The Rise of the Slave-Drivers

“On Sept. 1st, 1894, we will not renew our loans under any consideration. On Sept. 1st we will demand our money. We will foreclose and become mortgagees in possession. We can take two-thirds of the farms west of the Mississippi, and thousands of them east of the Mississippi as well, at our own price…Then the farmers will become tenants as in England…”

1891 American Bankers Association memo [Under the direction of the Bank of England.]

How easy it is to miss the forest for the trees.

The British Crown, or the British monarchy is the owner of the Federal Reserve. This is their real secret. The strategy of the Federal Reserve is their other secret. Again, it is right of front of us, but no one sees the obvious. The strategy of the Federal Reserve is to accumulate all the wealth through the very slow, but effective, technique of currency debasement. The monarchs of old used to shave or clip the coins as they passed through their treasuries. Now the process is more sanitary (no more clipping and scraping all those dirty coins). John Maynard Keynes clearly stated that at there is no more effective method of destroying a society than through currency debasement.” The Federal Reserve – Its Origins, History & Current Strategy By: Wayne N. Krautkramer

Here in America our real enemy sits behind a facade of royal and asserted Divine Authority. The Founding Fathers were well aware of what was needed to ensure the authoritarian claims of those “royals” did not simply over-rule their own State. In America, the People were united to wear the ‘Crown of Sovereign Authority’ and every man was therefore his own subject. This was the key to establishing “All men were created Equal” in a Nation ruled by law and not decrees.  To this end the Constitution was expertly written to exclude private opinion from becoming public law. All legislative power was vested in Congress Assembled period. Slavery was a defect of great moral wrong, right along with destroying the native people.

Congress was set up to be the international Person representing the Union of States, thus representing those interests to defend and protect the Nation. However, this quality of leadership only works when those who hold those Elected Offices actually serve the People so entrusted.  When Congress became the equivalent of a Person without a head, after the southern state rep.’s simply walked out the door, the enemy (always looking for a weakness) pounced.

Banking was conceived in iniquity, and born in sin. Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. Take this great power away from them, and all great fortunes like mine will disappear. And, they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be the slaves of the bankers, and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money, and control credit.” Sir Josiah Stamp, former president Bank of England.

How this was accomplished was easy— especially when the certain key words themselves so employed convey another meaning long lost to slang:

waged, wag•ing. n.
1. Often, wages. money that is paid or received for work or services. Compare living wage, minimum wage.
2. wages, recompense or return: The wages of sin is death.

3. Obs. a pledge or security.

4. to carry on (a battle, argument, etc.): to wage war.
5. Obs.
a. to stake or wager.
b. to pledge.
6. Obs. to contend; struggle.
[1275–1325; Middle English: pledge, security

A man pledges his labors in order to receive re-compensation—a Return. Slave-wagers were those who pledged their labors— to pledge an allegiance:

1. loyalty, as of a subject to his sovereign or of a citizen to his country
2. (Historical Terms) (in feudal society) the obligations of a vassal to his liege lord. See also fealty, homage

Slang has helped to destroy proper understanding of essential words and has allowed crafty Code writers to exploit such debased words to convey duplicity in use. Does a working man pledge himself to his liege lord for a return of money? A liege is a lord or sovereign to whom allegiance and service are due according to feudal law. I will wager most working men do not consider their boss to be their monarch—or consider themselves as Americans, a loyal subject to a monarch— and yet that boss may in fact demand loyalty as a consideration of remaining employed. When wage-slavers aka peons or peasants in mass numbers went to work in factories [especially in the North east] they  were by most observations treated far worse than chattel slaves outright.

—–“The view that working for wages is akin to slavery was already present in the ancient world, beginning with the notion of prostitution as temporary slavery.[24] At a time when self-sale contracts were one of the most direct ways to become a citizen in ancient Rome,[25] Cicero wrote in his De Officiis that whoever gives his labor for money sells himself and puts himself in the rank of slaves.

——In 1763, the French journalist Simon Linguet published a description of wage slavery:
The slave was precious to his master because of the money he had cost him . . . They were worth at least as much as they could be sold for in the market . . . It is the impossibility of living by any other means that compels our farm labourers to till the soil whose fruits they will not eat and our masons to construct buildings in which they will not live . . . It is want that compels them to go down on their knees to the rich man in order to get from him permission to enrich him . . . what effective gain [has] the suppression of slavery brought [him ?] He is free, you say. Ah! That is his misfortune . . . These men . . . [have] the most terrible, the most imperious of masters, that is, need. . . . They must therefore find someone to hire them, or die of hunger. Is that to be free?[17]

—–Some defenders of slavery, mainly from the Southern slave states argued that Northern workers were “free but in name – the slaves of endless toil,” and that their slaves were better off.[27][28] This contention has been partly corroborated by some modern studies that indicate slaves’ material conditions in the 19th century were “better than what was typically available to free urban laborers at the time.“[29][30] In this period, Henry David Thoreau wrote that “[i]t is hard to have a Southern overseer; it is worse to have a Northern one; but worst of all when you are the slave-driver of yourself.”[31]

—–The usage of the term “wage slavery” shifted to “wage work” at the end of the 19th century as groups like the Knights of Labor and American Federation of Labor shifted to a more reformist, trade union ideology instead of worker’s self-management. “—

The working class depends on the moneyed class for their Sustenance– means of livelihood— without which leads to starvation and death. Under such circumstances it is not a big leap of logic to conclude many thought it was better to go along with the demands of the federal governments “pledge of citizenship” even though it meant accepting the onerous tax upon the “income” so gained. But when the government resorted to subterfuge, to trick the labor class into a debt-pledge upon the wage so earned, the curse of debt-slavery to a foreign hand is the result. This was done in a time when the labor class was on its knees and suffering was wide-spread. The enemy was ruthless to the extreme and yet, the people were defenseless due to the government providing the screws upon which they were turned. Thus, social security was trotted out as the solution, to many social ills, but in the background of its voluntary construct was a more odious demand— a tax by which the debt-hook was to be firmly attached.

People have been fighting and arguing over these “provisions” of the taxing statutes without much success, due to the fact, the government is using bankers 1st  rights as regulations– not constitutional protections of property— in a manner which obliterates labor rights— while pretending to protect them. A protection racket by any name is operating on the working class with unnerving efficiency. The problem is bankers and labor are like oil and water, which have no natural balance. As a result of issuing debt-based, synthetic-dollars, which are not in parity with the Unit of Account [silver dollar], a purposeful inflation results from the need to service the ever-increasing [exponential] debt. The artificial dollar is shaved of purchasing power and is simply the modern form of debasement of currency. Banks love credit notes, but such notes destroy the labor equivalence of time-value. Banks which operate on their own private credit had to destroy genuine coined currency. The modularity of money became one-dimensional and one-sided as  a forced monopoly. The destruction of the rent-free Peoples money was the only game the bankers wanted to play. And to destroy such money they did…  In fact, the government was so successful, it is as if a REAL dollar of weight and substance never even existed at all.  And who benefits from this absurd and damning quality of synthetic Debt-notes?

—–“In 1865 the Times editorially stated: –

“If that mischievous financial policy which had its origin in the North American republic during the late war in that country should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its money without cost.

It will have all the money that is necessary to carry on its trade and commerce.

“It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized nations of the world. The brain and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That Government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on this globe.” —-

My observation is the Rule of Law itself was banished to a corner, right along with a genuine dollar, in order to carry out this agenda to its finality. Clearly, the bastards succeeded or this world would be a very different place.

Before and after the civil war that enemy was already well inside the gates. The bitterness which had been simmering in the background between the culturally different Northern and Southern antagonists, no doubt aided the enemy, whose fortunes always swell in times of war. Blood money by any name, also mocks the weaknesses of moral civility.  The enemy knew where to strike the deadliest blow. Thus, the 14th amendment simply exploited that critical quality– antipathy that separate alien races— blacks are aliens to whites in regards to race—and thus culture by blood relationships. The same in regard to Tribal nations. When blacks ceased to be property [after the passage of the mis-numbered second 13th amendment] they reverted back to being foreign aliens or Permanent Resident Aliens. Thus the truth nobody wants to touch is simply this: back then it was indeed RACE which decided who was a State Citizen. The 14th split a hair and concluded none can tell the difference, so why allow such a difference to be questioned. The British clearly considered those of the Negro race to be inferior both culturally and in subject form as inferior citizens. The peasant class of America were wage-slavers and in most respects were considered no better than slaves.

The transformation of the working class into a mass-capitation-income taxable bonanza for the bankers was essentially accomplished in deed well before the federal reserve cemented the deal. Manipulating the labor force by all means necessary has been the  goal all along. When money is employed to make money the result is income. When labor is placed in a false relationship to constrict the natural quality to a unnatural purpose the result is inequality.

How else to explain the gross inequality of allowing a business to subtract the payment of the pledge[wage]  and then by fiat lay a tax on the resulting payment? The money so received was already a debt to the labor so expended. What is the reciprocal of the expense function in favor of the working man when the payment of his wage so owed,  is taxed before the check is even cashed out?   In what diabolical realm of logic can it be claimed, as formal proof, that labor has to be pre-taxed before cashing the check, thereby can be claimed by fiat alone as pure-profit thus taxable income? The horse was before the cart and then it was in the cart and the man ends up wearing the saddle of debt. So when the government seizes its payment, before the worker receives his return of labor cost, so expended, the government is stealing private property by legal sophistry. How odd that the business definition of income evades this skim-off-the-top by declaring all expenses thereto deducted before an INCOME can even be measured to be taxed? Withholding at source is of course the legalized term of this theft and it is theft by any name. The government had no authority to interfere with that labor contract or its terms, much less dictate every nuance of the contract itself. The usurpation of the Labor Right has no foundation of Law, so the law was simply made to be an ass of itself.

The IRS, as an agent of bankers sin, is not going to suddenly reverse itself on the bold-faced assertions already cemented into the wall of silence. So if people are to be free again in the workplace they must understand how those bricks were fashioned and those chains forged. Unless of course, being an ignorant, pledged-debt-slave is fine and good. There are many who simply prefer to do nothing. Some people simply prefer not to rock the status quo and leave the heavy lifting to somebody else.

The question of why labor-citizens came to be nothing better than slaves is due to the fact wage-slavery for commoners was the norm way back in the day. Those who lived by their labors for money were beneath those who did not— the oldest form of social inequality was the norm— the upper class did not depend on labor for a living, but on the ‘INCOMES’ so Gained from their superior ownership of Property, both tangible and intangible. When corporations earn Income from money so invested they are defining the essential difference of why such incomes are so produced—money makes money measured by “gained income” not labor. If a man is compensated by both a wage and stock profits he has one source of income not two…. labor is by the sweat of ones brow and cannot be used as a measure against itself.

To wit: People HIRED workers to perform labors, and paid them based on what they perceived as a fair compensation… as a function of Time plus labors expended. No man so hired made an hourly-profit, or the payroll check, might well have been called a profit-check instead… and the word wage would have been used to describe betting at the race-track, or some other form of gambling. The IRS cites a treasury fallacy called the Zero Cost basis of Labor to attach the word income to wage… now the horse is super-glued to the mans back so he can push the cart.. and yet this absurdity is trotted out like a filthy rag to explain why wages are pure profit and thus become taxable income. When the IRS can just make up any stupid definition of Income why the sky is the limit on what new terms can be so produced. When a chicken lays a egg it is egg income, or a cow is milked it is milk income and the pail is a profit gathering device. When you fill up your tank it is fuel income and you make a profit by every mile so gained. These name games so employed illustrate the gross absurdity of using abstract terms to define measures which are themselves based on nonsensical declarations…. income is not a substance unto itself— IT DOES not exist.   It is simply a word to specify an accounting unit of measure–of which the word – accrue is better suited when determining actual gain. Imagine if the 16th was based on accrue instead…?

—–“The Court stated that “[a]lthough the ‘Congress cannot make a thing income which is not so in fact,’ [ . . . ] it can label a thing income and tax it, so long as it acts within its constitutional authority, which includes not only the Sixteenth Amendment but also Article I, Sections 8 and 9.”[52] The court ruled that Ms. Murphy was not entitled to the tax refund she claimed, and that the personal injury award she received was “within the reach of the Congressional power to tax under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution” – even if the award was “not income within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment“.[53] See also the Penn Mutual case cited above.

On April 21, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the decision by the Court of Appeals.[54]—–“

This is the sum of the game being played— anything can be declared income and lawful definitions be damned! The Congress shall have power is like a magic genie from the bottle— yeah, it can be right and proper or damn evil and wrong…. the Framers gave an inch and now it is a country mile times ten…. a DEFECT in operation to be exploited.

The very reason the people back then were mesmerized by the idea of taxing “Incomes” was due to the Tariff tax abuse so suffered. Caught up in a social fever to soak the rich they failed to discern the monster they wanted to unleash. The word ‘income’ was being used to specify a unique quality of wealth so measured by the term. The plural “incomes” was used due to the fact, substantial amounts of intangible wealth, were accruing “outside” of the direct property taxing authority of the Union States, and also not under the United States excise taxing authority, of International Trade and Business, naturally coming to and across American shores. If it was already lawful to tax a measure of wealth by the “incomes” no new legislation was ever needed. Why did Congress need an amendment to do something already established? People miss the real underlying reason…. the banking syndicate had ulterior motives.

The British banking syndicate was already in charge of the hen house and was well along its plan to control wages by Capital.  New York city was purposely set up to be a financial center to cater to those international interests. The control these interests had across the several States is demonstrated by the opening quote.  Does any word in that quote reflect fear of the government? NO…… these national bankers were to act with impunity upon their victims, which defines just how far that dead-cold hand was reaching. And every Debt-citizen so captured was to be squeezed to the last penny.

—–“Thomas v. State, 15 Ind. 449; “One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States.” (See also Cory v. Carter, 48 Ind. 327 (17 Am. R. 738); McCarthy v. Froelke, 63 Ind. 507; In Re Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443. McDonel v. State, 90 Ind. 320, 323, 1883.)

—–“In providing that persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens, the fourteenth amendment undoubtedly had particular reference to securing citizenship to the members of the colored race, whose servile status had been obliterated by the thirteenth amendment, and who had been born in the United States, but were not, and never had been, subject to any foreign power. They were not *aliens (and, even if they could be so regarded, this operated as a collective naturalization), and their political status could not be affected by any change of the laws for the naturalization of individuals.

—–“The federal government has absolutely no authority whatsoever to tax the Citizens of the several States for their Citizenship. The latter have natural Rights and Privileges which are protected by the U.S. Constitution from federal intrusion. These Rights are inherent from birth and belong to “US the People” as Citizens of one of the several States as described in Dred Scott v. Sandford supra. Such Citizens are not under the direct protection or jurisdiction of Congress, but they are under the protection of the Constitutions of the States which they inhabit.”

*This would be true if the assumed equality of race was not in question. Whites and blacks are alien to each other and in those days this factor carried forward the distinctions so established. The 14th did not solve the racial issue, or provide equality of cultural heritage.

The Act of Congress called the Civil Rights Act, 14 U.S. Statutes at Large, p. 27, which was the forerunner of the so-called 14th Amendment, amply shows the intent of Congress, as follows:

… [A]ll persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color … shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States … to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens ….”

Only by discerning the sly manipulations on “subject to” can the deduction be made clear, that when the blacks were set free from being owned property of Citizens, they reverted to the status of foreigners in regards to white Citizens without regard to their place of birth. They became Resident aliens by race distinction. By simply leaving out “international” in the 14th amendment the clear distinction was lost between allegiance to ones race [blood-kin] and then country, thereby providing the enemy with yet another tool for undermining the constitutional separation of powers. The goal was to obliterate State sovereignty and thus its Citizens of any real political power where it actually matters: the control of internal money as opposed to the international Market of money.

Van Valkenburg v. Brown, (1872) 43 Cal 43, 47.) “No white person born within the limits of the United States, … or born without those limits, {of its inherent international jurisdiction} and subsequently naturalized under their laws, owes the status of citizenship to the recent Amendments to the Federal Constitution.”

Naturally, the IRS and the inferior courts [in which it operates with impunity] flat-out ignore the historical facts surrounding the issue of State Citizenship. The diabolical ring of reasoning is like a race-track. An individual is a “Person” who is a legal artifice, in a construed representation of a “subject” aka the citizen, who is compelled to obey the dim-witted creatures inhabiting the Congress, to be the individual so generalized. This ring around the man, which owes its powers to nothing, but entrapment by words alone, is the noose about the mans neck.

The unconstitutional quality of the 14th only underlines the debasement of the law as a means to an end. Nothing in that rotten amendment did any good for black Americans, contrary to the claims that civil rights are a superior form to that of natural rights. If this were true the Founders would have been arguing over civil privileges not unalienable or inalienable Rights. Roman civil law is and was inferior to Natural Law which by its distinctions is Immutable. Let it be remembered the Roman Empire was crushed under its own dead weight. And when was the last time a Pope roared like a lion against the insults of a banking shyster? Any man claiming such extraordinary authority over the world round and cannot speak above a whisper on behalf the worlds working people is a coward pure and simple.

Communism was another death blow to working people, who never needed to be atheists just to make an honest dollar. Communism is just a three-legged snake bearing false virtues to the peasants, so enamored by its hollow promises, they fail to grasp replacing one form of dictatorship with another, is still a dictatorship. Communism, as postulated by Marx, is absolutely in conflict with a Republican form of government. Giving any State more power than the very People themselves can defend by principle, allows unchecked authority to become a totalitarian wet-dream. Civil servants who bite the hands that feed them are clearly confused as to why they are civil servants. By allowing rank injustice to fester like an open wound on the civil body of America, such political hucksters shamelessly sell vice as virtue. The false title of law-maker has gone to their heads and poisoned their conscience. Any Statute that is repugnant to the letter of the Law, as based on Consent, and reeks of political servitude  to a foreign master, simply has no principle worth defending..

The greater the force necessary to produce ‘compliance’ the weaker the underlying principle so defended, must become. There is nothing fair or honest in a system so designed to compel debt-obligation and then compel taxation to service said debt. They shot the horse, hooked an anchor to the rear of the cart and whipped the saddled man to work harder or else. Is it any wonder so many simply refuse to do anything? The compounding debt cycles offer no rest to the weary who must labor more for the government than themselves. The very same government which had the Sovereign authority to produce its own “Peoples” money—”  Government will furnish its money without cost” and there would never be a debt in the first damn place! All the gimmicks and smokescreens, the propaganda, the never-ending stream of political bull-sh*t is to hide that salient fact and bury in the dark recesses of the basement such a “sovereign authority” belonged to the People in the first place. SO long as Bankers have 1st Rights to the labors of men, such men are slaves by wage and principle. Why do Americans accept slavery? They were told to… and the word slave was deemed politically incorrect, so it was replaced by employed.

To be employed is to be a slave. A slave is paid is debased debt-notes which in turn are taxed on the false premise such wages are income. By simply changing the meaning of “incomes” to become a blanket assertion—- the “A tax” is enforced as a capitation tax and quite unconstitutional. The IRS simply refuses to read a history book, or the very Law which made their only actual legal authority possible. People do not understand that the Direct tax was SENT to the STATES because they were Sovereign Nations, in a Union. AS Citizens of that Union, no State had any taxing authority over another. To create a fair system of checks and balances, the apportionment rule was fashioned to prevent States from understating their Census to reduce taxation, or over state their census to gain Seats. The resulting Tax Cake, was thus Shared, by the apportionment slice accordingly. The Direct tax authority did NOT extend to the People themselves, or it would be extortion upon their property– a Tyranny of the few over the many, a cruel hoax upon the freeman and land holders alike. And what kind of IDIOTS would create a form of government to entrap themselves in gross Despair and befoulment of Liberty? How can any man pursue happiness bound in iron chains of debt?

The dirtiest secret of all is the same power that creates the debt also creates the credit upon which it is extinguished— bankers who have no incentive to be lawful, moral or otherwise gain a shred of conscience, are happy to pretend both powers were always theirs to begin with— who made them SOVEREIGNS over the Earth? Which shiny frick’in Crown sits atop their pointed heads? Who gave them such sweeping powers of a pen? Certainly in this Nation— not the Constitution, it has no such powers to give them in the first place. When Congress stepped down from its proper Seat of Authority, into a mere person— those fools lost every power so enumerated to them. The corporate “person” is a thing of no powers except by the delusions of grandeur, so entertained. The diabolical truth is that wretched impostor has wrecked the federal government so thoroughly it looks like Humpty-Dumpty was hit by a bazooka and flung by a hurricane across the country side. They have destroyed its true character and thus have poisoned the Nations well of Good Fortune and Good Will.

Imagine a Nation where the wealthy have no social limitations except to do NO harm— where men who indeed work for a living, do not pay twice for their labor dollar, under false pretenses that debt is good for the Nation. What kind of banking system is in operation? If paper dollars were always superior to metal Coin, those paper dollars would be stuffed under the mattress, while the metal coins circulated as bad money. If gold coin was superior to silver, gold is saved and silver circulates. A mass capitation tax is impossible when dollars are interest free, because the government furnishes its own money.

If the 16th amendment was not such a bold-faced fraud, the gross inequality of wealth distribution  is impossible. All those ultra-rich robber barons, already had solutions in the forms of Trusts and Foundations to remove the vast bulk of their wealth forever out of governments reach of taxing Incomes! Sly devils already had the fix in place….  they knew who really buttered their bread and they were not going to spoil any plan that would make them even wealthier, which is why that plan breezed on through, as if it was indeed going to change a damn thing, where such powers really mattered. Soaking the rich was the goal and it back-fired just as it was intended on the very people it fooled.

And here we are a hundred years later up to our collective eyeballs in fictitious debts circulating as artificial dollars. Sweet Jesus what a racket it all really is and yet, the people who are hurt the most say the least for fear that those IRS goons will strip them of their freedoms in a heart-beat, and others figure what the hell these chains are barely visible and seem light as a feather. Many more simply use the underground economy, or stash their money elsewhere—-Jul 22, 2012 – LONDON, July 22 (Reuters) – Rich individuals and their families have as much as $32 trillion of hidden financial assets in offshore tax havens, …

… And why? Because the IRS is the goon squad for the despicable British bankers lording over the Nations economy like the vultures they truly are and will always be.  At some point the rich and the rest of us are eventually going to come to the same conclusion— Why do we need these vultures hoarding over our credit and debts? Either the banking system and the taxing statutes start playing reality again or both need to heaved over-board Boston Tea style. That creepy syndicate of banking shysters is violating the Rights of honest men and woman working for a living by every crooked legal trick a Code can conjure out of thin air. And the damning thing is  nine out of ten Americans know it to be true… Congress just huffs and puffs and claims it knows nothing—- as IF that was their only purpose— TO be a brick in the wall.

A wall of silence.



Tags: , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: