraining a aggressive behavior is one thing but legalizing a government monopoly for initiating aggression can only lead to exhausting liberty associated with chaos anger and the breakdown of civil society. Preventing such authority and expecting a saintly behavior from the bureaucrats and the politician's is a pipe dream. We now have a standing army of armed bureaucrats in the TSA, CIA, FBI, Fish and Wildlife FEMA, IRS, Corventioniers, etc. Numbing over 100,000 citizens are guilty until proven innocent in the unconstitutional administrative courts. Government in a free society should have no authority to metal in the social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. Nor should government metal in the affairs of other nations. All things peaceful, even when controversial, should be permitted. We must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity, just as we do in the area free speech and religious liberty. But even in these areas, government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political correctness to regulate speech. A very dangerous trend. Since 9-11 monitoring speech on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required. The proliferation of federal crimes, the constitution established four federal crimes. Today, the experts can't even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books. They number into the thousands. No one person can comprehend the enormity of the legal system, especially the tax code. Due to the ill-advised drug wars and the endless federal expansion of the criminal code, we have over 6 million people under correctional suspension. More than the Soviets ever had, and more than any other nation today, including China. I don't understand the complacency of the Congress and the willingness to continue their obsession with passing more federal laws. Man to her sentence and laws associated with drug laws have compounded our prison problems. The federal register is now 75,000 pages long, a tax code 72,000 pages and expands every year. When will the people start shouting? Enough is enough. And demand Congress to cease and desist. What we should be doing is achieving liberty. Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the aggressive use of force. If one seeks liberty, a precise type of government is needed to achieve it, more than lip service is required. There are two choices available. One, a government designed to protect liberty is a natural right as it's sole objective. The people are expected to care for themselves and reject the use of any force for interfering with another person's liberty. Government is given a strictly limited theory to enforce contracts, property ownership, settles disputes, and defend against foreign aggression. Number two, a government that pretends to protect liberty but is granted power to arbitrarily use force over the people and foreign nations. Though the grant of power many times is meant to be small and limited inevitably metastasizes into an omnipotent political cancer. This is the problem for which the world has suffered throughout the ages. Though meant to be limited, it never lasted a 100% sacrifice of the principle that would be tyrants find irresistible. It is used vigorously though incrementally and insidiously granting power to government officials always proves the average, the at age that power corrupts. Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to mold people's habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady erosion and a steady move toward tyrannical government. Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the process and deny the government this arbitrary use of aggression. There is no in between. Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly. Today's mess is a result of Americans accepting option number two. Even though the founders attempted to give us option number one, the results are not good. As our liberties have been and wrote it, our wealth has been consumed. The wealth we see today is based on debt and a foolish willingness on the part of foreigners to take our dollars for goods and services. Then they loan them back to us to perpetuate our debt system. It's amazing that it has worked for this long but the impact in Washington and solving our problems indicate that many are starting to understand the seriousness of this worldwide debt crisis and the dangers we face. The longer this process continues, the harsher the outcome will be. The financial crisis is actually a moral crisis. Many are acknowledging that a financial crisis looms, but few understand its in reality a moral crisis. It's the moral crisis that has allowed our liberties to be undermined and permissible growth of illegal government power. Without a clear understanding of the nature of the crisis, it will be difficult to prevent a steady march toward tyranny and the poverty that will accompany it. Ultimately, the people have to decide which form of government they want. Option number one or option number two. There is no other choice. Claiming there is a choice of a little tyranny is like describing pregnancy as a touch of pregnancy. It is a myth to believe that a mixture of free markets and government central economic planning is a worthy compromise. What we see today is a result of that type of thinking and a results speak for themselves. A culture of violence, Americans now suffer from a culture of violence. It is easy to reject the initiation of violence against one's neighbor. But it's ironic that the people are virtually an affiliate knowing government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people practically at will. Because it's the government that initiates force, most people accept it is being legitimate. Those who exert the force have no sense of guilt, it is believed by many, by too many, that governments are morally justified in initiating violence supposedly to do good. They incorrectly believe that this authority has come from the consent of the people. The minority are victims of government violence, never consented to suffer the abuse of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority. Victims of TSA accesses never consented to this abuse. This attitude has given us a policy of initiating war to do good as well. It is claim that war to prevent war from noble purposes is justified. This is similar to what we were once told that, quote, destroying a village to save a village close quote was justified. It was said by a U.S. Secretary of State that the loss of 500,000 Iraqis, mostly children in the 1990s as a result of American bonds and sanctions was worth it to achieve the good we brought to the people of Iraq and look at the mess that Iraq is in today. Government used the force to vote social and economic behavior at home and abroad has justified individuals using force on their own terms. The fact that violence by government is seen as morally justified is the reason why violence will increase when the big financial crisis hits and becomes a political crisis as well. First, we recognize that individual shouldn't initiate violence. Then we give the authority to the government. Eventually the immoral use of government violence when things go badly will be used to just to justify an individual's right to do the same thing. Neither the government nor individuals have the moral right to initiate violence against another yet we are moving toward today when both will claim this authority. If this cycle is not reversed society will break down. When deeds are pressing and conditions deteriorate and rights become relative to the demands and the whims of the majority, it's then not a great leap for individuals to take it upon themselves to use violence to get what they claim is theirs. As the economy deteriorates and the wealth of discrepancy increase, as they already are occurring, violence increases as those in need take it in their own hands to get what they believe is theirs. They will not wait for a government rescue program. When government officials wield power over others to bail out the special interest, even with disasters rolled to the average citizens, they feel no guilt for the harm they do. Those who take us into undeclared wars with many casualties resulting never lose sleep of the deaths and the destruction their bad decisions caused. They are convinced that what they do is morally justified in the fact that many suffered just can't be helped. When the street criminals do the same thing, they too have no remorse believing that they are only taking what is rightfully theirs. All moral standards become relative whether it's bailouts, privileges, government subsidies, or benefits for some from inflating a currency. It's all part of a process justified by a philosophy of forced redistribution of wealth. Violence or a threat of such is the instrument required and unfortunately is a little concern of most members of Congress. Some argue it's only a matter of fairness that those in need are cared for. There are two problems with this. First, the principle is used to provide a greater amount of benefits to the rich than to the poor. Second, no one seems to be concerned about whether or not it's fair to those who end up paying for all the benefits. The costs are usually placed on the backs of the middle class and are hidden from the public eye. Too many people believe government handouts are free, like printing money out of thin air and there's no cost. That deception is coming to an end. The bills are coming due and that's what the economic slowdown is all about. Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government. It is the tool for telling the people how to live, what to eat and drink, what to read and how to spend their money. To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected. Granting to government even a small amount of force is a dangerous concession. Limiting government excesses versus a virtuous moral people. Our constitution, which was intended to limit government power and abuse, has failed. The founders wore in that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people. The current crisis reflects that their concerns were justified. Many politicians and pendants are aware of the problems we face, but spend all their time in trying to reform government. The sad part is that the suggested reforms almost always leads to less freedom and the importance of a virtuous and moral people is either ignored or not understood. The new reforms serve only to further undermine liberty. The compounding effect has given us the steady erosion of liberty and the massive expansion of debt. The real question is, if it is liberty we seek should most of the emphasis be placed on government, reform, or trying to understand what a virtuous and moral people means and how to promote it. The constitution has not prevented the people from demanding handouts for both rich and poor in their efforts to reform the government, while ignoring the principles of a free society. All branches of our government today are controlled by individuals who use their power to undermine liberty and enhance the welfare, warfare, state and frequently their own wealth and power. If the people are unhappy with the government performance, it must be recognized that government is merely a reflection of an immoral society that rejected a moral government, a constitutional limits its own power and love of freedom. If this is the problem, all the tinkering with thousands of pages of new laws and regulations will do nothing to solve the problem. It is self-evidence that our freedoms have been severely limited in the imparant prosperity we still have is nothing more than left over wealth from a previous time. This fictitious wealth based on debt and benefits from a false trust in our currency and credit will play havoc with our society when the bills come due. This means that the full consequence of our loss liberties is yet to be felt. But that illusion is now ending, reversing a downward spiral depends on accepting a new approach. Expect the rapidly expanding home schooling movement to play a significant role in the revolutionary reforms needed to rebuild a free society with constitutional protections. We cannot expect a federal government controlled school system to provide the intellectual ammunition to combat the dangerous growth of government that threatens our liberties. The internet will provide the alternative to the government media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda. This is why it's essential that the internet remains free of government regulation. Many of our religious institutions and secular organizations support greater dependency on the state by supporting war, welfare, and corporatism and ignore the need for our virtuous people. I never believe that world or our country could be made more free by politicians if the people had no desire for freedom. Under the current circumstances the most we can hope to achieve in the political process is to use it as a podium to reach the people to alert them of the nature of the crisis in the importance of their need to a responsibility for themselves. If it is liberty that they truly seek, without this a constitutionally protective free society is impossible. If this is true, our individual go and life ought to be for us to seek virtue and excellence and recognize that self-esteem and happiness only comes from using one's natural ability in the most productive manner possible according to one's own talents. Productivity and creativity are the true source of personal satisfaction, freedom and not dependency provides the environment needed to achieve these goals. Government cannot do this for us. It only gets in the way when the government gets involved, the goal becomes a bailout or a subsidy and these cannot provide a sense of personal achievement. Achieving legislative power and political influence should not be our goal. Most of the change of it is to come will not come from the politicians, but rather from individuals, family, friends, intellectual leaders and our religious institutions. The solution can only come from rejecting the use of coercion, compulsion, government commands and aggressive force to mold social and economic behavior. Without accepting these restraints inevitably the consensus will be to allow the government to mandate economic equality and obedience to the politicians who gain power and promote an environment that smothers the freedoms of everyone. It is then that the responsible individuals who seek excellence in self-esteem by being self-reliant and productive become the victims. In conclusion, what are the greatest dangers that the American people face today that the goal of a free society? There are five. The continuous attack on our civil liberties which threaten the rule of law and our ability to resist the on-rush of tyranny. Number two, violent anti-Americanism that has engulfed the world because the phenomenon of blowback is not understood or denied, our foreign policy is destined to keep us involved in many wars that we have no business being in. National bankruptcy and a greater threat to our national security will result. Number three, the ease in which we go to war without a declaration by Congress but accepting international authority from the U.N. or NATO, even from for preemptive wars otherwise known as aggression. A financial political crisis as a concept of, number four, a financial political crisis as a consequence of excessive debt, unfunded liability, spending, bail-assing, gross discrepancy and wealth distribution going from the middle class to the rich. The danger of centric and eye planning by the Federal Reserve must be understood. World government taking over local and U.S. sovereignty by getting involved in the issues of war, welfare, trade, banking, a world currency, taxes, property, ownership and private ownership of guns must be addressed. Happily, there is an answer for these very dangerous trends. What a wonderful world it would be if anyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression. The rhetoric to such a suggestion is always too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical, naive, utopian, dangerous and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal. The answer to that is that for thousands of years the acceptance of government force to rule over the people at the sacrifice of was considered moral and the only available option for achieving peace and prosperity. What could be more utopian than that, man? Considering the results, especially looking at the state sponsored killing by nearly every government during the 20th century, estimated to be in hundreds of millions of people at its time to reconsider this grant of authority to the state. No good has ever come from granting monopoly power to the state to use aggression against the people to arbitrarily mold human behavior. Such power when left unchecked becomes the seed of an ugly tyranny. This method of governance has been adequately tested and the results are in. The reality dictates we try liberty. The idealism of non-aggression and rejecting the offensive use of force should be tried. The idealism of government sanctioned violence has been abused throughout history and is the primary source of poverty and war. The theory of a society being based on individual freedom has been around for a long time. It's time to take a bold step and actually permit it by advancing this cause rather than taking a step backwards as some would like us do today. Today the principles of habeas corpus established when King John signed the Magna Card in 1215 is under attack in our own government. There's every reason to believe that a renewed effort with the use of the internet that we can instead advance the cause of liberty by spreading and unsencered messaged that will serve deraining government authority and challenged the obsession with war and welfare. What I'm talking about is a system of government guided by the moral principles of peace and tolerance. The founders were convinced that a free society could not exist without a moral people. Just writing rules won't work if the people choose to ignore them. Today the rule of law written in the Constitution has little meaning for most Americans. Especially those who work in Washington DC. Benjamin Franklin claimed quote, only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. John Adams-Concerred quote, our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. A moral people must reject all violence in an effort to mold people's beliefs or society that booze or ridicules the golden rule is not a moral society. All great religions endorsed the golden rule. The same moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all government officials. They cannot be exempt. The ultimate solution is not in the hands of the government. The solution falls on each and every individuals with guidance from family friends and community. The number one responsibility for each of us is to change our sales with hope that others will follow. This is of greater importance than the working on changing the government. That is secondary to promoting a virtuous society. If we can achieve this, then the government will change. It doesn't mean that political action or holding office has no value. At times, it does nudge policy in the right direction. But what is true is that when seeking office is done for personal aggrandizement, money or power, it becomes useless if not harmful. When political action is taken for the right reasons, it's easy to understand why compromise should be avoided. It's also become clear why progress is best achieved by working with coalitions, which bring people together without anyone sacrificing his principles. Political action to be truly beneficial must be directed toward changing the hearts and minds of the people recognizing that it's virtue and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish. The Constitution or more laws per se have no value if the people's attitudes aren't changed. To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to be overcome. Number one is envy, which leads to hate and class warfare. Number two is intolerance, which leads to bigoted and judgemental policies. These emotions must be replaced with a much better understanding of love, compassion, tolerance, and free market economics. Freedom when understood brings people together when tried freedom is popular. The problem we have faced over the years has been that economic interventions are swayed by envy, where a social intervention is swayed by intolerance or of habits and lifestyles. The misunderstanding that tolerance is an endorsement of certain activity motivates many to legislate moral standards which should not only be set by individuals making their own choices. Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are authoritarian. Neither endorses volunteerism. Both views ought to be rejected. I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of trying to figure out the plain truth of things. The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity for the maximum number of people worldwide is to pursue the cause of liberty. If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout the land. Now yield back the balance of my time. Bye.