Has the Supreme Court Shown the Hand of Authoritarian Free Enterprise?

JimSinclair ^

[Happy2BMe]

Has the Supreme Court Shown the Hand of Authoritarian Free Enterprise?

     Author: Kenny Adams and Jim Sinclair

Dear CIGA:

Re: KELO et al v. CITY of NEW LONDON, 04-108

The US Supreme Court may well have shown the hand and intentions of Authoritarian Free Enterprise too early for the US public to accept.

Home ownership (land and its accouterments) has become the primary thrust of working Americans, each of whom looks forward to that joyful day. Because of that desire to own a home, their right of ownership is largely dependent upon local governments - ones who are generally under the control of special interests or even worse - total stupidity.

As Brussels exposed its lack of intellectual mastery and timing with the Euroland referendum, the US Supreme Court may just have made the same mistake - whether by accident or intent.

If the US Supreme Court had rendered this decision in a period of extreme economic pressure, the general public might well have accepted this monumental ruling as being in their best interests. However, making this decision now may scuttle efforts to prevent the economic meltdown that over-the-counter derivatives guarantee at some point in the future.

The US Supreme Court has now sanctioned local government's confiscation of privately owned property for business concerns without the owner's consent and its subsequent transfer to any other private entity that might "promise" a greater financial reward to "the public good" as per Kelo et al v. City of New London, 04-108.

Historically, the compensation given under the title of eminent domain has been less than acceptable to the previous owner of the property.

Here we have the US Supreme Court deconstructing the 5th amendment of the Constitution, legalizing authoritarian plunder and thereby emulating the spirit of the Communist Manifesto which has in certain characteristics been a model from which Authoritarian Free Enterprises has sprung. This is an example of the authoritarian character of the new economic system being pursued in the USA, Great Britain and Russia. 

The Supreme Court ruling that specifically removes private property rights exists and parallels what is enumerated in the 1st and 4th planks of the Communist Manifesto.  

Five justices have in pursuit of the thesis of Authoritarian Free Enterprise embraced principles far more in harmony with the work of a "foreign" concept of jurisprudence that has repeatedly generated immeasurable suffering, poverty and tyranny. At the same time, they have rendered a decision that simultaneously denies the primary thesis of the American Constitution that they swore to uphold as a condition of assuming office - and, as always, for the "greater good."

The sitting Supreme Court of the USA has made alterations of basic tenets that are always inherent in the right of private property. This blatant perversion of the foundational concept of a free society is supposedly intended to be made acceptable to the populace by its legalization.

The Supreme Court's blessing for a local government's confiscation of wealth and property from its rightful owners and its redistribution to economic entities to which the property does not belong, constitutes, we believe, an act of legalized confiscation by the authorities of Authoritarian Free Enterprise. Plunder it is - and nothing less!

And how might any citizen identify an official act of legalized plunder?  Easily: With the simple observation of any authority taking without consent what rightfully belongs to one private entity for the sole purpose of allowing its ownership to be taken over by another private entity. This is something that no ordinary individual could do without being charged with a crime.  

Legalizing the concept of eminent domain for the purpose of the businesses of Authoritarian Free Enterprise only requires that the party in power extend its control to the local levels as has been accomplished by Putin in Russia. When this is accomplished, as it has been by Putin, his office controls the basis of that society. This exists in Russia and the old KGB takeover now is for profit not ideology or territorial imperative.

This decision is without question a perversion of the law because it allows the authority of a city, county, state, or nation to be a willing participant in an action of plunder wherein its basis is "might" against "right" - and the victim who resists must always be cast as the criminal.

This ruling supports an ongoing process that has weakened already and could totally alter the US Bill of Rights and particularly the 5th Amendment.

Voting for the legalization of plunder were the following members of the Supreme Court: Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg, Breyer, and Kennedy. Those against: O'Connor, Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist.

Authoritarian Free Enterprise won 5 - 4, resulting in the establishment within US law of the intent contained within planks 1 and 4  of the Communist Manifesto.

The US public and many other western democracies have lost their core principles, those that so many brave souls have died for. They are now totally dedicated to the accumulation of wealth and the expansion of their personal egos at any price. This fault may turn out to be it's savior - maybe.

Respectfully submitted,

Kenny Adams & Jim Sinclair 

[Happy2BMe]

Some are saying this will create a tax revolt due to property owners rebelling against their having no control left over the security of their private property.

Show stopper indeed.

(And the President remains silent in the confines of his domain . .)

SCOTUS DECISION WATCH- Live Thread- 10am

[Happy2BMe]

[cinives]

because you will experience a taking in the form of a Sheriff's sale ...

[dennisw]

Good 'toon. Ruth Bader Ginsberg is the Supreme Court Justice from hell. I know EXACTLY what makes this black robed kook tick.

[Happy2BMe]

EXACTLY!??

[longtermmemmory]

It is happening in FL.

In a municipality homestead is capped at 1/2 acre.

OUTSIDE a municipality homestead is 120 acres.

If you get annexed you have a grandfather clause protection but the NEW owners get dropped to the 1/2 acre.

This is particularly crucial as homestead property tax increases are capped to prevent taking by confiscatory taxation on the individual owner. So now instead of forcing gentrification by taxation, they can force taking by simply taking.

[Happy2BMe]

In other U.S.S.C. Oligarchy News . .

===================================

Court: File-Sharing Services May Be Sued

Court: No Ten Commandments in Courthouses

[dennisw]

Being Jewish, I understand lunatic ideologue wizened cancerous communist NY Jewish women. I've seen her kind many times before though of course not in the Supreme Court. Sadly, she is a shame to the (my) Jewish people.

In short… she’s a communist effin’ lunatic who is convinced of her rightness, dismisses any criticism. She’s in her NY/Washington liberal bubble where all she’ll get will be praise.

[inquest]

FORGET ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT ALREADY! They weren't being "oligarchical" by upholding a law that elected representatives enacted.

The blame for these laws lies with the politicians themselves. WE elected them, we can unelect them. If even a quarter of the anger that's been uselessly directed at the courts had instead been directed at the politicians, there would be heads rolling in city and town halls all across the country. But instead, everyone wastes their energy on SCOTUS, the branch of government that we have precisely the least influence on, and which didn't initiate the problem here. In the meantime, the slimy politicians get let off the hook. Can anyone give a rational reason for this?

[Happy2BMe]

Oh - that one.

(Thanks for the revelations. For a moment there, I could have sworn you were descrbing Hillary Clinton.)

============================

"She’s in her NY/Washington liberal bubble where all she’ll get will be praise."

[Happy2BMe]

I'm not for one second going to let the U.S.S.C. off the proverbial hook.

They are elitists GONE AMOK!

Their job was to STOP this lunacy. Instead they propagate and legalize it.

(Who are the criminals now?)

[TheGrimReaper]

Suggested future SCOTUS nominee guidelines:

NO more Souters
NO more Kennedys
and for God's sake, NO MORE GINSBURGS! (ACLU spawn)

[inquest]

This is what gets me: SCOTUS strikes down state laws, and large numbers of people here go ballistic, to the point of attacking the notion of judicial review itself, damning Marshall for Marbury vs Madison, etc. But then when the court fails to strike down a law, it seems as though these same elements are railing against "judicial tyranny". But the fact is, the courts didn't "tyrannize" us. It's true that they didn't stop tyranny, but that charge is absolutely no more applicable to them than to the people who elected the tyrants at the state and local level. Where's all the outrage against them?

I don't understand why people want to waste anger and energy on the courts, rather than on the politicians where you'll get 20 times more bang for your buck. Can you explain why it's being done this way?

[Happy2BMe]

"Can you explain why it's being done this way?"

======================

How difficult is it to impeach a senator or a congressman? An appellate judge or even a district judge.

You know it is almost impossible.

In this nation once for and by the people the Oligarchy now owns The People.

History repeats itself. I fear for our nation's security when private property rights come under such direct frontal attack. This will be a long hot summer.

Thank you for your thoughts.

[dangus]

Free Enterprise? Since when are government siezures free enterprise? I'm getting sick of "moderates" confusing free enterprise and fascism. Free enterprise means people have the right to conduct business as they see fit, without government interference. In free enterprise, government serves merely to preserve the freedom by preventing lawlessness, invasion, and the restriction of markets. New London represents fascism here, the ability of the government to co-erce its subjects into business dealings they do not wish to engage in.

[dangus]

Where's Bush?

[inquest]

In this nation once for and by the people the Oligarchy now owns The People.

"The Oligarchy" didn't force the people to elect officials who passed these tyrannical laws, nor did "the Oligarchy" enact these laws themselves. The sooner people start focusing on the source of the problem, the sooner we'll start seeing results.

[BenLurkin]

bttt

[Edgerunner]

No, SCOTUS is without fault! They only legalized the seizure by broading the definition from "public use" to "public benefit". /sarc

[The Grammarian]

Forgive me for using such an overused term, but doesn't "authoritarian free enterprise" mean the same thing as "corporatist fascism"?

What's really funny is that I have a loony-left friend who constantly tells me that the country is run by corporations. Who just handed corporations carte blanche to do as they please? The liberals on the Supreme Court. Oh, the irony...