In order for any base to shoot trespassers on sight, the President must sign a standing order authorizing soldiers to shoot to kill.

What is a POLICE STATE?

Every time a terrorist attack takes place, we witness a barrage of threats and innuendos of retribution emanate from the Halls of Power. Swift justice is promised, and every iota of evidence of any provocation for the attack is sidelined to concentrate attention on the attack itself, to isolate it as a "criminal act." This is now so routine that average people are easily led along to support a police bureaucracy that has unchallenged power throughout the United States. Once an attack has taken place the stage is set for a legislative battle to create draconian legislation to increase punishments that are proven out by the attack itself to be ineffective deterrents. It should come as no surprise that destruction of property and murder are already serious felony crimes, punishable by imprisonment, so why the rush to death sentences? It is sure evidence that the Federal Government is losing its grip on control of the American population. This is the irony when legislators announce that they do not want to "turn the United States into a police state." The reality is that the republic was designed to act as a police state by the Founding Fathers, and any legislator who declares that he does not want to turn the Federal Government into a totalitarian institution is either ignorant of history, or is deliberately trying to distract the American people from the existing situation. A situation in which the American people live under a constant state of fear of the bureaucracy of the various levels of the government. A police state is defined by the police function, which revolves around the protection of property. This is very important, because in societies that don't give priority to private property -- such as aboriginal tribes -- there is no use for police. This is not to suggest that there is no place for private property in an advanced society, but it is to imply that the law enforcement institution is not the product of an inevitable process of evolution. The United States is symptomatic of a society in which the law enforcement institution has become so powerful that it dominates the remainder of the society. This is indicative of an institutionalized police state, wherein the police as a group benefit from a special rank and status, which they are able to employ successfully to suppress dissent. Americans don't understand the institutional mechanisms that are designed to manipulate public opinion, because a vast amount of resources are expended every year causing deliberate confusion about the subject of engineered opinion. The entire institutional arrangement in the United States is based on corporate law, that basically devises fictional entities that are endowed with the characteristics of natural people, except that corporations can live forever. This will seem alien at first to the average American, who has been handicapped by an "education" wherein the first order of business is conditioning the individual to view institutions as "people" with rights. What is a "Congress"? What is a "President"? These things do not exist in nature; they only exist in the conventions of men. When innocent children are indoctrinated with the civic creed of the republic, through memorization of the supposedly historic events surrounding the War of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution of 1787, what is conveniently left out is the chronology of dissent to the plans of the Founding Fathers. The reality of these so-called Founding Fathers was that they were the richest men in the New World, owning land that had been taken without recourse to any process of law, and human beings who were reduced to the status of property through the social conventions we call "slavery." The supreme irony is that slavemasters are represented to unwitting schoolchildren as the model citizens of a free society! Men who were pre-occupied with maintaining the enslavement of their assets, are portrayed as the just and wise archtypes of good men! The Convention that wrote the Constitution of 1787 was composed of a majority of lawyers. When it convened, it was in the shadow of the Shay's Rebellion. The Shay's Rebellion was provoked by the seizure of farms for the payment of backtaxes; the main purpose of which was to re-pay the wealthy bondholders who had financed the Revolution. A Revolution, it should be understood, most of the poor did not support because of a widespread fear that the rich would use the Revolution to take over the government. Daniel Shay was a Revolutionary War veteran who, like most of the veterans of the War of Independence, had been swindled of his pay for fighting in the Army. He therefore felt sympathy with the embattled farmers, and he raised a regiment of militia, and took over the courts of Massachusetts where the foreclosure actions were being heard. This caused the propertied class to come unhinged. The Shay's Rebellion was put down, and the Revolutionary veterans were given some compensation for their sacrifices, but the ruling class was determined to take an even firmer control of the country, to safeguard their property. This led to the Convention of 1787, which was so divisive that it was held in secret. What came out of the Convention was a document that preserved slavery, that sanctioned the evolution of a national system of law enforcement and prisons, and which opened to question whether or not women should have civil rights! Of course, this was all lost amidst fictions about the "three branches" of government the Constitution enshrined, or the fiction of limited power based on the enumeration of powers that the government would be vested with. The reality that the new Federal Government would actually constitute a police state was, at the time, widely understood. This was on account of the fact that it was designed to appeal to property owners, who were the only Americans allowed to vote in 1787. The Federal Government was defined by its police functions, which included the return of fugitive slaves to their bondage. This is important because it reveals the central focus of the new Government. In order to endure, slavery had to be a legal institution. The private acts of individual owners to subjugate their slaves had to be legitimized by sanctions of law. Otherwise, those very same acts committed against another human being were crimes! The very term "slavery" euphemizes that this involved human beings who were systematically tortured, and often brutally murdered, whose lives had no protection under the law. This fundamental division pitted the slavemasters against the slaves in an unfair distribution of power that had to weigh towards the slavemaster's advantage. Slavery is another form of mental manipulation used to justify the crimes against humanity committed by the founding generation of the republic. The institution of slavery also disqualifies the Federal Government's credibility as an upholder of the human rights of Americans, because historically it has excelled at imprisoning Americans, not liberating them. The Founding Fathers were not struggling colonists fighting the oppression of the British king. The colonists were not oppressed by the British, who they saw as their countrymen. This does not mean that there were no serious conflicts; but it also does not mean that the only solution to those problems was independence, or the institution of a republic. The institution of a republic enabled the founders to disregard the ancient customs that make up the law, in order to pick and choose what laws they would obey; and interestingly enough, those laws they chose to obey helped them in their constant battle with their slaves... It also helped them in attaining clear title to lands that were basically seized after the rightful owners were "liquidated," so that they could not pose any counter-claims. While the Europeans were quick to criticize the Native American indians for not accepting the "superior" civilization of the Europeans, they were also quick to steal the best estates for themselves from these same indians. Then they made fortunes selling this land to Europeans who had the misfortune of arriving in the New World too late to stake it out for themselves. The most significant theme of American history is defined by the wealthy deploying low-born poor whites in buffer areas, so that the poor whites would absorb all the fury of the Native Americans, as they realized that the Europeans were governed by a lust for possessions. The Founding Fathers owned vast slave-worked plantations that were the source of immense wealth. To tempt the average man into collusion with their policing needs, they gave the vote to the owners of small "freeholds." Later, when the slaves were "freed," the evolution of a compliant Middle Class took further advantage of this mutuality of interests, to the benefit of a system of government defined by criminal codes and prisons. Where once law was based on custom, now it was defined as the Acts of Congress. These Acts, however, basically revolved around procedures for law enforcement, and what have been lauded as advances were really only made necessary by the harsh and inhumane procedures that have been the hallmark of all police states. For instance it is thought that the legal requirement that the police must inform a suspect of his "rights" marks the Federal Government as a superior police state to the classic police states of the Germans or the Italians; the reality, however, is that this is only an appearance, because the preponderance of power on the side of police can make the existence of rights for suspects irrelevant. There exists in America an unwritten constitution which is derivative of the ancient British constitution, which unlike the Constitution of 1787 is not an enacted statute. The unwritten constitution is, rather, an accumulation of legal scholarship, statutes, treaties, and customs, which are defined by what is called constitutional history. The constitutional history of the United States goes back into the history of England, which was called the Motherland precisely because of this constitutional connection. This does not mean that America is a British possession in any sense of the word, but it does imply that the American constitution is informed by British experience and history. There was another episode in which "the people" did away with the institution of the monarchy, in the 1600s. What followed was a military dictatorship that bore down on the people with such a heavy hand that the people rejoiced when the monarchy was restored. It stands to reason that there are not very many alternatives for the constitution of a government, for politics is not a field dominated by experimentation. Ultimately, the government is a civilian institution, such as a constitutional monarchy; or it is a military dictatorship, which is the classic definition of a police state. The republic is over 200 years old, and it is marked by social disintegration. Who does the government serve? The masses in the street know that it does not serve them. They know that they are subject to its police powers, and the real feel of the Beltway culture is that of a garrison state, first beseiged by the crimes of slaves seeking freedom, and later, beseiged by the crimes of ordinary people, who drive too fast, or use illegal drugs. In 1948 George Orwell wrote the infamous novel "1984," in which he described the phenomena of Newspeak. Newspeak was the language of the state in which the words had been stripped of any political meaning; thus a word like "FREE" no longer had any connotations of personal freedom or liberty, but only meant free of charge. In order to define a state as a police state, it is necessary to clarify the idea of a state being organized to fulfill police functions. Every state has law enforcement agencies, so the mere presence of law enforcement is not evidence that the state is organized as a police state. The sign of a police state is when the police actually run the society, either openly or through clandestine means. It is not widely acknowledged, but the police department is one of the most highly organized agencies in every locality of the United States; an agency with a code of silence, and a full-fledged agenda dictating everything from the morals of individuals, to the behavior of local business. No one knows how many millions of dollars are spent on a gigantic subterranean secret police force that has no other purpose than to dress up like prostitutes, and lure randy citizens into committing crimes. Likewise, professional uniformed police are taking their valuable time away from pursuing genuine criminals, in order to conduct elaborate surveillance operations over teenagers who sell marijuana, at a cost so tremendous that it is burying the country in debt. Additionally, there have been instances of minor traffic infractions being blown out of proportion, and resulting in the murder of police, because the police stumbled upon a shipment of the illegal marijuana. It is vital that we understand that those policemen would be alive today if marijuana had been LEGAL, because then no crime would have taken place by the shipment, and the most that would have happened was the motorists would have received a traffic ticket. The police, of course, all support maintaining the current status of the "laws," no matter how much evidence mounts that the "laws of Congress" are counter-productive to social peace. This is where old-fashioned job security comes into play, the police union being one of the oldest and best organized unions in the United States. What we don't hear much about is the extensive lobbying that goes on for the interests of the police and prison state. Lobbying that includes scare tactics ranging anywhere from prisons being located nearby, to the early release of felons. The masses react to fear, which the classic Fascists and Nazis knew too well. We forget that the Nazis started out as unofficial militia units known as the Brown Shirts, who would go out and break up the meetings of the liberals. The idea that the Democrats and the Republicans embody a pluralist ethic is a joke. Each is a coalition of interests with a full-fledged agenda, which is consistently obscured by patriotic mantras that are supposed to invoke the memory of the Founding Fathers. The fact that they have controlled the entire government from the county to the Federal level for 150 years, is lost amidst the latest gossip about the "other party's" most recent mis-deed. These political parties function to shape the opinions of the average man, under the auspices of "representing" him. They crank out slogans and symbols and campaigns, which dominate a mass media that is institutionally dependent upon the power structure of the republic. It is important not to mistake a Democrat for a liberal, or a Republican for a conservative. Because the members of these political parties are defending institutions, NOT PRINCIPLES. The most significant characteristic of a police state is totalitarianism. This means that there is an absence of legitimate dissent because it is suppressed. The suppression of the pre-1776 American monarchy resulted in the evolution of a mechanism for suppressing politically incorrect opinion. The dark side of Revolution is the Terror, when any demagogue can whip up a crowd, that has the destructive power to invoke the death penalty. Very little is said about those unlucky enough to side with the English king of America, what was at the time the legal government. The origin of independence from a cabal of planters pre-destined the evolution of a republic, in which each planter was the same as a king on his own plantation. The power of ownership under American principles of private ownership rival the most absolute monarchs of history. And to defend this artifice of ownership, the most powerful prison state of all time was built, largely due to the new industry discovered by lawmakers, who crank out new "laws" to fill the coffers of government with cold, hard CASH. The best evidence of the suppression of legitimate dissent are terrorist acts, such as the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995. When people use violence or destruction to send a message, it is because less dangerous means are not available to them. People are not inclined to blow up important buildings, if they have access to the public dialogue. It is precisely because the mass media sustains such a narrow focus -- on political candidates, and entertainment celebrities -- that individuals feel driven to such extreme measures to make a point. This does not justify destruction or terrorism, but it infers that if we are to take the incentive out of terrorist actions, the easiest way to do it is to remove the strident partisanship from the mass media. The media has taken the place of the demagogue on the soapbox, inciting crowds to riot. This is why the Editors and News Directors are so careful in news selection: Every "news" story has to fit a pre-determined focus that supports the status quo. The media has alot of experience creating marketing "storms" through its coverage of events, and its power and influence is not lost on its handlers. But the media does not exist in a vacuum; it is private property that is owned in conglomerates that completely hide the real interests represented in the media, that benefit from the police functions of the republic. More money is spent in the United States mass marketing motion pictures than is spent educating Americans. In many schools, the mass marketing promotionals for recent motion picture releases are used in lieu of genuine educational materials. Every resource available is expended preparing Americans for lives in subservience to the Federal Government. "Cheating" the government of taxes is twisted into the equivalent of cheating every American, because the Prison Guard Lobby running the country would increase the burden it imposes on the whole country, to make up for the difference. It is important to recognize that the underlying logic is deeply flawed, so that the discussion can progress to sound alternatives. For all those alleged conservatives who support the prison lobby, they should understand that the real roots of the lobby involve the transfer of wealth from hardworking American families, to the prison contractors, and the prison guard unions. The crime issue has been so distorted by the political parties, who now cause crime through their control of the government, that the self- fulfilling circle goes unseen by the masses, who are unwittingly sucked into the money-making law enforcement\justice system, in which justice can be had for a price. Money is the real hallmark defining the classes, because people with "money" possess those big estates the protection of which is the main function of the Government. These issues become very clear when an arrest could take place, and issues of local repute come up. People with names like Rockefeller or Vanderbilt seem to get treated better, for reasons that are never brought up. Police operate as if they serve a higher power, and they close ranks to support the official lies of the PD. The Police Department of every locality sees its own role in powerful terms of crime and punishment, and control of local towns. Who has not encountered the policeman who flippantly warns, "I don't want to see you do that in MY town again!" ? PDs have been known to launch large-scale operations against the political opponents of incumbents; officeholders like county sheriffs, District Attorneys, county supervisors, and city councilmen. And the police don't feel any compunction about operating secretly, under rules that parallel the covert actions of the CIA. The brutal physical control law enforcement exerts on localities is always a "surprise" or a "shock," because the image put out for mass consumption is an image of professional men in blue. When Rodney Kings get beaten in plain view of over 20 policemen, and not one stopped it; and then the police can be heard making racist slurs on their car radios, it's easy to understand why there is such a cultural divide between white Americans and black Americans. The police state relies on the mutual hatred and suspicion of the American people to perpetuate its rule. If the American people attain any measure of unity, they will be able to dislodge the yoke of the republic; but this is put off by the campaigns of the politicians and the media, who constantly rouse the worst fears in their audiences. The ultimate form of hate is war, and that is why the logic and lingo of the republic is war: War on Drugs, War on Poverty, War on Crime, War on Sex. America is at war all right, but on the frontline of that war is a body of police who are openly racist, whose brutality is covered up by secret internal procedures that no one is powerful enough to challenge! People die in police custody every day of the week, and to the law enforcement profession, a few fatalities have to be expected. When police are involved in crimes, then a whole new criteria comes into play; it invokes the special station of police as the elite bureaucracy of the republic. Police have been involved in episodes of rape wherein the District Attorneys refuse to file charges against them. They are involved in crimes of murder, burglary, drug dealing, murder-for-hire, selling stolen goods, all things they put other people in prison for doing. But police are too powerful, and most of their rackets continue, with everyone agreeing to SEE NOTHING. On the other hand, if someone kills a cop, then all the stops are pulled out. It is then that we see what a police state can do to enforce its authority. Roadblocks go up, police gather from neighboring towns and states, and curfews go into effect. Murders take place everyday, and the families of the victims are often faced with an indifferent bureaucracy that deals with homicides as case numbers. But let the victim of homicide be a police officer, and all indifference disappears, and the police act with the single-minded purpose that always results in the arrest of a suspect. For those insulted by the notion that the Federal Government can be compared with the police states of Germany and Italy, it is important for the individual to take stock of the real facts of history. The Federal Government has never kept any agreement it has ever entered into, with Americans, with the Indians, with the freed slaves, each of whom were supposed to receive 40 acres and a mule. It has always relied on the principles of conquest, using physical coercion as its primary force. The Federal Government does not perform the will of the people, it has its own will, which is connected with the core industries of the country. The iron-fisted police functions of the republic make it possible for the politicians to wheel and deal with the nation's resources, selling them to corporate industrial interests, without having to worry about facing the consequences: rioting poor people. In the same way the police initially came to help the slavemasters keep the property they had in their slaves, the police continued to play a fundamental role in sustaining the artificial divisions that derive from historic injustices. In the end how much property one owns is not as important as what kind of person one is. A rich man can be a good man, if he can be honest about the past, and seek to compensate for the mistakes of the past. Do men owe something to each other, in brotherhood? It is a vital question, because the police state eats away at that brotherhood. Police require crime to justify their institutional existence. Crime requires victims, and it is precisely the victimization of people that has to be brought to an end. What is not appreciated is the fact that the animus in people to commit crime derives from the suppression of their needs and aspirations. This reflects the reality that the largest contingent within the American prison system is constituted of the grandsons of slaves. Police are only necessary so long as the society is at war. It is this militarized domestic condition that needs to be addressed, because we are paying a price for this war. A blood price. The Federal Government had its genesis in the breaking of law, which makes it eternally branded an outlaw institution. The police rely on the Federal Government, and its power to divide the people with politics that reflect the most superficial causes. While the cop on the beat literally beats Americans into submission, everyone else looks the other way. Individuals are so exhausted working for the greenbacks printed under the republic, that they have no time or inclination to challenge what is obviously a system of national extortion backed up by threats of death. That is the ultimate test of the police state: The fact that behind every statute is the threat of death.

RETURN TO INDEX

RETURN TO ARCHIVE