note: this article originally appeared in March, 2015, edited July 2019

This is Part #2 of a two part series of posts about money & power, how it affects us now and, more importantly, how it will affect us in the future. And then the absolute most important part of this series, how “prepping” can mitigate the affects of “money & power” used against us.

In Part #1 (appeared 2 days ago on the 27th) I reviewed the last seven decades and how we slipped into bondage with the government as our master. I also showed how each President since Kennedy affected out country and who the real power was/is behind the curtain. I made it clear that

“money & power” is the control of this country and how it has eliminated virtually all of our now extinct rights, freedoms and liberties over time.

Lets move on to the next installment of “money and power” – the relationship between the two is interesting.

The Ruling Class (our government, all layers of government) want virtually all of both money & power, leaving just enough to allow us to survive. Even giving us the allusion of thriving. Yes, that sounds diabolical and extremely conspiratorial. But I challenge you this, prove me wrong! Show me the actions of government at any level in the United States that isn’t sucking power away from individuals and taking it unto itself. Better yet, show me a single instance where the Executive or Legislative branches of the federal government is truly reinforcing an individual’s rights or liberties in any meaningful way!

In America today, the only people that will benefit from any government action do so at a price that others pay. So what little government gives back to one group of people (usually money) belongs to another people group of people, NOT the government. The government in America today, at all levels, only takes power, it never gives power. Why?

Because, “Power cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be moved from owner to another.”

Government cannot create power, but it can take power or move power from one group of people but only at the expense of that group. But even the ability of transferring power is against God-given natural rights. In America, government have always seized power and authority from the people, or bought it. It doesn’t give power back to its owners…the people.

Remember the saying you probably heard at some point in your life, “money is the root of all evil” or some variation of it? The truth is, the statement is far more accurate than most would think. But to me it is only half right. The half that is missing is “power.” So changing the saying slightly, “Power and money is the root of all evil!” now becomes absolutely true, yes?

Well, not really. Yeah, it sounded as if I was leading you down that path to say “yes”, but I am not done with that concept of money and power just yet. To continue to refine the saying I would have to ask, “can money and power be good, or at least can it be used for good?” I think anyone who has any intelligence would have to say “yes” to that question. So “money & power” by itself is not evil. However, how that money and power is used makes the outcome evil or good.

Yes, I make a clear distinction between good and evil. For me, anything that goes against God’s plan for us as individuals is evil. Conversely, anything that supports God’s plan for us is good.

Let us test that…

We know that God gave man agency, the right to choose what we do. Granted, there are consequences to doing evil (i.e. murder) but God does not force us to not murder. However, He teaches us the principle that it is wrong. And therein is the difference – “force.” When we are compelled into doing something we lose our agency. When we are free to choose, we enjoy or suffer the consequences of those decisions that comes from exercising our agency. Example: If we drive recklessly and cause harm or damage we should be held accountable for those actions based on the choice that we made top drive recklessly. Hence, we cause damage or harm we compensate those that were harmed by our actions/choices. However, if we drive recklessly and cause no damage or harm to anyone, what difference does it make to anyone?

Traffic statutes today are long, complicated and tedious. They are designed to compel us into certain types of behavior. The authorities use these statutes to control our behavior (i.e. reduce the ability to choose) regardless of any harm or damage actually being done to someone. Statistics would make a plea that traffic laws prevent accidents, thus saving lives and reducing property damage. This argument is completely and utterly false. If their primary concern was saving lives and reducing property damage they would prosecute drunk drivers to the fullest extent of the law. Or, they would advocate for the total elimination of cars since they represent and average 50,000 deaths per year in America.

Notice statists (those people who love government and use it to control people) will create statute after stature to control behavior but are extremely lax in holding people accountable for their actions. And here is just one example of how that is done – there are large numbers of laws on the books to control people and their driving habits. There are even mandated DUI checkpoints wherein people are subjected to questioning, searches and mandatory sobriety testing; all without “probable cause” required by the Constitution. These mandatory checks even include forced blood draws as you are restrained, should you object to the field sobriety test.

But how many times have you heard one convicted drunk driver after another let off with a light, or no, sentence who then drinks and drives again killing someone? Exactly! There are plenty of “behavior control” laws but weak “enforcement” laws. Why is that do you think?

To answer that question we will subject the scenario mentioned above to the “money & power” test. We will take the easiest test first – power. When our non-harmful activity is controlled by the government does power move to the individual person, or is it taken from the person?

Example: A DUI checkpoint – without due process of law a large number of people are stopped against their will. They are questioned by law enforcement officers and often forced to submit to a variety of sobriety tests, including the potential for an invasive blood draw. So which way does the “power” flow? To the person…or to the government?

Let’s now touch on the money aspect. If a person is stopped for DUI what happens? Regardless of anything else, they are fined. And that money goes to a government entity. If the defendant seeks legal defense then money flows to lawyers. Regardless of the outcome of the case the legal system gains monetarily from the alleged DUI infraction.

Then with a DUI conviction on his drivers record insurance companies charge more for car insurance. And who issues business licenses to insurance companies? Correct, government agencies charge insurance companies for the right to conduct business in their states as well as charging a variety of other taxes including, in many cases, corporate income tax.

And interestingly enough…DUI is seldom discovered at DUI checkpoints; normally, it is expired insurance cards, expired drivers license, or out of date vehicle registration. All of which take money from the individual push it into the government bank accounts.

And finally, why are law enforcement offices so supportive of DUI checkpoints? Overtime Pay! Yup, money.

And where does the money come from to pay that overtime to individual officers? The federal government.

The federal government sends billions and billions of dollars per year to local police departments. And why do you think they do that? In the old days they would call it what?

So regardless of any damage or harm done by the driver, power and money flow directly and indirectly from the individual to the government or government employees.

Apply that same test to every aspect of government intrusion in our lives. And I mean every single aspect. Now, be ready to answer a simple question.

Here’s the question –

Are you OK with this kind government action, taking of money and power from the individual by the government in every aspect of our lives?

Remember, power is neither created or destroyed. Power exists in only one spot at a time; either it rests with an individual or it rests with the government. And the individual must freely give it up; or, conversely, a government entity must take by force the power from the individual.

Let’s make the test even simpler. Do you trust individuals more than the government? Or, do you trust the government more than individuals? Who is easier to deal with in a dispute, an individual or a massive bureaucratic government?

So you really want to know what this has to do with “prepping” and such?

Well, it goes first to “mind set”; the mental capacity to understand what you are up against as your prepare for emergencies, disasters, or grid-down.

Let me really test your “statist quotient“. Do you support the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights? Do you?

OK, great! Please answer the following questions:

1. Federal regulations controlling civilians owning automatic weapons are appropriate?
2. Federal law prohibiting convicted felons from owning guns is the right thing?
3. Federal law prohibiting guns being sold online or shipped in the mail make perfect sense?
4. Federal law requiring the 4473 form to be completed and FBI background checks just makes sense?
5. Federal law preventing kids under the age of 18 from buying guns is needed for public safety reasons?
6. Banning of ‘bumpstocks” or “slide fire” accessories is OK with me?

Well…the Second Amendment to the Constitution contained in the Bill of Rights states,

“…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

If you answered “yes” to or agreed with, any of the six questions above then you do NOT support the Constitution and you are a statist.

Yeah, you may not like it, but you are. Yes, you can argue it and debate it all you want, but the wording in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights is clear, perfectly clear. And you either support it or you don’t.

As soon as you start coming up with reasons to restrict gun ownership or gun purchasing then you become a big-government statist.

So why are there gun laws?  Apply the “money & power” test to it.

The federal government makes huge money off regulating guns. They do so through the BATF via gun dealers. If you want to own an automatic weapon, you have to pay a huge fee to the government for them to give you that privilege. So the “money” test clearly shows that money flows from the individual to the government.

Now test the “power” aspect. Does the individual currently have the power to do as they wish within Constitutional rights? “No” is the only answer to that question.

Let’s take felons first since they are prohibited by federal law from owning a gun. Why? The Second Amendment makes NO exception to prohibit felons owning guns. So some politician decided to take that power from felons.

Can a minor buy a gun or does federal law prohibit that? Answer – minors can not buy a gun based on federal law because some politician decided to take that power away from individuals.

Can the federal government deny a person the right to buy a gun?

Yes. Through the 4473 form the federal government can prevent a person from purchasing for virtually any reason, including a simple mistake on the form itself. So does power flow from the government to an individual or has the government seized power from the individual?

And why does the statist, via the government, want this particular power, gun ownership, to move away from the people, and to the government?  Our Founding Fathers addressed that subject:

Thomas Jefferson said – “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

George Washington said – “A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined…”

George Mason said – “To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them.”

Noah Webster – “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”

Elbridge Gerry  – “What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.”

And why do you think they said those things?

Because they were all too familiar with the face of tyranny and its evil and its destructive power. Tyranny is not bottom-up…it is top-down from government against the people. Our Founding Fathers recognized the tyranny under British rule, opposed it, fought against it, some died fighting it, and they won freedom from it. They had no desire to allow tyranny to reign ever again in America.

That my friends is why the federal government promotes gun control, when they own the ballot box, there is only one last option to throw tyranny out. Now you understand why Progressives are such huge proponents of gun control, to preserve and promote power flowing to the government not to the individual. And Conservatives rarely object to those restrictions of gun ownership not being infringed.

Have I answered the “prepper” relationship question yet?

Let try this on you – applying it to any scenario where “preps” are needed, which way will the power be flowing?

Remember the terms “state of emergency”, “curfew”, “checkpoints”, “mandatory evacuations” to name just a few? Who loses power in these cases and who gains power?

Then there is the ultimate transfer of power, “martial law.” In this case, all power is moved to the government and the individual loses all their power, rights and liberties for as long as the government deems appropriate. And what is the outcome every time? Show me an example where the federal government seizes power, deprives rights and liberties to its citizens, and it turns out well.  And how do they control people under such a power grab?

They do it with a carrot and a stick. They promise food, hand out debit cards, open emergency shelters and pass out water. At what cost? You must do exactly as they say.

Do you want to depend on FEMA to take care of your family in times of need? The same government style bureaucrats that run the IRS?

Do you want that for you and your family when an emergency or disaster strikes? Or would you rather be self-sufficient? Or better yet, able to help out family, friends and community? You can only do that if you retain “power” within your situation. And you do that by NOT being dependent on what the government is offering.

The more power you retain to yourself, the ability to take care of you and your family, the less control the government has over you. And ask the people who were ever under total control of, at the mercy of, the federal government during any emergency or disaster. Ask them how did they do? How did it work out for them? Would they have avoided it if they could have?

Now, let’s take the ultimate “grid-down” scenario; do you want to trust and to rely on the government to take care of your family? Would the government even have the capacity to do so?

Actually, let me ask a more fundamental question; what actions would the federal government take in the event of a “hard” grid-down? What policies would they implement?

Having a problem answering that question? Really? I doubt it.

Can you use the “power & money” test today in everyday life? Sure! Use it to test all things political, or anything related to the government. Simply look at who benefits in relation to the flow of money and the flow of power. Therein you will see who is the loser and who is the winner.

Example: Net Neutrality.

Money: Through Net Neutrality the federal government is able, through the FCC, to charge any fee or tax to any aspect of the Internet industry just like they do phone and cable bills. Get out your cell phone bill and look at the extra charges on your bill levied by the government. So in the case of Net Neutrality the money flows from the individual and businesses to the federal government.

Power: Through Net Neutrality the federal government is able, through the FCC, to control and dictate to any Internet related company whatever policies they, the FCC, deems appropriate. The same is true for TV, radio, cable, and Ham licensing. They can control access, content, speed, and every other aspect now enjoyed by the individual person.

In the case of Net Neutrality both power and money flow from the individual to the government resulting in a huge loss of freedom, rights, and liberty for the individual. The government took control, again

As you prepare for emergencies, disasters and “grid-down” think about the way those scenarios might play out. Prepare yourself mentally on how to deal with it by understanding principles.

To better understand today’s political environment simply apply the “money & power” test against any law, policy, proposal, rule, or speech. Where does the money go?  Who gains the power? Answer those two questions and you will know the difference between good and evil.

  

 

 

2009 - 2019 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved
No reproduction or other use of this content 
without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com
See Content Use Policy for more information.