The Sovereign Individual

Without doubt one of the best books I have read and I have read a lot. Written by William Rees-Moog who had a column in the London Times and James Davidson who was a renowned trader in the financial markets. They combined politics and economics and predicted accurately into the future. They had written an earlier book called Blood in the Streets about 1987 or so and it was amazing so they had some track record.

Now if the G20 meeting produced little as seems to be the case(I will study it closely Sunday) then I expect the markets to fare very badly. Expection/fears were high but nobody expected a non-event. Some expected the world to be saved and others expected the announcement of at least the mechanism leading to a new world currency. This could well be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

One theme in the book dealt with the forces that would lead to each nation state losing it's ability to enforce it's will within it's borders. There would be areas seceding from central authority and areas with no authority at all. We are seeing this to varying degrees in every country and in Ireland there are areas where it can be argued that the state does not at all. The book went on to say that this devolution of sovereignty could get down to even individuals.

However it also predicted that there would at the same time be an effort made by those who stood to lose to forge all the failing states into larger states inan attempt to keep the beurocracy class in positions of power and money. That is I believe what we are seeing with the rush to superstates and eventual global government. It is a race to see which will succeed.

If the markets collapse what we will see will be the most dramatic events in history. If governments fail to send out welfare cheques of value then these governments will just cease to exist because they will have no reason to exist.

The next f ew months could see devolutution on a scale hard to imagine.

The markets will bear close watching Monday to see how currencies fare out

Do you mean like our civil servants here - many of whose jobs are very artificial that they cannot be let go now because many of them got themselves indebted up to their eyeballs for property and have painted themselves into a corner with money like this fella
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=96764 who's family is running on empty.

But this could be unsustainable in the long run. Did I hear though on the radio today that some quango managers are taking a 10% pay-cut now ? There will be more of this.

The G20 summit looked like a total non-event and a waste of jet fuel bringing them all to Washington. A lot could have happened by the spring of next year which is their next meeting.

Yes. Everyone that is relying on government for a cheque.

There seems to be a lot of fragmentation of society in the US. We were giving out last year about the failure to evacuate people from Hurricane Katrina. I thought it was to do with abandoning the poor. Now today there are wealthy Californians running from their homes because of wildfires - there was no evacuation warning for them either.

Its good to see people who are prepared to work hard and use their initiative, but at the end of the day individuals just don't survive on their own. Everyone lives as part of a social network that divides up the work that delivers the roofs over our heads, the food on the table and the services we use. The better a job we make of that, the better we live.

The G20 was widely flagged as a warm up session, with not much preparation having gone into it. The question was asked whether there would be a run on the pound, if there was no commitment to printing more money and pumping it out into the economy. Alistair Darling looks happy enough this morning, but there are times if I wonder if he is on Prozac.

Katrina was an interesting lesson for those who wish to learn. It has to do with FEMA. Most people think this agency is to help people in an emergency. Where they get this idea is beyond me. It is the Federal Emergency Management Authority. It's purpose is to help the Federal Government continue operations after emergencies. This entails controling mobs by whatever means necessary. They are not there to help the mob.

All they did in Katrina was to seize weapons of those who were trying to protect their homes. They were painted as incompetent but the truth is they did a great job

youngdan wrote:

Katrina was an interesting lesson for those who wish to learn. It has to do with FEMA. Most people think this agency is to help people in an emergency. Where they get this idea is beyond me. It is the Federal Emergency Management Authority. It's purpose is to help the Federal Government continue operations after emergencies. This entails controling mobs by whatever means necessary. They are not there to help the mob.

All they did in Katrina was to seize weapons of those who were trying to protect their homes. They were painted as incompetent but the truth is they did a great job

Our friend Mr. Ganley of Libertas was awarded a medal for assisting this operation. Homeland Security a speciality.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2008/1029/1225197273403.html

His "small company" is hoping to expand: http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:fIVjFYryhsgJ:findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4191/is_/ai_n28104345+Ganley+FEMA+Rivada+Hurricane+Responder&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=ie

As I said I would like to be a fan of Ganley but I know nothing really about him. My suspicions are that he is not a European version of Ron Paul though.

I will stick with my opinion that this superstate is a heap of misery. Either a communist gulag or a right wing police state. Who knows but why be involved.

There is no chance of a Ron Paul in Europe. He could only have come into existence in America. We have liberals, and neo liberals, but no real Libertarians.

youngdan wrote:

I will stick with my opinion that this superstate is a heap of misery. Either a communist gulag or a right wing police state. Who knows but why be involved.

For over a thousand years my forefathers murdered and killed each other in the wars of Europe. The nation states of Europe were real misery. They produced war without end. Start with WW2 and work back. There are very few years when there was no war somewhere in Europe. That has to stop and if political union is the price it is cheap.

Give us a break Squire, surely you don't hold this opinion. What do you imagine this superstate to be like, a garden of Eden.

Are you really afraid that Italy will invade Ethiopia or Germany invade Poland.

It looks like many are willing to give up verything for the promise of some sort of happy dream

No state is a Garden of Eden and small does not necessarily mean good. There is not one stable border in Europe.

The Squires of old were a truely nasty bunch who thought nothing of laying waste to lands. Often one part of the family was simply fighting another. Brother killed brother or cousin or packed them off to the monastery where they would pose no threat. Might was all the justification you needed. More recent wars were truely disastrous, families divided, people ending up on the wrong side of new borders, many killed or ending up as political refugees etc. In the end what matters is wealth, for wealth is power and security. The more unstable the governaence the more important it is.

From that perspective the disagreement I have with the EU is not its existence, but the structures. How much power should the centre have. Even within the Nation States of Europe too much power resides at the centre.

Why should I assume that an independent Ireland or UK is going to be more democratic and benevolent than the EU?

youngdan wrote:

One theme in the book dealt with the forces that would lead to each nation state losing it's ability to enforce it's will within it's borders. There would be areas seceding from central authority and areas with no authority at all. We are seeing this to varying degrees in every country and in Ireland there are areas where it can be argued that the state does not at all. The book went on to say that this devolution of sovereignty could get down to even individuals.

Could you give us an example?

Good to see you 905.

Aside from the areas where the cops have little control in the physical world I was thinking more in the terms where the state is not seen as the most important factor. This is where I see the legal system breaking down. Trials have collapsed because witnesses fear for their lives. The reality is that the top dog and therefore the dog that is paramount is not the legal authorities of the State but the Godfather down the estate.

He is The Man and not the guy in the black robe. There is nothing to fear from him in the wig but you had better not cross the Man.

These are early days but there comes a time when either the local dog is squashed or else businesses will tire of paying protection(taxes) to Dublin as well as to the Gangboss.

Do you mean protection rackets are thriving in Ireland?

That is a good question. Some years ago I heard a story of some Nigerians trying to put the squeeze on a Dublin pub but they got battered black and I guess blacker in their case. Lately I have read that they have grown strong enough to control the drug trade.

I have heard that security, as in bouncers, are controled by the IRA. Maybe Hermes would have a report from his area. I know arround here it would be very foolish to try to operatea shady enterprise without paying

When the money seizes up, states do tend to break down. However that is not always the case, often the state becomes more oppressive and rule by fear becomes the new order.

A state can do quite a lot to prevent disintegrations. There can be all sorts of schemes to keep the masses fed and occupied. It can be done by a spirit of commonality, rationing and all the rest of it. Plucky yeomen doing their bit for Queen and Country fools a hell of a lot of people.

The criminals you mention are only problems because the state behaves in accordance with the law. Under normal circumstances it can't be more ruthless than those who compete with it. In a state of emergency the said individuals could well find that their life expectancy drops alarmingly.

Given the choice between a mob and a trained army, in the first year or two of any unrest I would put my money on the army provided it is not controlled by degenerates and fools.

youngdan wrote:

Good to see you 905.

Aside from the areas where the cops have little control in the physical world I was thinking more in the terms where the state is not seen as the most important factor. This is where I see the legal system breaking down. Trials have collapsed because witnesses fear for their lives. The reality is that the top dog and therefore the dog that is paramount is not the legal authorities of the State but the Godfather down the estate.

He is The Man and not the guy in the black robe. There is nothing to fear from him in the wig but you had better not cross the Man.

These are early days but there comes a time when either the local dog is squashed or else businesses will tire of paying protection(taxes) to Dublin as well as to the Gangboss.

Nice to see you.

My definition of 'state' extends beyond justice departments and the guards. If they still let in the bin men and collect their dole they're relatively well integrated, compared to... Somalia say. And the state not being seen as the most important factor, extends to lots of areas, tax compliance for one. Nationalism isn't necceessarily state-centric.

Bin men and dole cheques are welcome everywhere.

As things seem to be moving more quickly forward now we can watch how things work out. We shall see how the state manages to pay the bin men and back up the dole cheques