LISTEN TO ARTICLE:
How The Trump Administration Will Complete the Destruction
of the United States of America The Lincoln Administration Initiated
Aloha and Mahalo for coming,
Per my cultural obligation, I give you a shortened version of my parentage.
At birth, I was gifted with the names of two of my paternal great-grandmothers, Ida and Drucilla. My father, Eugene Franklin Rowe from Arkansas and Missouri, was a veteran of World War II. He met and married my mother Jane Keaonuenueokalani Awa who is from Kalihi, O’ahu, Hawai’i. As the eleventh of eleven children, I grew up in Carlsbad, California where my family settled after my father’s retirement from the Marine Corp.
Lincoln’s War 2.0: I begin this presentation in the uncomfortable position that this information may not be for you... yet. I accept that a majority of Americans will be unable to comprehend it since most who are asked about the subject of Lincoln and the Civil War have been conditioned to believe that it was unfortunate but necessary, destructive but liberating, bloody but holy. Lincoln occupies the hearts and minds of so many Americans as the greatest or their favorite president. This is one of the clearest examples of propaganda our country has ever experienced, and by propaganda, I do not mean lies. I mean seduction.
If this history is a new concept for you, I suggest the original Lincoln-Douglass Debates and The Problem With Lincoln written by Thomas DiLorenzo as a good place to start to educate oneself about this period in American history. I doubt you will find those on any government funded school reading lists. In our day, we assume due to our indoctrinated public school education that the debates represented a contest between racist and non-racist ideologies. That is not only oversimplified, but emphatically untrue. Rather than a debate between a slave defender and a great human-rights emancipator, the famous Lincoln-Douglas Debates were two bragging self-professed racists each defending their political ideologies for a white America.
Consequently, this presentation is for those who are already aware that President Abraham Lincoln was an unapologetic racist, that he destroyed the U.S. Constitution, and that he set the course for the economic servitude of ALL Americans. Again, for those who find this unfamiliar, historian Jeffrey Roger Hummel details this in his book, Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Freemen.
Unfortunately, even to those who recognize that Lincoln’s war was truly about an economic capture and the equalizing economic enslavement of the American people, I am not offering a lesson of a disgraceful past history at a comfortable distance. I intend to illustrate how the Trump administration is Lincoln’s War 2.0. It not only encompasses a new and greater economic capture, but it is enslavement rebranded as “decentralization,” and it includes all of humankind. Central control “decentralized” is not liberty. I am disappointed, to say the least, as I watch my libertarian colleagues accepting this revolution and in some cases leading it. I have long expressed to the confusion of my closest friends my concern that the Libertarian Party will be used as the Trojan Horse to enslave all of mankind.
So, like a good library, there is something in this presentation to offend everyone.
of the United States of America The Lincoln Administration Initiated
Aloha and Mahalo for coming,
Per my cultural obligation, I give you a shortened version of my parentage.
At birth, I was gifted with the names of two of my paternal great-grandmothers, Ida and Drucilla. My father, Eugene Franklin Rowe from Arkansas and Missouri, was a veteran of World War II. He met and married my mother Jane Keaonuenueokalani Awa who is from Kalihi, O’ahu, Hawai’i. As the eleventh of eleven children, I grew up in Carlsbad, California where my family settled after my father’s retirement from the Marine Corp.
Lincoln’s War 2.0: I begin this presentation in the uncomfortable position that this information may not be for you... yet. I accept that a majority of Americans will be unable to comprehend it since most who are asked about the subject of Lincoln and the Civil War have been conditioned to believe that it was unfortunate but necessary, destructive but liberating, bloody but holy. Lincoln occupies the hearts and minds of so many Americans as the greatest or their favorite president. This is one of the clearest examples of propaganda our country has ever experienced, and by propaganda, I do not mean lies. I mean seduction.
If this history is a new concept for you, I suggest the original Lincoln-Douglass Debates and The Problem With Lincoln written by Thomas DiLorenzo as a good place to start to educate oneself about this period in American history. I doubt you will find those on any government funded school reading lists. In our day, we assume due to our indoctrinated public school education that the debates represented a contest between racist and non-racist ideologies. That is not only oversimplified, but emphatically untrue. Rather than a debate between a slave defender and a great human-rights emancipator, the famous Lincoln-Douglas Debates were two bragging self-professed racists each defending their political ideologies for a white America.
Consequently, this presentation is for those who are already aware that President Abraham Lincoln was an unapologetic racist, that he destroyed the U.S. Constitution, and that he set the course for the economic servitude of ALL Americans. Again, for those who find this unfamiliar, historian Jeffrey Roger Hummel details this in his book, Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Freemen.
Unfortunately, even to those who recognize that Lincoln’s war was truly about an economic capture and the equalizing economic enslavement of the American people, I am not offering a lesson of a disgraceful past history at a comfortable distance. I intend to illustrate how the Trump administration is Lincoln’s War 2.0. It not only encompasses a new and greater economic capture, but it is enslavement rebranded as “decentralization,” and it includes all of humankind. Central control “decentralized” is not liberty. I am disappointed, to say the least, as I watch my libertarian colleagues accepting this revolution and in some cases leading it. I have long expressed to the confusion of my closest friends my concern that the Libertarian Party will be used as the Trojan Horse to enslave all of mankind.
So, like a good library, there is something in this presentation to offend everyone.
Why did the Communist Party USA celebrate a Lincoln-Lenin Day as shown here in 1938? Abraham Lincoln is responsible more than anyone else for the centralized government bureaucracy we live under today and which is a cornerstone of communist philosophy. In death, Lincoln could be made and was made to symbolize just about anything, except what he actually was, including an emancipator for the working man. Frank Meyer wrote,
“Were it not for the wounds that Lincoln inflicted upon the Constitution, it would have been infinitely more difficult for Franklin Roosevelt to carry through his revolution, for the coercive welfare state to come into being… Lincoln… opened the way to centralized government with all its attendant political evils.”
Although the Republican Party currently identifies itself with the soundbite as representing “small government and fiscal responsibility,” the objectively documented “Party of Lincoln” has been anything but. Its honest legacy illustrates it was built and continues to operate upon the Whig policies of redistribution of wealth and debt enabled by a tax-supported public school indoctrinated American labor force. Wait, but is that not what the Democrat Party does? Don’t they not do the same? Yes, obviously. This is the libertarian point about how the parties operate as two wings of the same bird. Each has its own special interest groups, other than the American people themselves, but they are essentially the same group of organized crime. The people are farmed and mined for their taxes and resources. We are no freer because we vote for a new overseer every four years.
Trump’s Tariffs
“Were it not for the wounds that Lincoln inflicted upon the Constitution, it would have been infinitely more difficult for Franklin Roosevelt to carry through his revolution, for the coercive welfare state to come into being… Lincoln… opened the way to centralized government with all its attendant political evils.”
Although the Republican Party currently identifies itself with the soundbite as representing “small government and fiscal responsibility,” the objectively documented “Party of Lincoln” has been anything but. Its honest legacy illustrates it was built and continues to operate upon the Whig policies of redistribution of wealth and debt enabled by a tax-supported public school indoctrinated American labor force. Wait, but is that not what the Democrat Party does? Don’t they not do the same? Yes, obviously. This is the libertarian point about how the parties operate as two wings of the same bird. Each has its own special interest groups, other than the American people themselves, but they are essentially the same group of organized crime. The people are farmed and mined for their taxes and resources. We are no freer because we vote for a new overseer every four years.
Trump’s Tariffs
In 1832, Abraham Lincoln introduced himself thus,
“My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank… in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.”
As I explained in a previous introduction to the Lincoln administration, he was the political descendent of the Hamiltonian tradition pushing to rebrand corrupt British “mercantilism” as the “American system.” At Hamilton’s death the mantle passed to Henry Clay from whom upon his death Lincoln picked it up. At Henry Clay’s funeral, Lincoln eulogized Clay as his, “beau ideal of a statesman” and the source of all of his own ideas about politics.
Lincoln was a corporate lawyer for the banking-newspaper-railroad manufacturing elite. He served his own interests and theirs. Imagine the corporate lawyers of big oil and tobacco of our day. Lincoln lived in the largest house in Springfield, Illinois complete with house servants. He lived steps away from the Illinois statehouse. For twenty-eight years, he walked the path between the two buildings as an attorney, lobbyist, and legislator representing all the major railroad corporations in the Midwest. He traveled around in an Illinois Central Railroad private car along with their corporate executives. As an aside, is it not curious that the image we are conditioned to recall of him is a humble Kentucky hillbilly? Author, poet, playwright, and lawyer, Edgar Lee Masters wrote,
“Clay was the champion of that political system which doles favors to the strong in order to win and keep their adherence to the government. His system offered shelter to devious schemes and corrupt enterprises… He was the beloved son [figuratively speaking] of Alexander Hamilton with his corrupt funding schemes, his superstitions concerning the advantage of a public debt, and a people taxed to make profits for enterprises that cannot stand alone. His example and his doctrines led to the creation of a party that had no platform to announce, because its principles were plunder and nothing else.”
Masters was referring to the Whig party.
I can tell you that having read Hamilton’s original work, he is quite convincing about American patriotism and saving American manufacturing through high protective tariffs until one has to admit that markets do not function on good intentions. When an argument in favor of the free market is made rather than applying the destructive results of tariffs on American consumers, suddenly some are quick to respond that we do not currently operate in a free market society as if that is an excuse to add further insult to injury. All of this distracts Americans from the reality that it is United States’ government policies, regulations, and subsidies propping up false markets and suppressing others that has created the hostile environment for workers, manufacturing, farming, and other industries in the first place.
Thomas DiLorenzo breaks it down further,
“The Hamilton-Clay-Lincoln ‘American System’ … sought to turn the U.S. Government into a subsidy machine for already affluent interest groups at the expense of everyone else. Masters was right when he wrote that such a system would marry the subsidized wealthy elite to the government. They would indefinitely support the careers (and the bank accounts) of the politicians who had doled out so many favors to them at taxpayers’ expense.”
“This same collection of special interest groups had attempted for decades to turn the U.S. government into an instrument of political plunder for their own benefit… Lincoln gave them everything they wanted and more.”
This is precisely what is happening right now with the Trump Administration carrying water for the wealthy elite types such as Elon Musk and Peter Thiel. People act as if they are some type of economic free market do-gooders when they have actually been sucking at the teat of subsidized government contracts to the tune of several billion dollars for decades.
Now Trump has given them the green light to use government as a political instrument to further his and their own economic interests –not the American people. Elon Musk and Peter Thiel are physically building the global digital prison pan-optacon, and people act as if we have nothing to do with it. That belies the fact that Musk and Thiel would not have the wealth or power they currently possess if they were not subsidized by government with our hard-earned and then stolen money. Think about that. To the argument that tariffs have historically been used to fund government, as if that is some type of justification, I ask, who has committed more crimes against Americans, the random individual or our government? It is our government by far.
In Lincoln’s day, the frame was to use slavery as the justification for war against the South, against his own countrymen, because they would no longer suffer under the high tariffs to the benefit of Lincoln’s corporate and political buddies. Outside the window of allowable popular opinion was the economic war on ALL of Americans as its objective. Today, Trump’s frame is to spotlight any trade partner as our “enemies” and focus on DOGE to produce the optics for reducing fraud, waste, and abuse all while providing cover so that outside the window of allowable popular opinion we do not pay attention to how we are funding and furthering our own enslavement.
Like vaccines which are noble in theory and intellectually oversimplified until they are simple-minded: introduce an antigen to allow the body to produce immunity; tariffs are defended without applying the theory to reality. Like bodies, markets are complex, and outcomes including unintended consequences cannot be controlled. If it were not for primary and secondary vaccine failure including actual vaccine risks, the magic of vaccines would be an acceptable fiction also, like tariffs.
The Excuse of Tyrants: Suspension of Habeas Corpus
I believe the sentiment, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” whether the gentleman who penned those words was a perfect illustration of those principles or not.
Quoting Thomas DiLorenzo,
“On April 27, 1861, shortly after Abraham Lincoln swore on a Bible to see to it that the laws of the United States were enforced, he refused to enforce the habeas corpus protections of the Constitution in the Northern states. He then ordered military commanders to arrest and imprison virtually anyone voicing criticism of himself, his administration, and its policies. Chief Justice Roger B Taney issued an opinion soon thereafter in the case known as Ex Parte Merryman (1861) declaring that Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus was unconstitutional –the Constitution gave the legislative branch, not the executive, the right to suspend habeas corpus, even in cases of “rebellion or invasion.”
“With Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus, the constitutional right to freedom of speech was virtually nonexistent in the Northern states for the duration of the Lincoln administration. Lincoln had essentially resurrected the Sedition Act, which had been used to intimidate and imprison the Jeffersonian critics of the John Adams administration. It was that act, which outlawed free political speech in America.”
We now see the arbitrary arrest of people in our community reminiscent of this outrage. Ironically, it is mainly Republicans who are so conscientiously concerned about their constitutional rights who I see celebrating Trump dusting off this despicable act once again. I am embarrassed for them as they clearly have no understanding that Thomas Jefferson who penned the Declaration of Independence and James Madison who is considered the Father of the Constitution sought the power of state nullification to deny this tyranny with the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. But it isn’t only Republicans; it is also some so-called “libertarians,” a relatively small faction calling themselves “bordertarians,” who are now disproportionally in the media. I have more to say on this, but first:
“Lincoln claimed the right to unilaterally amend and usurp the Constitution by simply declaring that he had the right to suspend the writ without the consent of Congress or anyone else.” (Klement)
I see Trump doing the exact same thing.
“This behavior was justified by the ‘doctrine of necessity.’” (Klement)
I could read a long list of abuses of power, but it is sufficient to say that I agree with historian Frank Klement that, “necessity has ever been the excuse of tyrants.”
What I first noticed as troubling patterns emerging in Trumps first term are now tyrannical similarities between the Lincoln and Trump administrations that are growing exponentially by the day. Lincoln’s War 2.0: The Trump Administration WILL complete the destruction of The United States of America as the professed constitutional republic founded on individual rights… if it ever existed. Why do I say this?
The Great American Coup
Unbeknownst to a majority of Americans, the Libertarian Party was infiltrated by a Republican faction that almost entirely took over the party leadership in 2022 with devastating results to our principled foundations. Consequently, there has been an increasing media presence that seeks to identify libertarianism with the current establishment’s government policies. The Libertarian presidential candidate who was marginalized at our own convention while Trump was given a platform, Jacob Hornberger says, “I can’t help but wonder whether Libertarian Party right-wingers are now hanging their heads in shame for converting the Libertarian Party into the Libertarian-Trump Party. My hunch is no. My hunch is that they are prouder than ever in indelibly imprinting on the minds of American voters that the Libertarian Party is now the Libertarian-Trump Party.” What is indelibly being imprinted on the minds of Americans with the Libertarian-Trump Party? “Decentralization.”
Central control “decentralized” is not simply a misnomer like “jumbo shrimp,” for example. It is far more problematic . It is presented with the art of seduction, not in the same sense equivalent to a lover seeking connection (something attractive or charming) but rather a malicious temptress scheming to entrap you: seducing as to lead astray usually by persuasion or false promises. I wish I could stop with the innuendos there, but the situational metaphor will not allow it. It is not simply on the level of differentiating between love making and rape. What could be worse than that, you wonder? Worse than that is the domination of the mind in which a victim accepts the behavior of the rapist as the normal, appropriate, or just way of things.
I am a libertarian because I believe in the ethical treatment of human beings and in the abolition of human exploitation. I respect natural life, and I want to guard human freewill against psychological manipulation and control. For me the heart of libertarianism is the focus on civil rights which include ensuring the mental and physical integrity, life and safety, protection from discrimination, privacy, freedom of thought, speech, religion, press, assembly, and movement of all people.
The preamble of our party platform states,
“We seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others. We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.”
The party’s statement of principles reads,
“We… challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual. We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.”
But this is not what governments have done.
“Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle, that the State has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labor. Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent.
“We, on the contrary, deny the right of ANY government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of ANY individual:”
“…we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others, the right to liberty of speech and action — accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and …we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation.”
Not surprisingly, I often hear Republicans and Democrats say that they too strongly believe in most of these same things. So, why aren’t they libertarian? It is because they only accept these rights when it comes to their own beliefs and values. They do not want the government telling them how to live their lives, but they do want the government to tell “those people” how to live their lives. You see, a true Libertarian can disagree with you and still live peaceably with you.
Continuing our statement of principles,
“Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by governments in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.”
I agree that the free market is an essential element for individual liberty, but I soundly reject the idea that economics is or can be the just measurement of ethical value, or in other words, what is morally right or wrong. Increasingly I hear the term “libertarian” used primarily as a replacement for the term “capitalist.” Libertarian capitalists worship the free market as if it alone will solve the problems of the world. I have little patience for libertarians who prioritize economics over ethics, opportunism over compassion, or profits over justice. Such individuals seem callous to the fact that wealth and power is concentrated in the few, that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I have seen such capitalists turn a blind eye to corruption, fraud, and/or injustice (while identifying libertarian) because, perhaps, the status quo is a means to their own piece of the stolen pie.
For me it is important that I quote directly from our party platform, because the growing media narrative would have the public at large believe that President Trump, Robert Kennedy, Jr., Elon Musk, and Peter Theil represent libertarianism because they throw around a few libertarian sounding terms or concepts. It's a deception to slap a libertarian label on things that are ultimately neither decentralized nor free. I believe attempts are underway to facilitate a metamorphosis of the Republican Party into the Libertarian Party like the Whig Party transformed into the Republican. It will not be an organization of any philosophical substance like the original. The old Republican Party will wear libertarianism badly like an “Edger suit.” Unfortunately, most will not even notice the difference or will celebrate it like those who celebrated the Emperor’s new clothes. Each of the above politicians or their agents mentioned above participates in the War Party and are, to that end, capitalists.
Lysander Spooner, the ultimate Anarco-Libertarian spoke of such capitalists this way,
“… that class of money-lenders of whom they are the representative and agents, -men who never think of lending a shilling to their next-door neighbors, for purposes of honest industry, unless upon the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest, -stand ready, at all times, to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers and murderers, who call themselves governments, to be expended in shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and enslaved.
“They lend their money in this manner, knowing that it is to be expended in murdering their fellow men for simply seeking their liberty and their right; knowing also that neither the interest nor the principal will ever be paid, except as it will be extorted under terror of the repetition of such murders as those for which the money lent is to be expended…
“And why are these men so ready to lend money for murdering their fellow men? Solely for this reason,… that such loans are considered better investments than loans for the purposes of honest industry. They pay higher rates of interest…
“The question of making these loans is, with these lenders, a mere question of pecuniary profit. They lend money to be expended in robbing, enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, solely because, on the whole, such loans pay better than any others.”
PRELUDES
Where is this leading? Without a doubt in my mind, this is leading to civil war. We need to increasingly guard against an enticement to civil war by resisting the bait to view our neighbor, countrymen or otherwise, as the enemy. Some modern Austrian economists seem to have forgotten the warning of their founder, Ludwig von Mises,
“Attempts to justify on economic grounds the policy of restricting immigration are therefore doomed from the outset. There cannot be the slightest doubt that migration barriers diminish the productivity of human labor.”
Furthermore, he warned, immigration to be the “issue… of the most momentous significance for the future of the world. Indeed, the fate of civilization depends on its satisfactory resolution.”
Mistakenly, in my opinion, his remarks are mischaracterized as a defense for strict border controls by the “bordertarians,” but that is a dishonest representation of his work, Liberalism: In The Classical Tradition. Yes, he presented the consequences of ‘hordes’ of foreigners versus the free and unrestricted movement of individuals; however, he did not out rightly condemn the “foreigner,” but rather the abusive and false immigration policies of an omnipotent state;
“It is clear that no solution of the problem of immigration is possible if one adheres to the ideal of the interventionist state, which meddles in every field of human activity, or to that of the socialist state. Only the adoption of the liberal program could make the problem of immigration, which today seems insoluble, completely disappear.”
Rightfully, he identified government intervention as the original sin, and unlike modern statists in libertarian clothing, he didn’t argue for increased government insult to injury. He did predict.
“Because of the enormous power that today stands at the command of the state, a national minority must expect the worst from a majority of a different nationality. As long as the state is granted the vast powers which it has today and which public opinion considers to be its right, the thought of having to live in a state whose government is in the hands of members of a foreign nationality is positively terrifying. It is frightful to live in a state in which at every turn one is exposed to persecution—masquerading under the guise of justice—by a ruling majority… If one considers the conflict from this point of view, it seems as if it allows of no other solution than war.”
In 1861, the Republican Party under a cloak of “Abolitionism” and with Abraham Lincoln at the head aspired to the central control of economic markets. Social unrest manufactured by an immigration threat that further manipulated emotions based on real racial injustices, Lincoln accomplished the economic enslavement of all Americans that eventually led to the establishment of the immoral Federal Reserve. In 2025, the Libertarian-Trump Party under a cloak of “decentralization” with tech billionaires at the head aspire to the newest economic enslavement program with Public-Private Partnerships and Social Impact Bonds. Nothing more than euphemisms for fascism and predatory philanthropy with Universal Basic Income and total human surveillance on the horizon.
Perspective is what differentiates Libertarians from other political constituents, and perspective is what differentiates me from other Libertarians. I believe we are facing the greatest threat to human liberty the world has ever experienced. I know not every Libertarian agrees with me, but I do not see issues such as health mandates, a housing crisis, or the looming economic collapse as solely isolated or unrelated. The aggregate of these elements and others now including homelessness and immigration represent a full spectrum attack on what it means to be a free human being. Although it is a global effort, the American people are the target of a specific weaponized and divisive media propaganda campaign. If we can effectively fight each other, we will not recognize the actual enemy of which traitorous individuals, statist bureaucrats, and bureaucratic systems of our own government play a part.
Because I speak out against the technocracy being built around us and because I do not see block chain as liberation, I am labeled naïve. Block chain may be helpful to count and track blueberries, but I do not believe putting all human beings or all human interactions on a permanent ledger to calculate them as human capital for emerging markets is just or moral. In circumstances of social impact bonds and predatory philanthropy, call yourself an investor, an opportunist, or a capitalist, but don’t call yourself a libertarian.
The definition of naïve means showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgment.
On March 12, 2020 when Governor Ducey shut down the state of Arizona, I held the first annual Health & Human Rights Summit for my organization Humans for Humanity Coalition. Because I had been watching the vaccine issue for thirty years and speaking out in defense of informed medical consent for at least eight, I recognized the false narrative immediately. In fact, I predicted it.
“My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank… in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.”
As I explained in a previous introduction to the Lincoln administration, he was the political descendent of the Hamiltonian tradition pushing to rebrand corrupt British “mercantilism” as the “American system.” At Hamilton’s death the mantle passed to Henry Clay from whom upon his death Lincoln picked it up. At Henry Clay’s funeral, Lincoln eulogized Clay as his, “beau ideal of a statesman” and the source of all of his own ideas about politics.
Lincoln was a corporate lawyer for the banking-newspaper-railroad manufacturing elite. He served his own interests and theirs. Imagine the corporate lawyers of big oil and tobacco of our day. Lincoln lived in the largest house in Springfield, Illinois complete with house servants. He lived steps away from the Illinois statehouse. For twenty-eight years, he walked the path between the two buildings as an attorney, lobbyist, and legislator representing all the major railroad corporations in the Midwest. He traveled around in an Illinois Central Railroad private car along with their corporate executives. As an aside, is it not curious that the image we are conditioned to recall of him is a humble Kentucky hillbilly? Author, poet, playwright, and lawyer, Edgar Lee Masters wrote,
“Clay was the champion of that political system which doles favors to the strong in order to win and keep their adherence to the government. His system offered shelter to devious schemes and corrupt enterprises… He was the beloved son [figuratively speaking] of Alexander Hamilton with his corrupt funding schemes, his superstitions concerning the advantage of a public debt, and a people taxed to make profits for enterprises that cannot stand alone. His example and his doctrines led to the creation of a party that had no platform to announce, because its principles were plunder and nothing else.”
Masters was referring to the Whig party.
I can tell you that having read Hamilton’s original work, he is quite convincing about American patriotism and saving American manufacturing through high protective tariffs until one has to admit that markets do not function on good intentions. When an argument in favor of the free market is made rather than applying the destructive results of tariffs on American consumers, suddenly some are quick to respond that we do not currently operate in a free market society as if that is an excuse to add further insult to injury. All of this distracts Americans from the reality that it is United States’ government policies, regulations, and subsidies propping up false markets and suppressing others that has created the hostile environment for workers, manufacturing, farming, and other industries in the first place.
Thomas DiLorenzo breaks it down further,
“The Hamilton-Clay-Lincoln ‘American System’ … sought to turn the U.S. Government into a subsidy machine for already affluent interest groups at the expense of everyone else. Masters was right when he wrote that such a system would marry the subsidized wealthy elite to the government. They would indefinitely support the careers (and the bank accounts) of the politicians who had doled out so many favors to them at taxpayers’ expense.”
“This same collection of special interest groups had attempted for decades to turn the U.S. government into an instrument of political plunder for their own benefit… Lincoln gave them everything they wanted and more.”
This is precisely what is happening right now with the Trump Administration carrying water for the wealthy elite types such as Elon Musk and Peter Thiel. People act as if they are some type of economic free market do-gooders when they have actually been sucking at the teat of subsidized government contracts to the tune of several billion dollars for decades.
Now Trump has given them the green light to use government as a political instrument to further his and their own economic interests –not the American people. Elon Musk and Peter Thiel are physically building the global digital prison pan-optacon, and people act as if we have nothing to do with it. That belies the fact that Musk and Thiel would not have the wealth or power they currently possess if they were not subsidized by government with our hard-earned and then stolen money. Think about that. To the argument that tariffs have historically been used to fund government, as if that is some type of justification, I ask, who has committed more crimes against Americans, the random individual or our government? It is our government by far.
In Lincoln’s day, the frame was to use slavery as the justification for war against the South, against his own countrymen, because they would no longer suffer under the high tariffs to the benefit of Lincoln’s corporate and political buddies. Outside the window of allowable popular opinion was the economic war on ALL of Americans as its objective. Today, Trump’s frame is to spotlight any trade partner as our “enemies” and focus on DOGE to produce the optics for reducing fraud, waste, and abuse all while providing cover so that outside the window of allowable popular opinion we do not pay attention to how we are funding and furthering our own enslavement.
Like vaccines which are noble in theory and intellectually oversimplified until they are simple-minded: introduce an antigen to allow the body to produce immunity; tariffs are defended without applying the theory to reality. Like bodies, markets are complex, and outcomes including unintended consequences cannot be controlled. If it were not for primary and secondary vaccine failure including actual vaccine risks, the magic of vaccines would be an acceptable fiction also, like tariffs.
The Excuse of Tyrants: Suspension of Habeas Corpus
I believe the sentiment, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” whether the gentleman who penned those words was a perfect illustration of those principles or not.
Quoting Thomas DiLorenzo,
“On April 27, 1861, shortly after Abraham Lincoln swore on a Bible to see to it that the laws of the United States were enforced, he refused to enforce the habeas corpus protections of the Constitution in the Northern states. He then ordered military commanders to arrest and imprison virtually anyone voicing criticism of himself, his administration, and its policies. Chief Justice Roger B Taney issued an opinion soon thereafter in the case known as Ex Parte Merryman (1861) declaring that Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus was unconstitutional –the Constitution gave the legislative branch, not the executive, the right to suspend habeas corpus, even in cases of “rebellion or invasion.”
“With Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus, the constitutional right to freedom of speech was virtually nonexistent in the Northern states for the duration of the Lincoln administration. Lincoln had essentially resurrected the Sedition Act, which had been used to intimidate and imprison the Jeffersonian critics of the John Adams administration. It was that act, which outlawed free political speech in America.”
We now see the arbitrary arrest of people in our community reminiscent of this outrage. Ironically, it is mainly Republicans who are so conscientiously concerned about their constitutional rights who I see celebrating Trump dusting off this despicable act once again. I am embarrassed for them as they clearly have no understanding that Thomas Jefferson who penned the Declaration of Independence and James Madison who is considered the Father of the Constitution sought the power of state nullification to deny this tyranny with the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. But it isn’t only Republicans; it is also some so-called “libertarians,” a relatively small faction calling themselves “bordertarians,” who are now disproportionally in the media. I have more to say on this, but first:
“Lincoln claimed the right to unilaterally amend and usurp the Constitution by simply declaring that he had the right to suspend the writ without the consent of Congress or anyone else.” (Klement)
I see Trump doing the exact same thing.
“This behavior was justified by the ‘doctrine of necessity.’” (Klement)
I could read a long list of abuses of power, but it is sufficient to say that I agree with historian Frank Klement that, “necessity has ever been the excuse of tyrants.”
What I first noticed as troubling patterns emerging in Trumps first term are now tyrannical similarities between the Lincoln and Trump administrations that are growing exponentially by the day. Lincoln’s War 2.0: The Trump Administration WILL complete the destruction of The United States of America as the professed constitutional republic founded on individual rights… if it ever existed. Why do I say this?
The Great American Coup
Unbeknownst to a majority of Americans, the Libertarian Party was infiltrated by a Republican faction that almost entirely took over the party leadership in 2022 with devastating results to our principled foundations. Consequently, there has been an increasing media presence that seeks to identify libertarianism with the current establishment’s government policies. The Libertarian presidential candidate who was marginalized at our own convention while Trump was given a platform, Jacob Hornberger says, “I can’t help but wonder whether Libertarian Party right-wingers are now hanging their heads in shame for converting the Libertarian Party into the Libertarian-Trump Party. My hunch is no. My hunch is that they are prouder than ever in indelibly imprinting on the minds of American voters that the Libertarian Party is now the Libertarian-Trump Party.” What is indelibly being imprinted on the minds of Americans with the Libertarian-Trump Party? “Decentralization.”
Central control “decentralized” is not simply a misnomer like “jumbo shrimp,” for example. It is far more problematic . It is presented with the art of seduction, not in the same sense equivalent to a lover seeking connection (something attractive or charming) but rather a malicious temptress scheming to entrap you: seducing as to lead astray usually by persuasion or false promises. I wish I could stop with the innuendos there, but the situational metaphor will not allow it. It is not simply on the level of differentiating between love making and rape. What could be worse than that, you wonder? Worse than that is the domination of the mind in which a victim accepts the behavior of the rapist as the normal, appropriate, or just way of things.
I am a libertarian because I believe in the ethical treatment of human beings and in the abolition of human exploitation. I respect natural life, and I want to guard human freewill against psychological manipulation and control. For me the heart of libertarianism is the focus on civil rights which include ensuring the mental and physical integrity, life and safety, protection from discrimination, privacy, freedom of thought, speech, religion, press, assembly, and movement of all people.
The preamble of our party platform states,
“We seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others. We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.”
The party’s statement of principles reads,
“We… challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual. We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.”
But this is not what governments have done.
“Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle, that the State has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labor. Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent.
“We, on the contrary, deny the right of ANY government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of ANY individual:”
“…we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others, the right to liberty of speech and action — accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and …we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation.”
Not surprisingly, I often hear Republicans and Democrats say that they too strongly believe in most of these same things. So, why aren’t they libertarian? It is because they only accept these rights when it comes to their own beliefs and values. They do not want the government telling them how to live their lives, but they do want the government to tell “those people” how to live their lives. You see, a true Libertarian can disagree with you and still live peaceably with you.
Continuing our statement of principles,
“Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by governments in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.”
I agree that the free market is an essential element for individual liberty, but I soundly reject the idea that economics is or can be the just measurement of ethical value, or in other words, what is morally right or wrong. Increasingly I hear the term “libertarian” used primarily as a replacement for the term “capitalist.” Libertarian capitalists worship the free market as if it alone will solve the problems of the world. I have little patience for libertarians who prioritize economics over ethics, opportunism over compassion, or profits over justice. Such individuals seem callous to the fact that wealth and power is concentrated in the few, that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I have seen such capitalists turn a blind eye to corruption, fraud, and/or injustice (while identifying libertarian) because, perhaps, the status quo is a means to their own piece of the stolen pie.
For me it is important that I quote directly from our party platform, because the growing media narrative would have the public at large believe that President Trump, Robert Kennedy, Jr., Elon Musk, and Peter Theil represent libertarianism because they throw around a few libertarian sounding terms or concepts. It's a deception to slap a libertarian label on things that are ultimately neither decentralized nor free. I believe attempts are underway to facilitate a metamorphosis of the Republican Party into the Libertarian Party like the Whig Party transformed into the Republican. It will not be an organization of any philosophical substance like the original. The old Republican Party will wear libertarianism badly like an “Edger suit.” Unfortunately, most will not even notice the difference or will celebrate it like those who celebrated the Emperor’s new clothes. Each of the above politicians or their agents mentioned above participates in the War Party and are, to that end, capitalists.
Lysander Spooner, the ultimate Anarco-Libertarian spoke of such capitalists this way,
“… that class of money-lenders of whom they are the representative and agents, -men who never think of lending a shilling to their next-door neighbors, for purposes of honest industry, unless upon the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest, -stand ready, at all times, to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers and murderers, who call themselves governments, to be expended in shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and enslaved.
“They lend their money in this manner, knowing that it is to be expended in murdering their fellow men for simply seeking their liberty and their right; knowing also that neither the interest nor the principal will ever be paid, except as it will be extorted under terror of the repetition of such murders as those for which the money lent is to be expended…
“And why are these men so ready to lend money for murdering their fellow men? Solely for this reason,… that such loans are considered better investments than loans for the purposes of honest industry. They pay higher rates of interest…
“The question of making these loans is, with these lenders, a mere question of pecuniary profit. They lend money to be expended in robbing, enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, solely because, on the whole, such loans pay better than any others.”
PRELUDES
Where is this leading? Without a doubt in my mind, this is leading to civil war. We need to increasingly guard against an enticement to civil war by resisting the bait to view our neighbor, countrymen or otherwise, as the enemy. Some modern Austrian economists seem to have forgotten the warning of their founder, Ludwig von Mises,
“Attempts to justify on economic grounds the policy of restricting immigration are therefore doomed from the outset. There cannot be the slightest doubt that migration barriers diminish the productivity of human labor.”
Furthermore, he warned, immigration to be the “issue… of the most momentous significance for the future of the world. Indeed, the fate of civilization depends on its satisfactory resolution.”
Mistakenly, in my opinion, his remarks are mischaracterized as a defense for strict border controls by the “bordertarians,” but that is a dishonest representation of his work, Liberalism: In The Classical Tradition. Yes, he presented the consequences of ‘hordes’ of foreigners versus the free and unrestricted movement of individuals; however, he did not out rightly condemn the “foreigner,” but rather the abusive and false immigration policies of an omnipotent state;
“It is clear that no solution of the problem of immigration is possible if one adheres to the ideal of the interventionist state, which meddles in every field of human activity, or to that of the socialist state. Only the adoption of the liberal program could make the problem of immigration, which today seems insoluble, completely disappear.”
Rightfully, he identified government intervention as the original sin, and unlike modern statists in libertarian clothing, he didn’t argue for increased government insult to injury. He did predict.
“Because of the enormous power that today stands at the command of the state, a national minority must expect the worst from a majority of a different nationality. As long as the state is granted the vast powers which it has today and which public opinion considers to be its right, the thought of having to live in a state whose government is in the hands of members of a foreign nationality is positively terrifying. It is frightful to live in a state in which at every turn one is exposed to persecution—masquerading under the guise of justice—by a ruling majority… If one considers the conflict from this point of view, it seems as if it allows of no other solution than war.”
In 1861, the Republican Party under a cloak of “Abolitionism” and with Abraham Lincoln at the head aspired to the central control of economic markets. Social unrest manufactured by an immigration threat that further manipulated emotions based on real racial injustices, Lincoln accomplished the economic enslavement of all Americans that eventually led to the establishment of the immoral Federal Reserve. In 2025, the Libertarian-Trump Party under a cloak of “decentralization” with tech billionaires at the head aspire to the newest economic enslavement program with Public-Private Partnerships and Social Impact Bonds. Nothing more than euphemisms for fascism and predatory philanthropy with Universal Basic Income and total human surveillance on the horizon.
Perspective is what differentiates Libertarians from other political constituents, and perspective is what differentiates me from other Libertarians. I believe we are facing the greatest threat to human liberty the world has ever experienced. I know not every Libertarian agrees with me, but I do not see issues such as health mandates, a housing crisis, or the looming economic collapse as solely isolated or unrelated. The aggregate of these elements and others now including homelessness and immigration represent a full spectrum attack on what it means to be a free human being. Although it is a global effort, the American people are the target of a specific weaponized and divisive media propaganda campaign. If we can effectively fight each other, we will not recognize the actual enemy of which traitorous individuals, statist bureaucrats, and bureaucratic systems of our own government play a part.
Because I speak out against the technocracy being built around us and because I do not see block chain as liberation, I am labeled naïve. Block chain may be helpful to count and track blueberries, but I do not believe putting all human beings or all human interactions on a permanent ledger to calculate them as human capital for emerging markets is just or moral. In circumstances of social impact bonds and predatory philanthropy, call yourself an investor, an opportunist, or a capitalist, but don’t call yourself a libertarian.
The definition of naïve means showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgment.
On March 12, 2020 when Governor Ducey shut down the state of Arizona, I held the first annual Health & Human Rights Summit for my organization Humans for Humanity Coalition. Because I had been watching the vaccine issue for thirty years and speaking out in defense of informed medical consent for at least eight, I recognized the false narrative immediately. In fact, I predicted it.
When I hear people make comments, “The Trump Administration/The Biden Administration” and whether it is positive or negative, I know that person does not understand who the enemy is. THIS DUOPOLY; the Mono-Government Elite, and trans-national capitalists are the government the Founders warned us about.
I will tell you what it is to be naïve: naïve is believing that our government or tech billionaires have your best interest in mind.
Language Misused
The talented Ursula K. LeGuin wrote:
“Socrates said, ‘The misuse of language induces evil in the soul.’ He wasn’t talking about grammar. To misuse language is to use it the way politicians and advertisers do, for profit, without taking responsibility for what the words mean. Language used as a means to get power or make money goes wrong: it lies. Language used as an end in itself, to sing a poem or tell a story, goes right, goes towards the truth. A writer is a person who cares what words mean, what they say, how they say it. Writers know words are their way towards truth and freedom, and so they use them with care, with thought, with fear, with delight. By using words well they strengthen their souls. Story-tellers and poets spend their lives learning that skill and art of using words well. And their words make the souls of their readers stronger, brighter, deeper.”
In contrast, C.S. Lewis writes our enslavement has,
“…stolen on us unawares. …wars necessitated vast curtailments of liberty, and we have grown …laccustomed to our chains. The increasing complexity and precariousness of our economic life have forced Government to take over many spheres of activity once left to choice or chance. Our intellectuals have surrendered first to the slave-philosophy of Hegel, then to Marx, finally to the linguistic analysts.
“As a result, classical political theory, …key-conceptions (natural law, the value of the individual, the rights of man), has died. The modern State exists not to protect our rights but to do us good or make us good – anyway, to do something to us or to make us something. Hence the new name 'leaders' for those who were once 'rulers'. We are less their subjects than their wards, pupils, or domestic animals. There is nothing left of which we can say to them, 'Mind your own business.' Our whole lives are their business.
“[T]he new oligarchy must more and more base its claim to plan us on its claim to knowledge. If we are to be mothered, mother must know best. This means they must increasingly rely on the advice of scientists, till in the end the politicians proper become merely the scientists' puppets. Technocracy is the form to which a planned society must tend… Let scientists tell us about sciences. But government involves questions about the good for man, and justice, and what things are worth having at what price; and on these a scientific training gives a man's opinion no added value. Let the doctor tell me I shall die unless I do so-and-so; but whether life is worth having on those terms is no more a question for him than for any other man.
“…A hungry man thinks about food, not freedom. We must give full weight to the claim that nothing but science, and science globally applied, and therefore unprecedented Government controls, can produce full bellies and medical care for the whole human race: nothing, in short, but a world Welfare State. It is a full admission of these truths which impresses upon me the extreme peril of humanity at present.
“The question about progress has become the question whether we can discover any way of submitting to the worldwide paternalism of a technocracy without losing all personal privacy and independence. Is there any possibility of getting the super Welfare State's honey and avoiding the sting?
“All this threatens us even if the form of society which our needs point to should prove an unparalleled success. But is that certain? What assurance have we that our masters will or can keep the promise which induced us to sell ourselves? Let us not be deceived by phrases about 'Man taking charge of his own destiny'. All that can really happen is that some men will take charge of the destiny of the others. They will be simply men; none perfect; some greedy, cruel and dishonest. The more completely we are planned the more powerful they will be. Have we discovered some new reason why, this time, power should not corrupt as it has done before?”
Conclusion
War is when the government tells you who the enemy is.
Revolution is when you figure it out for yourself.
I will tell you what it is to be naïve: naïve is believing that our government or tech billionaires have your best interest in mind.
Language Misused
The talented Ursula K. LeGuin wrote:
“Socrates said, ‘The misuse of language induces evil in the soul.’ He wasn’t talking about grammar. To misuse language is to use it the way politicians and advertisers do, for profit, without taking responsibility for what the words mean. Language used as a means to get power or make money goes wrong: it lies. Language used as an end in itself, to sing a poem or tell a story, goes right, goes towards the truth. A writer is a person who cares what words mean, what they say, how they say it. Writers know words are their way towards truth and freedom, and so they use them with care, with thought, with fear, with delight. By using words well they strengthen their souls. Story-tellers and poets spend their lives learning that skill and art of using words well. And their words make the souls of their readers stronger, brighter, deeper.”
In contrast, C.S. Lewis writes our enslavement has,
“…stolen on us unawares. …wars necessitated vast curtailments of liberty, and we have grown …laccustomed to our chains. The increasing complexity and precariousness of our economic life have forced Government to take over many spheres of activity once left to choice or chance. Our intellectuals have surrendered first to the slave-philosophy of Hegel, then to Marx, finally to the linguistic analysts.
“As a result, classical political theory, …key-conceptions (natural law, the value of the individual, the rights of man), has died. The modern State exists not to protect our rights but to do us good or make us good – anyway, to do something to us or to make us something. Hence the new name 'leaders' for those who were once 'rulers'. We are less their subjects than their wards, pupils, or domestic animals. There is nothing left of which we can say to them, 'Mind your own business.' Our whole lives are their business.
“[T]he new oligarchy must more and more base its claim to plan us on its claim to knowledge. If we are to be mothered, mother must know best. This means they must increasingly rely on the advice of scientists, till in the end the politicians proper become merely the scientists' puppets. Technocracy is the form to which a planned society must tend… Let scientists tell us about sciences. But government involves questions about the good for man, and justice, and what things are worth having at what price; and on these a scientific training gives a man's opinion no added value. Let the doctor tell me I shall die unless I do so-and-so; but whether life is worth having on those terms is no more a question for him than for any other man.
“…A hungry man thinks about food, not freedom. We must give full weight to the claim that nothing but science, and science globally applied, and therefore unprecedented Government controls, can produce full bellies and medical care for the whole human race: nothing, in short, but a world Welfare State. It is a full admission of these truths which impresses upon me the extreme peril of humanity at present.
“The question about progress has become the question whether we can discover any way of submitting to the worldwide paternalism of a technocracy without losing all personal privacy and independence. Is there any possibility of getting the super Welfare State's honey and avoiding the sting?
“All this threatens us even if the form of society which our needs point to should prove an unparalleled success. But is that certain? What assurance have we that our masters will or can keep the promise which induced us to sell ourselves? Let us not be deceived by phrases about 'Man taking charge of his own destiny'. All that can really happen is that some men will take charge of the destiny of the others. They will be simply men; none perfect; some greedy, cruel and dishonest. The more completely we are planned the more powerful they will be. Have we discovered some new reason why, this time, power should not corrupt as it has done before?”
Conclusion
War is when the government tells you who the enemy is.
Revolution is when you figure it out for yourself.