SONS OF LIBERTY - Meet the Shackles Pt I - Jeckyll Island

[endauthority]

without fractional reserve banking, then banking ceases to exist, and capitalism essentially falls apart. Banks would often end up in situations where they dont have money to loan anything, and if they do, chances are, most people couldnt get loans.

Not that I would complain, because then maybe people would wake up and realizes how shitty Capitalism is.

[morganvideo]

Excellent video -

[qininiq1]

Fieldman07 and indyeight: All of those bible worshipers quote their scripture out of context. You can quote the bible to support murder, rape, satanism (I'm not implying satanism and murder are similar, or that satanism is bad), even if the intentions of the text were good. People have to stop hailing an old book that contradicts itself constantly. The bible sucks, don't quote it, especially while dealing with heavy issues in the real world.

[indyeight]

Tyranny and oppression are wrong but so is rebellion. This country was founded on rebellion and rebellion will cause the destruction of this nation. I was a big fan of the metal bands back in the late 80s, especially Queensryche. Then my eyes were opened to the ultimate truth found in the Lord Jesus Christ. These bands may do well in exposing the problems but they lack the right answers. 1 Samuel 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of WITCHCRAFT. Witchcraft is huge in America today! (Harry Potter)

[fieldman07]

@indyeight

The passage was refering to rebellion against god.

Read the whole thing before quoting stuff out of context. 

[Slayherr]

@indyeight

So you blame Harry Potter for Satanism, right? What´s wrong with you? Do you really believe, that Satanism is spread by Movies like Harry Potter? Then what about Twilight?!? Vampires & Werewolfes are more evil than this small dumbface Potter. But the most evil thing is capitalism. And guess what, most kind of religions support capitalism by taxes and collections. It´s all about money, dude.

[Guvoro]

@Slayherr The devil dresses himself not like the devil! And this kind of satanism is not something you have to fear. It is the satanism the masonic-elite believes in. THEY ARE fuckin evil, not us or some "untouchable" force... And they play with it, that people are unaware and kept stupid. A lot of those people live in the mindset of:"Those fuckin sheeps will never get it."

It worked till now. But the game is over... People really START TO THINK :-)

watch: TAzR8zdM3OA

[endauthority]

@Guvoro Right, the devil dresses himself up like one you can trust. So all those people complaining about free masons being evil are being tricked, its actually guys like ron paul, alex jones and david icke who are satanic. Afterall, more people think the free masons are evil than think alex jones is evil. If YOU were the devil, who would YOU prefer?

[wdcsucks1]

inspiring!!!

[MittWaffen]

Wow, great band. Better message.

Spread this stuff; better than most modern music and the message makes this an even better band. People will listen when bands start sharing this message in mass. It will be accepted..!

[BipolarMoon]

We have the power, it's just the taxes the US born are paying are being used for the wrong things. Stop paying taxes, government loses their control. That's just my take on it all.

[armsOVsorrow]

FREEDOM ISN'T FREE!

[potp5150]

It's about time someone besides BlastFemur was writing songs about this stuff!!!!!!!!!!!! BlastFemur rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[KendrickMan]

I want his facial hair.

[Solidsidious]

@KendrickMan I want EVERYTHING from Jon. His child his facial har...his glasses. XD

[IcedEarth426]

Two great men in one video. Looking forward to Part 2!!

[headsinks]

Its not about the evils of capitalism, but it was the centralized oligarchy which controls the capitalist system and shackles the flow only to the 1% elite were the real problem. To explain this in a very easy term; Imagine there this religion for all which preaches good then some individuals of smart guys manipulate this religion to enslave ppl within a new sect and destroys everything which against the core of that religion. The same goes to capitalism. Hey CM is capitalist.

[haiwin224]

Why the fuck is this video getting so many socialist/communist/prog responses to it? The industrial age is over. Working today doesn't mean you're being exploited. We all have equality of opportunity. All it takes to get ahead is to find what you're good at make money doing it and taking initiative to get ahead while not taking unnecessary risks characterized by wall street and the banks.

[Chuloloc]

Awesome. Amazing video. By the way, there's a question I've that been meaning to ask. I know that Bushe-fires In The Mind is only the first Sons Of Liberty project and it's just getting a physical distribution but will there be more Sons Of Liberty albums? Thank you, Jon Schaffer. Hail Sons Of Liberty.

[CenturyMedia]

@Chuloloc Hopefully there will be more!

[Chuloloc]

@CenturyMedia Thanks. Hail Sons Of Liberty.

[Guvoro]

@Chuloloc Yes there will be! Sons Of Liberty AND Iced Earth are now signed under the new label! Check out the SonsOfLiberty YT-Channel and Jon's personal messages ;-)

[Chuloloc]

@Guvoro Yeah, I now know. I'm already subscribed to the Sons Of Liberty YouTube page. So I do recieve Jon's video blogs. Hail Sons Of Liberty.

[Grindermetalhead]

Sounds like right-wing douchebagerry to me.

Don't fall for this bullshit people! Right wing "libertarianism" is the advocacy of the most extreme form of tyranny: free market capitalism. It's liberty for rich fucks and wage slavery for the working class.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Working classes are always better off, have control over theor own lives and can pursue their own happiness freely only under free market capitalism - the only moral and just system of social relations.

Every other system involves using FORCE against those who dissent.

Only under capitalism the use of force is banned, and only voluntary exchange is possible.

That's why I consider metalheads to be utterly intellectually lost to the cause of liberty. They're too brainwashed.

[Grindermetalhead]

@Arjozof Bullshit. Capitalism is a hierarchical, authoritative social structure and it's incompatible with genuine liberty. Hierarchy by definition means that some are freer than others and that those at the top of the power pyramid get to order those at the bottom. Dispossessed class is coerced by hunger to sell its labor power and consequently personal autonomy for a given period of time. Its subsistence depends on the wage that capitalist exploiters pay and is therefore left at their mercy.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead What you've just described is feudalism, or, in modern terms, corporate state. It has nothing to do with free market capitalism, which existed (to a certain degree, never in full) during 19th century USA, and currently exists to even lesser extent in such small vestiges as Hong Kong or Taiwan.

In capitalism, there is no "dispossessed class", because even a petty worker is the overlord as a consumer,and is a capitalist himself when he saves or invests.

BTW, hierarchy is natural

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Hierarchy is natural - because people are not the same, there are always those who have natural talents for leadership, and as long as their leadership is agreed upon voluntarily, they are free to lead - in business, or in organizations people freewillingly form and choose to participate.

As for coercion - only FORCE can be called coercion (including theft and fraud), and these are banned under capitalism, where private property is enforced without any exceptions.

[Grindermetalhead]

@Arjozof What i described is a typical capitalist firm. Listen dude, I'm tired of debating this shit over and over again with delusional right wing elitists like yourself.

I could just copy paste my refutations of your arguments that i posted to hundreds of other so called libertarians like yourself i debated so far but I'm not going to.

Truth of the matter is that you guys are authoritarians, just like statists and where there is hierarchical authority there can be no genuine liberty.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead You cannot form a single logical, competent argument. You use buzz words and smear words from Obama's thesaurus.

USA were founded on principles of Liberty, Property and Pursuit of Happiness - the ideas of free market capitalism.

Calling us authoritarians is a complete confusion over political vs. economic power.

We resist political power, while you condone it (as long as it is democratic, but what's the difference if 51% of population wants my property?).

[Grindermetalhead]

@Arjozof Obama's thesaurus? I'm an anarchist, U dummy.

I object to all forms of power and domination of the elites over the disempowered and the dispossessed. I'm a true libertarian. A libertarian socialist. Libertarian philosophy is built upon 2 centuries of anti-authoritarian socialist tradition. You right wing fucktards usurped and distorted the term when you commandeered it in the 70's. Your inability to see the connection between political and economic power is what makes you authoritarian.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead There is no connection between political and economic power, because the latter is the POWER OF THE CONSUMER IN THE MARKETPLACE.

What you object against then, is the sovereignity of the consumer - you wish to deprive us from our freedom to buy what we wish, to sell what we wish, and to exchange with whomever we wish.

Libertarian socialism is a hideous oxymoron, which completely disregards economic reality.

Socialist anarchists are actually the biggest totalitarians out there.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Genuine liberty can only exist when PRIVATE PROPERTY is intact and secured from any aggression, be it "democratically elected government" or a disgruntled mob "thirsting for social justice". Both are criminal, as they want to dispossess the genuine owners and STEAL their wealth.

Nobody has a "right" to other man's property.

So called 'liberty' which denies the right to private property, is short of tyranny of bureaucratic elite which "redistributes" wealth. It never worked.

[Grindermetalhead]

@Arjozof Private ownership over the means of production is one of the main roots of hierarchical authority. It is a source of social inequality, exploitation and hierarchical authority.

[Grindermetalhead]

@Grindermetalhead Capitalists are the ones that are redistributing wealth by exploiting the working class and robbing the fruits of its labor through private ownership over the means of production.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead blah blah blah

Private ownership means that only I, not some bureaucrat, decide what to produce in my firm, who to hire, whom to sell. As an entrepreneur, I rely on market signals to optimize production - not on bureaucratic directives and orders which always lead to shortages/overproduction of given commodities.

In capitalism, anyone can become an entrepreneur or capitalist, because he doesn't need any permits from bureaucratic overlords, and his property is secure.

[Grindermetalhead]

@Arjozof You mean you get to be free from external authority but you get to be the ultimate authority to the people who work under you? Wow, I guess you're not authoritarian after all.

[Grindermetalhead]

As for your myth of free market where there is no coercion and everyone freely exchanges goods and services, boy do I have news for you.

First of all market often ensures that people act in ways opposite to what they desire or forces them to accept "free agreements" which they may not actually desire. Wage labor is the prime example of this because vast majority of people has no other option but to agree to work for others in order to provide subsistence for themselves and their families.

[Grindermetalhead]

Operating in a market means submitting to the profit criterion. This means that employing a social criteria in decision making is counterproductive because ignoring the profitability would cause businesses to go bankrupt.

Under these conditions producers are most often compelled to decide things that are contrary to interests of the working class and society in general, such as introducing deskilling or polluting technology, working longer hours, and so on, in order to survive on the market.

[Grindermetalhead]

Markets suffer from booms and slumps, as the response of producers to changes in prices result in over-production and over-investment due to the market-increased uncertainty and the destabilising aspects of price signals.

[Grindermetalhead]

Market is the tyranny of small decisions under which the aggregate effect of individual decisions produces social circumstances which are irrational and against the interests of those subject to them. Under market system competition forms economic pressures which force its participants to act in ways they might not prefer to, but end up doing anyway due to market forces.

[Grindermetalhead]

Since everyone tries to maximize their income by either minimizing their costs or maximising their prices, it is extremely difficult to take other priorities into account because that can be competitively suicidal.

Markets often reward those who act in anti-social ways and externalize costs (in terms of pollution and so on) because it's impossible to know if a low cost reflects efficiency or willingness to externalize by imposing costs to a third party.

[Grindermetalhead]

Due to this, market exchanges are never bilateral agreements, as right wingers claim, because two economic agents who make a market-rational bargain between themselves don't have to consider consequences of their bargain for other people, nor the consequences for the environment.

[Grindermetalhead]

Markets also make tremendous impact on human activity because market forces ensure that work continually has to be expanded. Competition means that we can never take it easy. The need to survive on the market can impact on broader (non-monetary) measures of welfare, with quality of life falling as a higher GDP is created as the result of longer working hours with fewer holidays, which can be good for material wealth, but it is not so great for people.

[Grindermetalhead]

Furthermore, markets block the efficient use of resources because high initial prices of energy efficient commodities ensure that most people will continue to use less efficient ones, and so waste resources. This makes alternative, renewable forms of energy (for example wind and solar energy) ignored in favour of one-use and polluting energy sources.

[Grindermetalhead]

There is a shitload of other corrosive effects of markets on human personalities and society in general which I am to tired to explain right now, so I'll leave you with the ones that i already explained and I don't think I'll be responding to your comments anymore.

Farewell and best of luck to you.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead There is an even bigger shitload of lethal, destructive and antihuman effects of GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION and lack of private property system, and what's more important - we witnessed its effects in 20th century, with over 100 million dead under your ideal systems of antimarket communism/nazism.

I have checked your profile. It seems you're typical metalhead troglodyte who never had a proper job, and you're just a life-loser bitching about the internet.

Advice: KILL YOURSELF

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Markets are the ONLY EFFICIENT WAY to calculate resource use. They do it through the price system, which would be non-existent in your ideal world of total communism. As Mises wrote in 1920, it would lead to calculation chaos and total destruction of economy, back to the level of primitive barter (it would suit you primitivists though).

Markets show clearly that "alternative" energy is not cost-effective and its use would lead to mass starvation and death of billions.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead What bollocks.

The freer the market - the more capital investments - the more productive a working hour - the less one has to work for the same standard of living.

But people don't want the SAME standard of living. In contrast to primitive low lifes like you, people have ambitions and set higher goals for themselves, therefore they aim for more wealth and more happiness. The consumer commands - the producer follows. And if one wants to consume - one must first produce.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Of course they don't have to consider things which are completely irrelevant. Only invasion of someone else's property rights is a crime which entities must be punished for. There is no other "consequence" of bilateral agreement. Either it invades property of a third party - or not. If it does, the third party sues and gets paid accordingly to their loss.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead In the free market, where private property rights are enforced with deadly relentlessness, a polluting entity would find itself sued for millions of dollars for invasion of private property.

No sane, rational market entity would dare to externalize costs by invading someone else's property.

In current system, where private property does not exist or is severely limited and not enforced, we have incidents like BP spill and idiotic government involvement.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead a shitload of severe BLAH BLAH.

Market is the democracy of the consumer, where the small everyday decisions of billions of people decide the well=being and future of giga-corporations, which can go bankrupt the next day if they do not cater to the whims and wishes of the supreme overlords - the consumers.

Competition forces market participants to BETTER SERVE THEIR FELLOW MEN, or stop wasting my time.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead In the free market there are no booms and slumps, because as Mises and Hayek explained, the market mechanism has the best coordination between acting men and firms precisely because of price signals.

When State intervenes, the market crumbles, the price signals are distorted. The business cycle then begins, with malinvestments and inflationary booms.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Profit criterion IS THE SOCIAL CRITERION, because if an enterprise is making a profit - it means that CONSUMERS DEMAND IT. And society is comprised of consumers and CONSUMERS ONLY, in regard to economic reality.

There can't be no other viable criterion to determine if an enterprise is serving people or not.

Profit means that the entrepreneur is producing efficiently that which is desired by the society. Period.

You would want the State to decide instead. Just like fascists.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead So? This is the fact of reality. Resources are scarce, mana does not fall from heaven. You've got to work for a living. Any more questions?

Majority of people are not prudent enough to reduce their consumption and increase savings to accumulate capital, therefore they cannot become capitalists themselves. But some people can - and they do rise from wage labour to being entrepreneurs and create multitude of wealth. You owe them practically everything you take for granted.

[Grindermetalhead]

@Arjozof Wow, you really put an effort there. However, this elitist Austrian school bullshit has been refuted over and over by main-stream economists and by left leaning economists worldwide.

Markets cannot work without regulations and regulations require government or some sort of coercive entity to impose them.

I am opposed to any kind government for many reasons, which I have neither time nor will to go into details of, so that is just another reason why I'm anti-market oriented.

[Grindermetalhead]

I wont even go into that bunch of crappy straw-man and ad-hominem arguments you presented, however i will say that I am opposed to state socialism and I don't consider countries based on soviet model to be communist nor socialist at all. That shit is socialism only in name but in reality it is state capitalism and it has nothing to do with genuine socialism nor communism.

Lastly, if you want to argue against my positions, first make sure you're arguing against my positions you disingenuous fuck!

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead yeah, right, genuine socialism or communism is a magical entity which "never happened" while Soviet Russia was not "genuine" because some wicked fairy did not allow it to become "genuine".

Face it dude. There can never be your imaginary socialism, because socialism doesn't work. So the socialists must always use deadly COERCION to achieve their goals: nationalization of the means of production, and redistribution of wealth. Because no sane person would allow it freewillingly.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Who refuted Austrian theories? I'd like to know. For the truth is, nobody ever managed to refute Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle, or Calculation Problems under Socialism. Keynes just ignored Austrian critique of his own fallacies, and that's what the mainstream is doing now, after the American crisis too.

Markets can and do work efficiently WITHOUT any government, as long as private property is respected and defended, but there is no need for government coercion to do that

[Grindermetalhead]

@Arjozof At the first stage of Russian revolution soviets were the federation of grassroots movements organized and run democratically by workers and peasants. When Bolsheviks saw that they will lose the majority vote because violent purges of dissenting elements they started conducting were not everybody's cup of tea, they seized control over soviets by force and appointed party commissaries who suppressed democracy and implemented party policies.

[Grindermetalhead]

Suppression of democracy and vanguard party sectarianism were main reasons why Russian revolution failed and turned into a Bolshevik dictatorship.

Every other "communist state" was created in the image of Soviet Union and almost all were dominated by it through Cominform.

In my knowledge, the only socialist state who successfully resisted Soviet domination was Yugoslavia.

[Grindermetalhead]

The best example of working and fairly successful communist society that I can give you is the anarchist Catalonia during the Spanish civil war.

It was, unfortunately, overrun by Franco's fascists, directly aided by Hitler and Mussolini, and indirectly by Stalinists who throughout the revolution did everything in their power to smear and suppress anarchists.

[Grindermetalhead]

As for the calculation argument, it is logically defective. Economic calculation based on prices is perfectly possible in a libertarian socialist system.

Modern capitalism shows that workplaces owned by the same body (for example a large company) can exchange goods via the price form. Even Mises agrees that such a system may as well be "syndicalism" but unbeknown to Mises, majority of syndicalists are in favour of libertarian communism.

[Grindermetalhead]

In his ignorance of syndicalist thought he asserted that the "market is a consumers' democracy and syndicalists want to transform it into a producers' democracy." Most syndicalists, however, aim to abolish the market and all aim for workers' control of production to complement (not replace) consumer choice.

For von Mises, the problem for socialism is that "because no production-good will ever become the object of exchange, it will be impossible to determine its monetary value."

[Grindermetalhead]

The flaw in his argument is clear. For example, coal, is both a means of production and of consumption. If a market in consumer goods is possible for a socialist system, then competitive prices for production goods is also possible as syndicates producing production-goods would also sell the product of their labour to other syndicates or communes. So, when deciding upon a new workplace, railway or house, the designers do have access to competitive prices with which to make their decisions.

[Grindermetalhead]

Nor does his argument work against communal ownership as the commune would be buying products from syndicates in the same way as one part of a multi-national company can buy products from another part of the same company under capitalism.

The Mondragon co-operative complex in the Basque Country indicates that a libertarian socialist economy can exist and flourish.

For further refutations see Fred Taylor and Oscar Lange'scollection of papers, entitled "On the Economic Theory of Socialism".

[Grindermetalhead]

And now I give up. Neither will you convince me, nor will I convince you so there is no point in arguing further. Furthermore, these 500 character messages are pretty annoying constraint because they are not designed for a debate.

Farewell and best of luck to you.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead If I didn't live during communist regime in Poland, I would still believe in potential viability of co-operatively managed firms. But I did live, and actually we still have cooperatives from the communist times INTACT,and they are subsidized by the state.So they are not effective in the market - which means that they don't serve the consumer well enough.

In the free market all forms of property and management could be tried, incl. cooperatives and syndicates.Would they prosper?

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead It's all a matter of ownership, as I wrote earlier. If a worker can sell his stocks to other worker, or completely other person - then it's full-blown capitalism anyway, so why call it other names?

But if not, then it's a dictatorship with workers imprisoned with co-ownership forced on them by the "collective", just like in communism, but reduced to a single firm. It doesn't work, but moreover - it will not magically create equality and prosperity, but even more inequality.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Not when the ownership of the means of production is not free to change hands, go bankrupt, be taken over by a rival company and so on.

In your system, although you don't mention any state interference, the threat of cartelization is very strong.

I see no problem with anarcho-syndicalist communes in a libertarian social order - but stop dreaming about abolishing the market. If communes are more effective, they will succeed on the free-market. Well, why don't they?

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Haha, abolishing market abolishes consumer's freedom of choice. Face it, dude - you want to prohibit me from choosing the good I want for the price I consider fair. You want to substitute the market where consumer reigns, for a static dictatorship of the factory communist councils who would dictate "prices" as they wish regardless of consumers' demand and preferences.

that's how your "ideal" system would work - it would be nothing short of our Polish communism, believe me.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead Calculation argument is 100% coherent.

Without market for goods, you have no prices. You can't have a market without private property rights. Are the stocks owned by the workers freely exchanged on the market? If so - then it's capitalism all right, and most workers would sell their stocks to people who are more competent to run the factory, as most workers don't care about 'workers management'.

But if not - then it's slavery and you're a hideous liar and tyrant.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead If the anarchists didn't force non-anarchist to conform to their own vision of 'promised land', they wouldn't have been overrun.

[Arjozof]

@Grindermetalhead And Yugoslavia's economy was getting better precisely because free-market mechanisms were allowed in the midst of socialist calculation chaos.

[Grindermetalhead]

@Arjozof To me it's not so much a matter of prosperity and efficiency as much as it's a matter of personal liberty, ability to manage one-self and freely associate with other like minded individuals, mutual aid, egalitarianism, abolishment of coercive, hierarchical authority and other anarchist principles. Even if more liberty means less economic prosperity, I still would not abandon anarchism. I'm used to being poor so I don't mind it that much, but I sure wouldn't mind getting used to be free.

[xmastreedwb]

@Arjozof That last part of your post is really ironic. Jon Schaffer is a metalhead. He's also very patriotic.

[Arjozof]

@xmastreedwb Jon Schaffer is a real exception, SONS OF LIBERTY are the most devastating manifest of integrity and concern about the REAL issues.

Now confront it with a typical metal protest song about evil corporations, evil greed, evils of capitalism and preaching of leftist/liberal douchebaggery with no understanding of basic economics, history or political philosophy.

99% of social-aware metal songs are like that.

[GH02T823]

my friend was telling me about this not to long ago which is creepy that our government is fucked and we have no power in our country

[DirtyMidgetStudios]

@GH02T823 The U.S. Constitution grants the peoples of the United States of America, the right to overthrow the government if necessary. It's not a question of power, it's a question on how alert everyone is.

[alern92]

ma chi te sencula