The Second Republic Solution (1/3) - Adrian Salbuchi on The Corbett Report

[MTL911Truth]

I really support Mr. Salbuchi and everything he said.

[dreballs]

Japan will be a lost city in 4 yrs! get out now! There so nice there,They wont even tell you the truth wow there so nice there.And your talking about horns honking wake up sleeper cell=YOU

[dreballs]

Alert gov bot channel stay safe!.Much love to all even your bot channel

[the26thhour]

Australia was almost an independent Nation.

Now its just prioritised for the Government's quality of life & its masters, the Multi-Corporates.

Our last "Leader" was stabbed in the back by his own party cause he challenged the mining groups & the one to be axed before that was sacked by the Queen of England after he promised he'd find out the truth of Pine Gap (USA's Area 51 of Australia).

[Gravija1980]

LOL so the Argentinans basically came up with their own version of the Venus Project. A resource-based economy is the ony way to go, folks

[NYCzkidd1]

@Gravija1980

i feel that venus bullshit = a one world government -_-

[Gravija1980]

@NYCzkidd1 There is no government in the Venus Project and what the fuck is wrong with the world being united? Quit listening to Alex Jones fear mongering and use your head - we are all humans who deserve to live free and reach for the stars TOGETHER (not as separate primitive tribes you call "nations")

[MTL911Truth]

@Gravija1980 you said it all right there. The Venus project is one-world government wrapped in a package that is palatable to some truthers. Nation states are not bad things. They are the most logical way for humanity to organize itself. The Venus Project is yet another front in the NWO`s attack on the modern nation state.

[Gravija1980]

@MTL911Truth Please reply with one beneficial reason to separate people into nations.

[MTL911Truth]

@Gravija1980 we all speak different languages and have different laws and cultures?

[CelticReject]

James. Although I very much appreciate your work and unending efforts, I cannot but feel that it will be to no avail. The reason for my opinion is that the NWO is a juggernaut, and you, I and all other people are a bunch of fleas on the line. Sorry mate, but you will not make 1 iota of difference. Great words, much intelligence, wonderful aspirations are in you films. However, the ptb don't care about you, or the sheeple. Sorry mate. But all your efforts will be in vane.

[phonic0photon]

Yet again, James, you've brought to our attention someone, whom, is like yourself, a straight shooter. An excellent beginning, no pussy footing around.

[WJValente]

I say don't "audit" the Federal Reserve, but ABOLISH it!

[WreakingHavoc1]

@WJValente You first have to get a majority to audit it. Then, once their crimes are made public, you will gain more public support to abolish the institution.

[WJValente]

@WreakingHavoc1 OK, good point.

[zapproowsdower]

this is very interesting. most people paying attention would see the US as part of a western globalist movement, with nations like argentina, iran, china, russia, being part of a somewhat opposing movement. but when plugging in the context provided by this video, it would seem that these nations are controlled opposition and are part of the same paradigm as the US.

[zapproowsdower]

what's up with not playing that intro tune? I always imagined it being played by some german impressionist dancers wearing tight leather and having very serious expressions.

[paulooca67]

Note how he seems to not really want to get to the point. The guy is a reactionary whose good at self-promotion. He's going to get his share of lemmings, lol.

[sarahsgift1]

Excellent interview!

[ufosindeutschland]

how the world really works .... hmm let me think.. on concious based decisions ... less on money ... thanks for this interview :)

whoop ~

[TheStrazy]

Gold is the currency of kings.

Silver is the currency of gentlemen.

Barter is the currency of peseants.

DEBT is the currency of SLAVES.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@TheStrazy Is that an original piece? If so, very well said. If not, thanks for sharing.

[TheStrazy]

@WreakingHavoc1 no not original think it came from steve lazear

[PestControl02]

excellent video.

rated, shared & commented.

[GoddardsJournal]

Any Japan-insider news on Fukushima?

[cchessmaster]

If you want to change the world quit using their fraudulent fiat money. They control you through debt.

[Mystery207]

@cchessmaster Do that while still paying Taxes? Huh!

[cchessmaster]

@Mystery207 I don't pay taxes.

[l1xx3r]

Why do we even need a government... we are smart enough to organize ourselves into small communities... with contracts and agreements with other communities...

[WreakingHavoc1]

@l1xx3r While I can understand the reasoning of the Anarcho-capitalists, one fact remains - some human beings always gravitate to leadership positions in a group. Government isn't bad if it is limited to punishing those who initiate force, fraud or coercion. We just can't give government any power over the peaceful, honest, voluntary actions of adult individuals.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 "..gravitate to leadership positions in a group.." Nothing wrong with leaders. It's rulers that can be a problem.

"..Government isn't bad if it is limited to punishing those who initiate force, fraud or coercion.." And so where is it most likely that people who like to initiate force, will end up? Gov maybe?

".. limited to punishing those who initiate force,.." Then it's not a government.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 Sure it can be a government with no power over peaceful, honest, voluntary actions by adult individuals. But you must specify that in the Constitution. And put in greater punishments for those in government who try to violate this - life in prison maybe? I'm against the death penalty in general, but I guess I could support it for politicians who perjure or violate their oath of office if such a Constitution limitation was implemented.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 You're describing a bunch of people with no more rights than you have yourself, and that is fine. But, then it is not a government. (A gov is a ruling class). What you describe is a security company or similar, and that can be supplied in a stateless society.

You have no need of a constitution. Politicians never read them anyway.

[l1xx3r]

@WreakingHavoc1 But governments always work towards that end. The smaller and least powerful governments always end up the biggest and more tyrannical, history shows this.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@l1xx3r RIght - because enough protections haven't been instituted. We need more protections to limit government power via the law. But of course the people have to pay attention and watch their elected officials. 

[l1xx3r]

@WreakingHavoc1 I don't know what you are trying to say... it looks like you are agreeing with me, but I am not sure.

[WreakingHavoc1]

Sorry it's dev (dot) republicoftheunitedstates (dot) org 

[007feedback]

ADRIAAAAAAAAAAAANN !!!!

[vention4wh]

Sounds great but will they keep their promises? When they're in power what's to stop them from being bribed or threatened into knuckling under to the bankers again. And even if they won't, the people have been betrayed by those seeking power for so long that they are unlikely to throw their heart into backing some new power structure. And they're unlikely to sign up and put their names on a list that the authorities can seize and then send their goons out to arrest them. Good luck to him.

[vention4wh]

@vention4wh

If you really want a new republic that people believe in you have to make a small version of that republic that people can participate in, that's scalable, with term limits to prevent a new aristocracy from forming. Let's call the base unit a "group" and make it 100 adults. They elect an executive and a representative who travels to the next higher group of 100. That next higher group represents 100 groups or ten thousand people. And so on until the country is represented.

[vention4wh]

@vention4wh

3. That's just one quick idea but there are probably better ways of doing it. If people are to believe in something then they have to be able to affect it and it has to represent them. I think people have had enough of trying to affect change in national politics. It's too far removed from the citizenry and there is no effective way to really reign in the bureaucrats at that level, since they make the laws and select those who enforce them.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@vention4wh The de jure republic is back and ready to go - it just needs more support. See - dev (dot) republicfortheunitedstates (dot) org

[WreakingHavoc1]

@vention4wh It's up to us, we the people, to keep them honest. We know how the banksters work now. They can't get away with the same deception again.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 "..They can't get away with the same deception again..." Wanna bet?

These are the same people that are responsible for most of the education in a country.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 They can't get away with it in regards to those of us who know the truth now. We must add new Constitutional protections - and the language must be very clear and unambiguous. Or else the lawyers and judges will manipulate it. It can be done, we just have to first take the power back from the banksters, and their lackeys, the lawyers and judges.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 "..language must be very clear and unambiguous.." So what's ambiguous about the 4th amendment? It's already clear, but they ignore it. Bits of paper haven't protected you so far. (Trying the same thing over and over - and expecting different results).

"..we just have to first take the power back.." Yes, most of the public would like that too. I wonder why they don't just do it then. As long as you/we play in their popularity contests, they'll always control people.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 The language was very clear in that area, yet ambiguous in other areas that led to usurpation of the entire system via corporate government in 1868. The corporate "United States" set up a parallel system which ran on legalities. There's a difference between legal and lawful. That's how they began to sidestep the Constitution. But what wasn't really clarified in the Constitution was an easy way to punish government officials who violated their oaths of office. Needs 2B very easy.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 Look at it this way - If it is a government, it's not accountable to you. Politicians aren't accountable. As you say - in the constitution is not clear how to punish etc.

I'm saying that it's your logic that's wrong. If you agree to give some people control over you, then how do you think you can control them? You can't. All I said was that if you can control a government, then it isn't a government. (Which is a better idea I think)

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 You're clearly not understanding me. I'm not agreeing to give anyone control over me. I'm a sovereign, as long as I'm acting peacefully, honestly, and voluntarily; as is every other human being on earth. When someone takes an oath to uphold a Constitution with the intent to protect the rights of others, then they must lay down their sovereignty while they serve in that capacity. Calling a leadership group "government" or any other name is irrelevant. The devil is in the details.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 And by that I mean to say, it's how the ability to punish those officials is set up. Must be very easy for the people to severely punish any politician who usurps authority and violates their rights.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 "..."government" or any other name is irrelevant,," No it's not irrelevant. Anything you have proposed for a gov to do, can be done by e.g. a private security system, So, you'd have to explain the difference between such a system and a state/gov.

Why would you need to punish people when - in a private system, you could just take your business elsewhere?

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 In a purely private system, you will still have criminals - and they will most likely group in gangs. Who will oppose these gangs who will surely be emboldened by the fact that there is no government? This is the problem with anarchy. Without any taxes, it's obvious that there will be less crime, but under A-C crime will inevitably be concentrated into hardcare gangs led by extreme sociopaths. And as for taxes, it is possible to have a minarchist government without taxes also.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 "..you will still have criminal.." Yes. of course. There's been a lot written about security in anarchic societies. Worth reading if you're interested.

If it's possible to have a government without taxes, then it must be funded voluntarily. That's fine if people want that. I'm not sure how it would be financed, but that's ok. That would almost guarantee very few daft laws. People wouldn't pay for the drug war for example.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 A private security system could indeed do such jobs - but again, how do you guarantee that it will not be corrupted? There is plenty of corruption in private businesses just as there is in government.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 "...plenty of corruption in private businesses just as there is in government..." Yes, but a private security firm has to rely on its customers to buy from them, or it will go out of business. A gov has a captive market - you are forced to pay them every year.

If businesses are corrupt, there would be an opportunity for a business ratings firm to open up where people could obtain a ratings report on a company they may want to do business with. People will figure it out

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 Not if the government is not funded by taxation. Thomas Jefferson repealed all taxes in 1802 and ran the government solely from trade tariff revenue. It is possible. Problems are indeed solved by people, but again, there will be those who gravitate to leadership positions.  I just think it's better to have a limited Constitutional republic in place to protect rights. We'll have to agree to disagree. My plan is a hard sell to the populace, but yours is virtually impossible.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 Tariffs are just a tax. It's a prevention of 2 people to do business on their own terms. That's not freedom. Of course we can disagree - no problem. I don't have a plan that I'm trying to sell. I've no problem with leaders, but politicians are not leaders. They are dictators. Protecting rights, defence, courts etc - these are the worst things you can give to a bunch of bureaucrats. haha - I guess our reasoning is just different. If I can opt out, I'd be happy.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 Well tariffs are different, hence the differentiation in names. Tariffs on goods coming from outside the country do not affect anything happening inside the country, and if you have no taxes inside the country, you will have cheap goods. I think we can agree that between the two, tariffs would be better than taxes. You may not have an agenda you're trying "to sell" - but you're certainly trying to convince others to see things your way. I'd like to opt out to, into common law.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 Common law may be a step forward, but there is a thing in common law called "necessity" which basically means that a judge can choose to ignore the law if he feels "it's necessary."

I'm afraid tariffs do affect what goes on in a country. They prevent you buying cheaper (imported) goods, which prevents the growth of job opportunities in your own country. e.g. Bastiat did a good job of describing that about in 1845.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 I also think we could agree that if we could opt out of the income tax, fiat currency, central banking, paying for pre-emptive wars, paying to support bureaucrats who control peaceful, honest, voluntary activities, that we'd be a lot more happier regardless of what type of governmental (or non-governmental) system we live under.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 I like to try to look at things in different ways. I've looked at the minarchist gov thing. The best reasoned arguments I've found so far, come from the stateless side of things. Nothing wrong with attempting to persuade someone else to look from a different perspective. There's no coercion involved. (We'd prob agree about a lot of things - like you mentioned). There's s ton of good writing been done on this stuff. Gov has failed the public every time, through history, I think.

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 Again, winning enough people over to actually go stateless, is virtually impossible as dumbed down as this population is. But the ignorant fools could get patriotic and get behind a "return to the Constitution" movement. We don't have 40 years to do this. The economy will collapse when the dollar loses world reserve currency status. I think getting behind the de jure republic is our only hope at this stage.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 I think I could agree with just about all you said there. I certainly don't expect our generation to give up idolising the suit monkeys any time soon. I guess you could be right about a constitution movement etc. Yes, I think we could very well see a dramatic decrease in wealth, happening very quickly. It's certainly gonna be interesting. :)

[WreakingHavoc1]

@zalida100 Yeah, as the Chinese proverb (or curse) goes: "May you live in interesting times." Stock up on food & water and get some gold & silver to protect your assets. Hopefully the good guys can win in the end, but it's going to rough going for a while.

[zalida100]

@WreakingHavoc1 Good idea - sensible enough thing to do. Cheers

[acuriousbeast]

This sounds, so far, like a good roadmap for after SHTF.

[zalida100]

@acuriousbeast Except that what adrian salbuchi has so far said, sounds a bit like more socialism. He's arguing against private money. There's nothing wrong with private money. I think he wants to be more specific, that private money is not the problem. It is the monopoly of controlling the money that is the problem. 10 different people trying to sell private money in a non-coercive free market threatens no-one. You can choose to use it or not use it. No need to have a monopoly on it.

[acuriousbeast]

@zalida100 That part of it slid right past me. Economics is basically more blah, blah to me. Those are points worth considering. What perked my ears up were the tactics in dealing with 'powers that be'. What a lot of people miss is that if the 'whoever' actually had the resources and hard cash to pull off totalitarian rule they would have done it already. They are in panic mode as evidenced by the increasingly obvious silver manipulation, the power grabs, the posturing, and the distractions.

[zalida100]

@acuriousbeast It's more than just the economics. It's the threat of violence behind the philosophy. I'm sure salbuchi is a decent guy etc. But, if you try to achieve a "moral" goal, by "immoral" means, you will always end up with something you never intended. This stuff has to be founded in sound (peaceful) reasoning.

"..They are in panic mode.." I've considered this, and I think you may be right. (But I'm not sure). Anyway, I still like the video. - Ag market is rising a little. Dunno why.

[acuriousbeast]

@zalida100 Can't keep a good metal down. I need to watch more of Mr. Salbuchi before I give the 'official verdict' lol. I'm trying the 'due consideration' thing instead of popping off like I usually do. I honestly believe the 'powers that be' are in panic mode. They are showing all the signs.

I look at my own political and governmental dealings here and I'm seeing lots of bluster and posturing combined with no follow through and back pedaling. The Budget Office says we are in deep caca.

[zalida100]

@acuriousbeast Salbuchi has a youtube channel I think. arsalbuchi

"..powers that be' are in panic mode..." Why? Who's threatening them? Are they losing the infowar? If they get frightened they may react like a wounded animal.

I think their main problem is that they are a bunch of psychopaths trying to cooperate amongst themselves. That never works. I think they'll eventually eat each other. 

[acuriousbeast]

@zalida100 I personally put them in the 'narcissist' category, a group that has essentially good cooperating skills but always ends up turning on each other and consuming themselves. Unbridled arrogance and unappeasable greed are what's working here. That they let virtually the whole planet get connected with each other through the internet and cell phones was one big mistake. Things like the TEA Party and the MIdeast Uprisings caught them off guard & they're making their own money worthless.

[zalida100]

@acuriousbeast 'narcissist' category' - Yes, lots of them too I guess. "...internet and cell phones was one big mistake..." I think they certainly hate/fear the internet. "..MIdeast Uprisings caught them off guard.." I'm not so sure about that.

"..making their own money worthless..." I think their fiat paper has just run its course. I'm sure they have plans after the dollars are done.

Ya gotta be aware of the incentive - tkKblERRpKc (It's long, but quite important)

[acuriousbeast]

@zalida100 Even if I was 100% right I doubt enough people would take advantage of the opportunity. After reading the 'Osama's dead' articles, chock full of issues, and all the silver shills out in force and then reflect on how Americans usually buy into whatever they're fed that day I doubt if a single thing will change any time soon. I'm starting to feel like Dagny Taggart's assistant splayed out on the train crossing.

[zalida100]

@acuriousbeast No. You're right. Most people will absolutely beg for their owners to save them. It's pretty pathetic, but there you are. If they don't want to think a little bit, there's not much you can do.

Dam! I still haven't read that book. I only got around 50 pages and then got distracted.

[crz666]

thank you !!!!!!!!!

[mispistoleros]

this is, indeed, an important discussion and salbuchi offers sound solutions.

the money solution already exists in the USA:

The Bank of North Dakota

watch?v=fU8o6WUcHuU

to understand the mechanics of bondage, what salbuchi is talking about, it's worth studying argentina's collapse as a case in point:

Argentina's Economic Collapse - Part 1 of 12

watch?v=rH6_i8zuffs

[1x93cm]

wow adrian! i haven't heard from him in a while..thanks james for these newscasts

[MyTube22T]

Thanks for your work, James. God bless.

[pepintheshort100]

What an important interview James! What an important guest!

Thank you. And thank you, Adrian Salbuchi!

[oozzyy11]

Second to view, excellent broadcast again.

[DragonYearJoji]

Good to see you interviewing all the right people James! Adrian Salbuchi has a lot of good things to say.

[SONGSBYMAX]

First to view! Hello James and Adrian!