Tuesday, March 20, 2018


Collectivists advocate “equality”, however, they rarely acknowledge the kind of “equality” which a free society necessitates.

I came across the following article regarding the proliferation of plutocracies in modern times, featuring an interview with one Branko Milanovic, who was attributed as “one of the world’s foremost authorities on inequality”:

Branko Milanovic on inequality and the new global plutocracy

The article includes much chatter about plutocracies via "political capitalism", yet there is not one mention about how the control and manipulation of fiat currencies has created the largest financial banking scam in the history of mankind, allowing an elite ruling class to become super wealthy while the working masses bear the burden of the perpetually increasing debt incurred by the scam.  This economic scam is the primary cultivator of plutocracies.

A paramount fact which collectivists apparently refuse to acknowledge is that "capitalism" really means "free market", of which there are none in the entire world besides the unregulated black market.  Whenever a government imposes regulations upon the otherwise free market, the market is no longer "free" and therefore cannot accurately be called "Capitalism".

"Equality" should have absolutely nothing to do with the redistribution of wealth, as collectivists routinely assert.  Rather, it should have everything to do with ensuring the unalienable Natural Rights of the individual has equal protection under the rule of law.

In such a legal construct where the STATE performs its proper function in a free society, peace, prosperity, and liberty will be maximized.  By contrast, when the STATE allows — or itself commits — violations of Natural Rights (such as interfering with the otherwise free market), turmoil, poverty, and tyranny is maximized.


bernard baruch carman
∞ ∞ ∞
Natural Rights Coalition — Principles

Wednesday, March 7, 2018

AVL Mayor and Council Violate Oath of Office

(My letter to NC Governor Roy Cooper; cc: Buncombe Commissioners & Sheriff & Asheville City Council)

Dear Governor Cooper:

I live in Buncombe County and a serious matter regarding a local threat of domestic terrorism has come to my attention.

The Mayor of the City of Asheville, Esther Manheimer, along with the entire City Council, have unanimously voted to tell NC State as well as Federal officials to “ban 'assault’ weapons”.  Manheimer admitted her agenda is to go further, to ban ALL semi-automatic firearms.

Asheville calls for assault weapons ban; mayor says she would go further

Resulting from political deceit, it is somewhat difficult to understand the meaning of “assault weapon”, because both the mainstream media and politicians such as these often erroneously refer to semi-automatic firearms as “assault weapons” in attempts to control the narrative and scare an uninformed public.  In this case, it has been admitted by Manheimer that her agenda is to prohibit ALL semi-automatic firearms, which is nearly every single firearm in existence, including revolvers.

Such declarations made by these pubic officials constitutes a violation of their sworn oath of office to protect and defend the US Constitution from all foreign and domestic threats.  In doing so they have exemplified incompetence to hold office not only for violating their oath of office, but also for treason against the American people for conveying threats of domestic terrorism.

As a very concerned citizen of Buncombe County, I am making these actions known to your office of NC Governor.  Every Asheville City Council member has violated their oath of office to protect and defend the US Constitution by calling for the NC State legislature to ban both fully automatic and semi-automatic firearms, and should be removed from office immediately and also be charged for treason for communicating threats which would directly violate the individual and unalienable Natural Right to Self-Defense, which the US Constitution is designed to legally protect.

In liberty,


bernard baruch carman
* * *
- truth seeker/seeder • SeedsOfTruth∞Liberty
- infinityGAMESSmokinGames • audio/Mac specialist

∞ ∞ ∞

Thursday, February 8, 2018

Concealed Carry Permits in Buncombe Jump 400 Percent

Concealed Carry Permits in Buncombe Jump 400 Percent

It’s great to hear of such an increase of people locally taking their Natural Right of Self-Defense more seriously — this will certainly lead to a reduction of crime!

Sadly, it’s apparent from the comments of some in this article and online posts that there are still those who remain deceived into believing the insanity that the STATE’s continued violations of our Natural Right to Self-Defense can in any way prevent — or even minimize — violent crime in America.

In fact, the opposite has been proven to be the case with the STATE’s creation of so called “Gun Free Zones” in the 90’s.  Since then nearly every mass shooting has taken place in such dangerous zones created by the STATE.

An astute conspiracy theorist would have to wonder if the entire purpose of creating such dangerous anti-liberty zones was to actually increase the potential of violent crimes in order for the STATE to increase support for tyrannical gun regulations, like the mandatory “buyback” plan that Hillary Clinton and other tyrants in power desire.  After all, there is no “theory” to the conspiracy of these Collectivists who desire to unarm common law abiding Americans, as they’ve routinely stated.

And of course we have more than our own share of Collectivists locally who exemplify themselves as being entirely out of touch with reality.  Consider the insanity exhibited here from Cecil Bothwell:

“The uptick in concealed carry permits should worry everyone. When more people are toting weapons, concealed or not, all of us are less safe.”

The absurdity of such a statement is beyond ignorant, for it is not based in reality but rather a fantasy within one’s own mind.  For starters and as already mentioned, anyone can witness the facts  regarding the result of STATE mandated “Gun Free Zones”.  Further, the paramount fact of the matter ignored (intentionally?) by such Collectivists is that no legislation can ever prevent a criminal from acquiring a weapon via the black market and then acting violently — PERIOD.

Even Dianne Feinstein (finally) publicly admits what most everyone already knew as a matter of simple reasoning, that no gun regulations could prevent such tragedies as the Vegas shooting.  So then, when are the rest of the anti-gun Collectivists going to admit this truth?

Do they not recognize the parallel with the “War on Drugs”?  After all, a plethora of drugs have been deemed “illegal” — illegally — by the tyrannical STATE, yet this has never prevented anyone (including politicians) from being able to acquire them.  So why do people embrace the insane idea that this would work any differently… for ANYTHING???  One would think that the evil fruit of alcohol prohibition in the 1920’s would have taught this lesson to anyone with a functioning intellect.

The overwhelming fact of the matter is that when more law abiding citizens are armed and trained, we are all more safe!

The reason for this is plain for most everyone to understand, but we can certainly spell it out for those having difficulty: criminals are most prone to commit crimes in which they believe they have the greatest chance of success.  This is a simple concept that one would imagine to be common knowledge.

Even mentally unstable violent criminals who have no goal other than to murder as many people as possible seek success, therefore, they most often select locations deemed by the STATE as “Gun Free Zones”, knowing that most people obey such laws (even though such bad laws should NOT be obeyed).

Speaking of mentally unsound, another common attribute of gun grabbing Collectivists is that they perpetually refuse to hold accountable those individuals committing violent crimes.  Rather, they place blame upon inanimate objects such as the weapons themselves and then seek to punish ALL innocent Americans by infringing upon their Natural Right to Self-Defense.

One local Collectivist commenting online in response to this article even blames a victim with “contributing to gun violence” for his firearm being stolen from inside his locked vehicle, rather than blaming the thief!  It’s sad to witness such delusion among those indoctrinated into anti-liberty collectivist philosophy.

Another fact is that there are often cases — scarcely properly covered by the fake MSM news — where lives are saved merely by one armed individual thwarting the actions of violent criminals.

For example, the recent horrific church shooting in Texas was ended by one neighbor with an AR-15, saving the lives of several innocent church goers that day.  The fake MSM news widely reported the fact that the mass shooter used an AR-15, and especially highlighted such rifles are easily accessible for purchase.  Yet among most all of the online articles I just searched through, absent from these reports is the parallel fact that the “good guy with a gun” who put an end to the murder was also using an AR-15.  Also unstated by MSM was any mention of the fact that had more individuals in that church been armed, chances are more lives could have been saved.

But how quickly and effortlessly the gun grabbers “forget” such facts!  Thankfully, we who honor the Natural Right of Self-Defense don’t forget!

Perhaps no one puts it to the Collectivist legislators better than Suzanna Gratia Hupp, who lost her parents due to being in a “Gun Free Zone” at the very wrong time… and obeying the bad law:

Suzanna Gratia Hupp explains meaning of 2nd Amendment!

I look forward to AVL & WNC continuing to be a safer place to live as more individuals recognize TRUTH vs FICTION and take their Natural Right to Self-Defense responsibility more seriously!


bernard baruch carman
* * *
- truth seeker/seeder • SeedsOfTruth∞Liberty
- infinityGAMESSmokinGames • audio/Mac specialist
∞ ∞ ∞

Thursday, December 7, 2017


I’ve been enjoying the “DownsizeDC" newsletter for a while, but I had not previously noticed the “Zero Aggression Project” website mention, which immediately raised a red flag in my mind.  So I went there to investigate more about what I originally presumed to be a libertarian organization called “DownsizeDC”.

I quickly discovered that “DownsizeDC” is another outreach attempt at luring and indoctrinating ignorant liberty lovers into the folly of anarchism, for behind the alluring name we find more anarchists calling themselves “libertarian”!

You see, those of us libertarians who have experience in trying to work with “voluntarists”, voluntaryists”, “anarcho-capitalists” (or by any other deceptive name), fully recognize what you really are — anarchists.

We have witnessed and tolerated your foolish slogans, like “VOTING IS VIOLENCE!” and “ALL TAXATION IS THEFT!” while trying to grow a liberty movement of actual libertarians within the Libertarian Party.

However, the effort proved to be useless, so myself and many others like me who were told it was a political party for “LIBERTARIANS” left the “go nowhere party” because we ultimately realized that working along side of anarchists was counterproductive in that the two opposing agendas simply do not work together.  The ongoing churn within the LP is quite telling, indicating to those of us who have been through the “LP Bait & Switch” process that the blame for the continued stunted growth of the liberty movement rests squarely upon the anarchists.

For quite a while the anarchists have been using their problematic “NAP” (Non-Aggression Principle) or now “ZAP” (Zero-Aggresion Principle — apparently rebranded to sound more “vibrant and electrifying” by “DownsizeDC”, and approved by anarchist/aggressive hate-monger, L. Neil Smith) as their absolute basis of principle.

Using this concept as an absolute, they argue that all Civil Laws equal aggression because they force one against their will to comply — as if a 30MPH speed limit is some kind of act of aggression upon us while driving around neighborhoods.  Thus, they conclude that there can only be liberty in a society which has no laws and/or no government.

This is a very interesting (and insane) agenda for a supposed “political party” to adopt, but it did.  To further illustrate the absurdity and hypocrisy of this adoption, the LP mandates its voting members sign a pledge denouncing the initiation of force — get that?  The LP forces its voting members to sign a pledge denouncing force!

Oh, they will say to its members, “No one is putting a gun to your head!”  I can say this unequivocally because when I questioned this apparent hypocrisy, this was said verbatim to me.  Regardless, the LP’s bylaws prohibit members from voting unless they sign the pledge (unless this has recently changed).  By the typical standards of NAP/ZAP advocates, mandating the signing of such a pledge in order to vote would be an example of “aggression” in any other arena.

So the LP continues to ignore logical, rational, and practical Natural Rights libertarian ideas for solutions to various problems within our society, as it simultaneously repels countless individuals who would otherwise positively contribute to a real liberty movement which could grow large enough to displace one of duopoly parties.

Ironically, anarchists of course allow for government within their fanciful arguments.  They just call it something different, or privatize it falsely thinking doing so would somehow prevent collectivist corruption, in order to perpetuate their anarchistic deceit that it is possible for peace, prosperity, and liberty to thrive in a society without government.

This agenda exemplifies ignorance at best, and deceit at worst.  It also exemplifies one of the flaws of the so called “NAP/ZAP", because this flawed principle apparently doesn’t really take into consideration ignorant or even willful deceit when accounting for “aggression”.

NEWSFLASH for anarchists: Deceit is also against the Golden Rule!  Thus, you are all violating your precious NAP/ZAP!

It’s not as if we true libertarians — we who believe that Civil Law must honor Natural Law, and protect our Natural Rights by extension — in any way advocate aggression or violence.  It’s just that we don’t have such a far reaching concept of “aggression" being anything with which we might find personal disagreement.

Perhaps we libertarians could somehow find some way to work together with anarchists.  After all, we do agree on more than we do with collectivists on either side of the false “left/liberal — right/conservative” political dichotomy.

However, in order for us to do so the anarchists would have to dispense with the deceit of calling themselves “libertarian” and start being honest, calling themselves precisely what they are — anarchists.  This seems only practical, for if you believe in your chosen ideology regardless how fantastical it is, why not just call yourself by name in such accordance?

The only reason I can imagine for not doing so would be to consider that at some point in time the anarchist movement advocated this most deceitful method of alluring the ignorant into considering anarchism as the only remedy for the massive indoctrination of Collectivism which runs rampant throughout our “Neo-Amerikan” society, calling themselves “libertarian”, simultaneously usurping the non-anarchist Natural Rights libertarian ideology which is rooted in the philosophy of Individualism.

Therefore, since the anarchists continue to advocate such a foolish ideology in a deceitful way, we libertarians will continue to reveal it for the folly it truly is.

Anarchy VS Liberty


bernard baruch carman
* * *
infinityGAMES • SmokinGames • audio/Mac specialist
∞ ∞ ∞

Thursday, July 20, 2017

ETHOS - Woody Harrelson Film Review

Top Documentary Films - Woody Harrelson ETHOS Time To Unslave Humanity

While this movie includes a mere glimpse into the paramount subject of the Federal Reserve banking cartel as well as certain violations of our [Natural] Rights, it also conveniently omits highly important data crucial to the general subject matter and presents extremely deceptive fundamental falsehoods regarding the contract of the United States of America.

It fails to mention the fact that corporations did not create themselves — rather, they are creations of the Federal government.  Corporations have no power or advantages other than that which the government gives them.  Such is why corporations buy politicians in order to create biased legislation which favors themselves.  Some officials of corporations have even occasionally left their company in pursuit of Congressional seats in order to do so.

Yet, this movie perpetuates the typical ignorant collectivist railing against corporations blaming them for their “greed”, while all the time the real culprit of the corruption has been the Federal government for giving them special legal privileges and perks.

The movie erroneously asserts Capitalism to be the cause of this corporate corruption.  However, collectivists are either ignorant or deceptive when they erroneously blame America’s economic condition upon Capitalism — they should be placing such blame upon the Federal government which created all this corporate corruption, which is also known as “Crony Corporatism”.

The fact is that America has not been a Capitalist nation since at least 1913, when the Federal Reserve was created violating the US Constitution with regard to legal “money” and prohibiting any semblance of a free market currency and economy.

Ever since, American governments at all levels have continued to violate the otherwise free market, which is Capitalism.  When government interferes with and/or regulates the market in any way, the market is not longer free.

One collectivist interviewed in the movie erroneously stated that the long running struggle in America has been between “Capitalism and Democracy… and clearly Capitalism is winning”.  Besides exhibiting the commonly held ignorance over the simple meaning of Capitalism equating to a “free market”, apparently this man is also ignorant of the fact that Capitalism and Democracy are two separate and incomparable systems: Capitalism being economic and Democracy being one of government construct.

What he means to say is that the struggle has been between the economic ideologies of Capitalism VS Socialism.  These opposing social economic political ideologies are respectively rooted in the larger fundamental battle between the philosophies of Individualism VS Collectivism, which respectively honor VS dishonor individual free will.

However, this true battle of philosophies will not be addressed by the mainstream partisan duopoly, its schools, and its media, because their goal is to perpetuate the false “liberal/left VS conservative/right” paradigm which continues to divide Americans through its deceit while the duopoly remains in power.

Predictably, the movie also perpetuates the false concept that America was intended to be a “democracy”, when the truth is that it was constructed as a democratically elected republic.  This was the intention of the American founders, but for the reason that they desired to thwart pure democracy and thus minimize the chances of rapid and drastic changes to the fundamental construct of the American Federal government system and its balance of powers.

Far more crucial to the subject matter at hand than the distraction of the democracy-republic construct debate, the paramount truth and narrative continually lacking among the mainstream partisan duopoly, its schools, and its media, is that regarding the principles of Natural Rights upon which America was originally founded.

According to the Declaration of Independence, along with the US Constitution and Bill of Rights which were designed to limit government rather than the people, the primary function, purpose, and service of a government of, by, and for a free people is to protect the unalienable Natural Rights of the Individual through the Rule of Law.  Therefore, to maximize peace, prosperity, and liberty, a society must establish a government whose Civil Law is rooted in, and will never violate, Natural Law.

The movie fails to reveal such truths which are at the core of government corruption that nearly everyone complains about, as it continues its erroneous assault upon [government created] corporate entities for perpetuating war via the Military Industrial Complex.  In doing so, it fails to reveal the fact that the Federal Reserve banking scheme (illegally allowed by the Federal government) is what makes endless war possible by creating phony money out of thin air (fiat currency).  Again: a controlled currency and economy is NOT a free market and is therefore NOT Capitalism!

It also fails to reveal the fact that this immoral banking scam is the primary cause for the 99% who are inaccurately pointing at corporations as being the source of this ever widening wealth gap.  Rather, crimes of high treason should be brought up against the Federal government for allowing a non-Federal cartel of bankers to create wealth for themselves to the detriment of all Americans in perpetuity in the form of endless debt.

This is a very dangerously deceptive pro-Collectivist movie in that it provides a little bit of truth, yet a lot of omissions of truth as well as blatant deceit — most notably the lie that America has been a Capitalist nation since 1913.

The real incredible irony is that the final message of the movie suggests spending our money to support “those companies that do business in a socially responsible way” — in other words, practice Capitalism as much as you can in a largely otherwise Socialized economy!

By doing so the movie inadvertently admits that Capitalism WORKS and Socialism FAILS!  LOL!



Wednesday, May 3, 2017

Mind Your OWN Business!

The STATE has no authority in matters of private lives.  This includes private businesses, and it certainly includes the private institution of marriage (which is supposed to be a matter of CHURCH... remember separation of CHURCH & STATE?).

If owners of a private business want to "discriminate" — meaning deny their private services to anyone they wish — it is their natural right to do so.  Those who do not like such "discrimination" can simply choose to take their business elsewhere, and even boycott the business.  By engaging in such “discrimination” owners of private businesses risk damaging their business in an otherwise free market.

But of course, “Neo-Amerika” does not have a free market capitalist economic system, and arguably hasn’t since at least 1913.  To accurately call it a “free market capitalist system” there would have to be no interference in the market by the STATE.  One would be hard pressed to come up with one market that hasn’t suffered STATE interference.  One must even ask permission from the STATE to operate a business.  That is not freedom.  Rather, it’s a direct violation of our unalienable individual Natural Right to Commerce & Private Contract.

People seem to have a most difficult time understanding the concept that Civil Law cannot justly prohibit individuals from being rude or acting with prejudice.  For example, one cannot justly make a law against being an “asshole” for two reasons: 1. no one’s natural rights are violated; 2. “asshole” is entirely subjective and arbitrary.

Likewise, no just law can be made against so called “racism”.  While we’re all members of the “human race”, some people will always claim superiority based on attributes of genetics.  Further, the term “racism” continues to be frivolously attributed to matters not even related.  For example, it seems that the promotion of legal immigration complete with background checks that any nation would require is now considered as being “racist”.

The root of such absurdity is none other than collectivist indoctrination which has caused people to believe they have such authority to control and/or dictate the otherwise free will of individuals through the power of the STATE in order to force conformity of everyone to their own personal will and viewpoints.  Such is why there are corrupted judicial decisions awarding hundreds of thousands of dollars to individuals who got their feelings hurt by private business owners declining to bake for them a “pro-homosexual cake”.

It’s staggering to witness this growing trend of confusion over matters of natural rights like free speech.  Notice how collectivists clamor incessantly about “free speech” so long as they agree with your viewpoints.  However, once they find disagreement they strive to shut down the free speech they disapprove of, and even occasionally resort to violence.  This growing trend will only worsen as “Neo-Amerika” continues forward on this path of ignorance.

The masses have largely forgotten that the primary if not sole function of government in a society of free people is to protect the unalienable Natural Rights of the individual.

Natural rights are not arbitrary.  They can be defined by three simple qualifications:

1. A natural right must exist in a state of nature preceding any government or point of civil law;
2. A natural right must impose no obligation upon another individual or collective of individuals;
3. A natural right must not violate or greatly risk violating a natural right of another individual.

Having one’s feelings hurt by an “asshole” running a private business is not a violation of anyone’s natural rights.  To illustrate the absurdity and hypocrisy of commonly held collectivist assertons, one merely has to turn around the bakery scenario accordingly:

Consider if someone requested a cake decorated with the phrase, “HOMOS SUCK”, from a bakery owned by a homosexual, or “NAZI POWER” from a bakery owned by a Jewish person.  Should such private business be forced to comply against their will due to some collectivist notion of “public accommodation”?  Of course not!  Yet, collectivists routinely argue in accordance with their arbitrarily held personal opinions rather than considering the just limits of Civil Law regarding matters of individual personal liberty.

The bottom line is that the STATE has no authority to interfere in the private lives of individuals — including such matters of commerce and private contract.  Thus, the STATE cannot justly dictate bathroom policies of private businesses any more than sexual preferences among adults within their own homes.

However, the corrupted STATE which has utterly failed in the 20th century to perform its sole just function of protecting the unalienable individual natural rights of Americans is largely a reflection of its society.

Therefore, perhaps much of this growing trend of “discrimination” and “racism” hysteria can be reversed if more Americans would heed that wise age old adage to “mind one’s OWN business”.


bernard baruch carman
* * *
- truth seeker/seeder • SeedsOfTruth∞Liberty
- infinityGAMESSmokinGames • audio/Mac specialist

∞ ∞ ∞

Friday, April 28, 2017

Chastisement ≠ Violence

In response to related “anti-spanking” articles including: “Against Spanking”

Chastisement ≠ Violence

Rather, just physical chastisement serves to minimize violence and natural rights violations in a society.

In recent decades the anti-spanking movement has negatively contributed to the serious problem among our younger generations regarding their growing disdain for courtesy, respect, and responsibility toward their peers, elders, and society at large.

Chastisement of children associated with a modest amount of pain is NOT “violence” — on the contrary, such just punishment SAVES LIVES!

Just chastisement saves the lives of those undisciplined children who rashly run into the road while playing without learning to first check to ensure no vehicles are coming.  Such chastisement also serves to save a law abiding driver from accidentally wounding or killing a child, thus also from facing great punitive emotional and financial damages for a tragedy they didn’t even cause.

Just chastisement saves the lives and property of those who would be victimized by undisciplined children who have tendency to set and play with fire without stopping to think that the fire could spread for acres before gotten under control.

Just chastisement saves lives of undisciplined children (as well as others) who are prone to resort to violence when they disagree with the viewpoints of other individuals.  The growing trend of violent “protests” among the American youth exemplifies more fruit of the anti-spanking movement.  Such behavior issues are certainly related to many “snowflake” children who are apparently so overly spoiled that they cannot emotionally handle disagreement.  A spoiled child to this degree is a serious danger risk to society at large and are at risk of becoming prone to violence.

Known among cultures dating back to the origins of civilized societies, without a *modest* amount of pain being associated with disciplining a child, the correction is far less memorable and the child will be more prone to repeat the action requiring such discipline.

Another serious problem the anti-spanking movement has caused is the ongoing trend for “concerned citizens” (i.e.: paranoid citizens) to report parents who would dare to physically chastise their children in any way.  As a result, there are countless cases where parents and their children have been through literal “hell” due to warrantless and reckless reporting of “child abuse”.  Unless there is a situation of actual child abuse, all such interferences exemplify violations of our Natural Right to Parental Authority.

Again, no one with a sound mind suggests “whupping” or beating a child to the point they are seriously physically or emotionally wounded.  This axiom is even documented in ancient texts like the Bible (Eph 6:4; Col 3:21), indicating a very long standing acknowledgment among various societies at large.

A modestly administered well deserved spanking does not equate to long lasting physical or emotional wounding.  Rather, such correction serves to improve and even save lives, as already exemplified.

However, it appears that many among the anti-spanking movement have even asserted that NO amount of physical chastisement is warranted EVER.  Many of these radical “never-spankers” honestly believe that ANY form of physical chastisement is to be equated with “child abuse”.

Yet, practical experience indicates these folks to be wrong and will continue to do so.  People do not need so called “experts” or biased studies to come to a simple understanding of such truths which have been proven to be effective throughout human history.

Further, children are not ALL equal — they require varying degrees of chastisement, ranging from raising one’s voice, to a painless slap, to a full on spanking.  But as typical, collectivist indoctrination has caused proponents of the “never spank” movement to ignore the fact that humans are all individuals rather than collectives.  What works well as effective chastisement for one individual might not work likewise with another.

If one is not overly concerned with the potential of their children becoming spoiled to the degree that they might not give ample caution to various actions having great risk of hurting themselves or violating the natural rights of others… don’t ever spank your children and enjoy that new found faith in such contemporary “experts”.


bernard baruch carman
* * *
infinityGAMES ∞ SmokinGames ~ audio/Mac specialist
∞ ∞ ∞