Range Magazine for the Fall of 2014 carried an article by Julian Stone which noted: “The feds will not be satisfied until they have control of all private property–and not only in the America West.”
I have an old copy of The Communist Manifesto published by International Publishers back in 1969. It’s dog-eared, with lots of stuff underlined, and with my comments in the margins, because I have made lots of use of it in refuting what its author and those Illuminists that financed him promote in it.
On page 23, Marx stated: “In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in a single sentence: Abolition of private property.” He then goes on to explain what he means by that and says that the concept of property is based on class antagonism.
Whether they even realize it or not, (and I think at the leadership levels they do) many of the federal agencies at work in the Western states are actively promoting what Marx has advocated, and their agenda is to eventually absorb all private property in this country.
Range Magazine for the Fall of 2014 carried an article by Julian Stone which noted: “The feds will not be satisfied until they have control of all private property–and not only in the America West.” Think about what you just read.
Mr. Stone noted in his article several areas I have referred to in other articles. One was on the Texas-Oklahoma border, the Red River. He noted: “Private landowners in Texas and Oklahoma have wrangled since 1919 over lands bordering the river. Now the Oklahoma BLM is formulating new land management plans for 116 miles of the Red River borderlands for which private landowners in Texas have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (to pay for property or in taxes?) and the BLM says it belongs to the government. “The land in question belongs neither to Texas or Oklahoma, even if locals have bought it from one another and continue to pay taxes on it.” Thus spake the BLM in its infinite wisdom (or was that greed?). I understand that since Trump got into office some of this has changed, but you can bet your boots, spurs and all, that the next time you get another Democratic administration in Washington it will change back again and legalized theft will again be the order of the day. All the BLM has done is to back off–for now.
Further along in his article Mr. Stone has observed: “BLM recommends establishing new national monuments by using the Antiquities Act ‘which allows the president to act quickly.” In other words, steal it before the local rubes know what’s going on and can squawk! The Western Congressional Caucus noted awhile back that: “The president is going down the list, and sealing off vast swaths of the West on behalf of his special interest allies, who view our states as their personal playgrounds.” The president referred to here was Comrade Obama. But do you think if they get a Democrat, or even a liberal (socialist) RINO in the White House these plans will cease? Right now they may be on hold. Don’t let Trump’s being in the White House lull you back to sleep. These federal agencies, the BLM, the Forest Service and the whole bevy of federal agents are only waiting, with bated breath, for their next chance at a federal land grab to begin anew. Administrations may change–the leopard’s spots don’t!
Mr. Stone listed a whole batch of areas the BLM would dearly love to grab control of, literally millions of acres all across the West–The Organ Mountains Desert Peaks, nearly 500,000 acres; Gold Butte in Nevada; the Dolores River Basin in Colorado–another 500,000 acres; Hidden Gems in Colorado, another 400,000 acres; Montana’s Northern Prairie, about 2.5 million acres; the Sonoran Desert in Arizona, 500,000 acres, and the list continues. I can’t list all of them. One thing you have to say about the BLM–they don’t think small. They really want it all. This is only a wish list for the first installment. They’ll take it a few hundred thousand acres at a time, but they and their sister “agencies” mean to control it all.
What do you think all this does to the ranching, farming, mining and logging culture of the Western states? It destroys it–and that’s the whole idea. They are making the same stupid (or deliberate) mistake the African dictatorship of Zimbabwe made when it displaced all the white farmers and the country’s leader gave all that farmland to his good buddies–who didn’t bother to farm it–and now the country is starving where it used to export surpluses.
The cattle industry in this country and the independent way of life that ranching has produced are slated for destruction. We don’t need cattlemen or sheepmen or farmers. We can always buy our meat from overseas–at inflated prices. The feds seem to think that sure beats having our own ranchers produce what we use and it make us dependent on other “cultures.” It destroys our own unique Western culture in the process–and for the feds, that is just as important as making sure we get millions of illegal immigrants, preferably from Muslim countries, in here to “enhance” our native culture. There are lots of different agendas involved here at different levels. However–the destruction of American Western culture is one big part of it.
And for you folks here in the South, lots of you farm and raise cattle also. You may not lease public land for grazing, but ask yourselves this–how many federal agencies tell you how much cotton or tobacco you are allowed to grow–on your own land? How big a step would it be from that to the feds telling you how many sheep cattle, or goats you can raise–on your own land???
So let us not kid ourselves. Whether Trump is in office or not (and I am not questioning his honest intent) the federal agencies really do mean to fulfill Marx’s vision for a new Communist world and a new Communist man. They are raising particular hell in the West right now. When they think they have accomplished their plans there they will start to come for the rest of us. You all had better be aware of that and get ready to do whatever you can legitimately do to resist–because it will happen, as sure as the turning of the earth!
Has it ever occurred to our good Southern folks that the destruction of our monuments, our history and heritage, is the first step in this campaign in our part of the country. Then they will work on the Midwest. They don’t have to worry too much about the Northeast or the Left Coast–those already belong to them, but they want the rest of us under their heel asap!
Murray N. Rothbard was the father of what some call Radical Libertarianism or Anarcho-Capitalism which Hans-Hermann Hoppe described as “Rothbard’s unique contribution to the rediscovery of property and property rights as the common foundation of both economics and political philosophy, and the systematic reconstruction and conceptual integration of modern, marginalist economics and natural-law political philosophy into a unified moral science: libertarianism.”
This book applies the principles of this “unified moral science” to environmental and natural resource management issues.
The book started out life as an assigned reading list for a university level course entitled Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View.
As I began to prepare to teach the course, I quickly saw that there was a plethora of textbooks suitable for universal level courses dealing with environmental and natural resource economics. The only problem was that they were all based in mainstream neo-classical (or Keynesian) theory. I could find no single collection of material comprising a comprehensive treatment of environmental and natural resource economics based on Austrian Economic Theory.
However, I was able to find a large number of essays, monographs, papers delivered at professional meetings and published from a multitude of sources. This book is the result. It is composed of a collection of research reports and essays by reputable scientists, economists, and legal experts as well as private property and free market activists.
The book is organized into seven parts: I. Environmentalism: The New State Religion; II. The New State Religion Debunked; III. Introduction to Environmental and Natural Resource Economics; IV. Interventionism: Law and Regulation; V. Pollution and Recycling; VI. Property Rights: Planning, Zoning and Eminent Domain; and VII. Free Market Conservation. It also includes an elaborate Bibliography, References and Recommended Reading section including an extensive Annotated Bibliography of related and works on the subject.
The intellectual level of the individual works ranges from quite scholarly to informed editorial opinion.