Hi,

I found your web site a few years ago searching sausage making information. I saved the article to my favorites. Last weekend I came across it, reread it and looked around your site. I found The path to another Depression By John Silveira .

I was wowed. I have been talking like this for 25+ years.

What is going on is madness. I don’t mean rhetorical madness, I mean real full blown madness.

(Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds)

(“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.” )

I don’t think there is a stopping this train wreck. The people have been mass hypnotized. The end is near.

I believe in Jesus returning soon and even if you don’t, we have much in common.

Keep up the good work.

I wish that I had looked at your site more closely, sooner.

Thank You,

Jon Holzapfel

Share or Bookmark

Well, in spite of some letters I have seen from time to time complaining about the “political” views expressed in Backwoods Home, it seems that you guys were right on in your series about the coming dictatorship.

In the article it was noted that we had set the economy up as a fascist system – well – now the government control’s the banks, the auto industry and the administration has simply done away with the congress by appointing “czars” who can act without congressional supervision, and by claiming executive privilege can refuse to testify and explain their actions to congress.

However, I’m not sure that makes a difference. Our congress is the best that money can buy (and they have been bought) so we see the spectacle of the house voting for huge spending bills they haven’t read, and allowing the president to fire people in private industry, because of his wisdom and vast experience in business.

I am not sure where our government found the “right” to interfere in our every day lives – it seems that we had perfectly adequate bankruptcy laws.

Self sufficiency seems to be a lot more important now that we have decided equality of outcome is more important than equality  of opportunity.

Bob McPherson
Santa Fe, Texas

Share or Bookmark

I subscribe to your magazine and look forward to each issue. I especially enjoyed the most recent article on the Coming Dictatorship. I agree with you, and that is why I am deeply concerned about the future of our country.

There is a huge machine (U.S. Government) that is out of control. This machine is consuming everything in its path, but mostly it is consuming and wasting our hard earned tax dollars, and borrowed money (T-Bills, etc.). I fear for my children and grand children. They most definitely will not spend their lives in the same country you and I grew up in.

I’ve been thinking about how to bring this machine to a halt, non-violently, before it is too late. The machine runs on a lot of tax dollars. Without those tax dollars it would be slowed down, and maybe stopped. Would it work to organize as many people and companies as possible to quit sending tax dollars to D.C.? This might be a really bad idea, but something along these lines must be  done.

People in other countries hold worker layouts and strikes to cripple a country for a short period of time. Sometimes it works. Do you think it would work here?

What if truckers shut down their rigs for 24, 48 or 72 hours? Think what that would do, especially if the trucks going into Washington D..C. did this. We the People have the power to bring this machine down if we organize. My guess is that would be the problem. Getting enough Americans to agree to stay home would be very difficult.

I hope I don’t sound desperate. I want the best for our country and all of those that will have to live in it. I don’t really think of myself, only my family. I do not want to exclude anyone, harm anyone or discriminate against anyone either. I realize not everyone will agree with what I have said here. All I know is that those who were elected to represent me are not representing me. They are completely disconnected. I can only imagine who really controls this country now.

By the way, I am a military veteran, and I took an oath to uphold the Constitution and defend it from enemies both foreign and domestic, and I will do so. I am afraid there are those Americans who also took similar oaths who will not do what they swore to do. I just wanted to share with you that I recently found an organization called OATHKEEPERS.org. I think this is a step in the right direction, if this is a legitimate organization.

Thank you for listening to me, and thank you for your magazine.

Thomas Wilson

Share or Bookmark

Good job [with the article],

I’ve read about and have ‘adopted’ a strategy in regards to a “Level 4′ type scenario.

Dig In.

Our food/gas/electricity/medicines deliveries are so just-in-time these days, that any lengthy scenario (over a month or two) massive amounts of the general population will die. An on-your-own scenario of six months encompassing the winter months may trim the population by 50%. If this ever happens it will be Mad Max time.

Dig In and be invisible.

After the unprepared population is weeded out, sadly, that may be the reason that calm and reason reappear.
I do disagree with your (and others’) philosophy of massive military and police control in a very bad scenario.

Here is why:

They are us.

In China and other countries we have seen the military and police seem to have a ball beating down their own people. I do not believe that will happen here. I feel this mainly because in other countries the military and police enjoy a certain better standard of living than a majority of the population. In the USA our cops and military are just like you and I. In fact, a great many will probably be in the Dig In mode protecting their own families.

On the other side, I live smack in the middle of Iowa; lol, yep, I can only imagine the coastal populations flocking here……

Dave

Share or Bookmark

After reading the commentary The media’s treatment of Blacks makes their socialist bias obvious I could not wonder but do White folks really believe this nonsense?

The opinion itself is filled with social stereotypes and bias!  To believe that the news media all have gotten together to pick and chose what Blacks they will listen to and those that they will not give the time of day too is ignorant.  In a nation that has not allow a race of people their equal rights, their share of wealth, their proper representation and their rights to participate in the so-called “free enterprise system”,  how in the world can anyone with a brain could come to the conclusion that’s it’s the media elite’s that holding a race of people back.

The media is no different from the rest of the so-called free enterprise system that has systematically participated, supported and justified a cultural bias against Blacks in this nation.  For over 300 years this bias has existed in America, it’s not just the media but among its majority peoples.

How in the world can Blacks stand on their own feet when their feet have been tied for over 300 years of injustices?  The writer blames the media for not hearing from Black social elites like Allen Keyes; well that’s simple to figure out, he does not sell papers or magazines nor does he get high television ratings.  The media is in the business of selling ads and if the advertisers don’t approve of their targeted audiences well say goodbye to sales.   The advertiser’s targeted audiences are people who can “pay”, hence the white majority in this nation.

So before a person writes about things he does not understand they might want to do some research on the subject before concluding that’s it’s the media’s fault for Black folks being in the condition they find themselves in today.  It’s not; it’s the combination of an ignorant and bias majority and the “great American free enterprise system”!

Mo Carter

Share or Bookmark

Thank you for disseminating Mr Silviera’s article.

While I don’t think the act will ever fly in the U.S.A. It is alarming. But there is much food for thought  in the effort.

We North Americans, U.S and Canada, are among the very few nations that use the Boxer primer in our ammo. The central flash hole in the cartridges makes it easy to punch the spent primer out and simple to reload the cartridge. Most countries use the Berdan primer with three off center flash holes, making it very difficult to remove the spent primer and reload the cartridge case. I believe this was intentional to prevent their people from reloading ammunition. Think about who uses which type of primer and their form of government and the truth will slowly sink in.

Here we should give thanks that our “Commie sit down to pee pen raised rabbit liberals” do not understand firearms or ammunition. The technology to serial number all ammo and I.D. Fired cases to the  gun they were fired in does not exist and the bureaucracy to do so would be enormous and ultimately be a failure. BUT!  A Federally mandated switch to Berdan primers would render all of our ammunition un-reloadable. I think an attempt to do this is coming “As sure as God made little green apples!”  Let’s  stay alert for the attempt!

Leon Kania
Ex Captain, 5Th Special Forces, Viet Nam

Share or Bookmark

To Whom It May Concern:

The [linked] article by Mr. John Silveira is woefully out of date. Leaving the article in its current state only adds to the misinformation, panic, and stridency generally found on the internet and in mass emailings of dire warnings regarding our personal liberties. The Ammunition Accountability Act, in every form and everywhere introduced, failed. It was never brought to a vote in any of the 18 states in which something of this nature was introduced, either dying in committee, dying due to no action taken, or even having been withdrawn. Though the tools of research and verification are at the fingertips of anyone possessing a computer and who could read the article at the above link, the tendency all too often is to immediately post such misinformation to everybody they know, distributing concern, unease, and panic, while contributing nothing constructive. There is no current threat from the Ammunition Accountability Act or anything resembling it anywhere in the Union.

As a matter of service to your readers, the author might compose a follow-up article, updating the fate of the bill in each of the states, or even just a paragraph denoting that the bills are currently a dead issue. Perhaps your editorial staff would undertake the project. Will it/they resurface? It is likely, even probable. And that would be the time to update once again, inform and motivate the reading/shooting public to the new threat. Letting old, inaccurate, outdated information stand serves no good purpose, informs no one, and only leads to useless spam, and frankly, de-sensitization of the reading/shooting public to real, clear, and present threats to our liberties and the 2nd Amendment.

Respectfully,

John L. Corstorphine, Jr.

John,

Thanks for calling that to our attention. The author just added to the article a couple of paragraphs updating the current status.

Dave

Share or Bookmark

I always ask my friends when they send me articles like this or about other government intrusions, “when do we start shooting”.

I have read about this before and at this point in time I would say that it would be the spark to ignite more than anyone proposing such a policy would have bargained for.

Richard Miller

Share or Bookmark

Are there phone numbers to use to let “them” know we do not want federal health care?

I want to help fight this thing.

Cliff

Cliff,

Good luck!

Share or Bookmark

Claire,

I just re-read your article Preparing for civil unrest and I wanted to thank you for your thoughtful and well written piece.

I did have a follow up question – can you please share the advice on the back of the card that you are carrying from your lawyer?

In the meantime, applying your observations to the situation in Iran might not be a bad idea- It seems they went from 1 to 5 in a matter of minutes after the election.

I can also foresee your scenarios taking place in the US of A without too much imagination.

Again, thank you. Please keep up the great work!

Steve Szymke

Steve,

The lawyer’s advice has been added at the end of the article. Click the link above.

–Dave

Share or Bookmark

I just have to comment on your online article The path to another Depression by John Silveira.

I live in a small farm in central Alberta and my husband and I have discussed the automaking industries woes many times, as the situation here in Canada is the same as south of the border for the auto industry.  We have both said many times – “let them go bankrupt, it’s the only way they’ll get the unions out and truly become competitive in the world market”!  We have opened from scratch (& without bank financing), grew our small business to 5 times it’s original square footage, and maintained it and turned a decent profit every year for 13 years (then we sold it), so I feel that we have the right to say this.  Business owners MUST have the ability to cut costs, cut people, change suppliers, etc. as needed to keep their company profitable – unions null and void this ability on many fronts.

Over and over in government, it’s individuals who have no ‘real world’ business skills who are in power.  Could they, on their own, open and run a successful small business in a competitive industry? I believe that for most of them, the answer would be no.  If they can’t manage a small business successfully, how can we possibly expect them to manage an entire country?

This is the first time I’ve come across your website and must say – so far I’m very impressed with the common sense advice that is being given!

R. Dixon
Alberta, Canada

Share or Bookmark

One of the biggest injustices today is the family court judge. He has more power than the president.

I am fixing to have to go to court, and it looks like the lawyers have written the laws where the judge will probably award half of my property, which I owned before my marriage, to my soon to be x-wife. One of the things the judge will consider in determining if my property was transmuted to marital property is if we treated the property as marital.

One man should not be able to do what a family court judge can. The lawyers have written the laws where they can tie a case up in court for as long as they want, and before it is over the lawyers will own everything.

What can be done?

Marshall Jackson

Share or Bookmark

Dave Duffy is right on the mark as are most of BWH writers. I’m finding a swell of folks who are not optimistic about the direction America is going.

I’ve been to two gun shops recently. One in the heart of the city and one in the country. Both can’t keep anything on the shelves.

PB

Share or Bookmark

Editor,

I was recently gifted (by a friend) with a subscription to your magazine.  Similarly, I received a gift from my (liberal) Mom to another back-to-the-basics magazine with the acronym M.E.N.  I have read a couple of issues of both and wanted to commend you on a job well done.  Frankly, if it was not a gift from my mother, I would cancel my subscription to the ever so liberal “mother”…incidentally, not my mother.  The deciding factor was Dave Duffy’s “My view” in the March/April 2009 issue.  As a degreed (not armchair) ecologist, I applaud a scientific discussion of the supposed global warming/climate change issue as opposed to the litany of politicians espousing their vested and hypocritical opinions.

When I see the multi-trillion dollar global impact on international food prices caused by the recent push for ethanol, I shudder to think what will happen to global natural gas and other commodity prices if we continue down this misguided and corrupt path to CO2 cap & trade.

It is also the height of hypocrisy for the elitist liberal community (political, social and Hollywood) to be spouting concern about the plight of the down-trodden world-wide when cap and trade will most drastically and directly impact the global poor–as was the case with ethanol.  And to think that all of this nonsense is based entirely on the false assumption that anthropogenic CO2 liberation is the root cause of “global warming”.

Anyway, thank you for allowing me to vent, and again, Mr. Duffy hit a grand slam with that one!!

Mark Vanoni
Divide, Colorado

Share or Bookmark

Dear Editor:

I read with great satisfaction Mr. Duffy’s “My View” in your March/April 09 issue.   I agree, point by point, with all that he had to say regarding the loss of our freedom, and the global problems for which our government prescribes socialist, and especially in the case of non-existent global warming, non-sensical solutions.   I would add only that at the top of the heap in all of this madness, is the privately held cartel known as the Federal Reserve.

Until we rid ourselves of this self-serving monopoly that controls our government and the people, we haven’t a prayer of turning things around.   For more info, please research the Austrian School of Economics, the Mises Institute.org,  Peter Schiff’s work,  Tom Wood’s work, and of course, one of the few truth tellers in Washington, Ron Paul’s work.

For an initial taste of our arguments, check out [the following] article, found in the [Wall Street Journal website] no less!

Thank you for a great journal and great writers.

Take Care,

Elena Campbell
Winter Park, CO

From http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123440593696275773.html

Capitalism Needs a Sound-Money Foundation
Let’s give the Fed some competition. Abolish legal tender laws and see whose money people trust.
By JUDY SHELTON
Febrruary 11, 2009

Let’s go back to the gold standard.

If the very idea seems at odds with what is currently happening in our country — with Congress preparing to pass a massive economic stimulus bill that will push the fiscal deficit to triple the size of last year’s record budget gap — it’s because a gold standard stands in the way of runaway government spending.

Under a gold standard, if people think the paper money printed by government is losing value, they have the right to switch to gold. Fiat money — i.e., currency with no intrinsic worth that government has decreed legal tender — loses its value when government creates more than can be absorbed by the productive real economy. Too much fiat money results in inflation — which pools in certain sectors at first, such as housing or financial assets, but ultimately raises prices in general.

Inflation is the enemy of capitalism, chiseling away at the foundation of free markets and the laws of supply and demand. It distorts price signals, making retailers look like profiteers and deceiving workers into thinking their wages have gone up. It pushes families into higher income tax brackets without increasing their real consumption opportunities.

In short, inflation undermines capitalism by destroying the rationale for dedicating a portion of today’s earnings to savings. Accumulated savings provide the capital that finances projects that generate higher future returns; it’s how an economy grows, how a society reaches higher levels of prosperity. But inflation makes suckers out of savers.

If capitalism is to be preserved, it can’t be through the con game of diluting the value of money. People see through such tactics; they recognize the signs of impending inflation. When we see Congress getting ready to pay for 40% of 2009 federal budget expenditures with money created from thin air, there’s no getting around it. Our money will lose its capacity to serve as an honest measure, a meaningful unit of account. Our paper currency cannot provide a reliable store of value.

So we must first establish a sound foundation for capitalism by permitting people to use a form of money they trust. Gold and silver have traditionally served as currencies — and for good reason. A study by two economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Arthur Rolnick and Warren Weber, concluded that gold and silver standards consistently outperform fiat standards. Analyzing data over many decades for a large sample of countries, they found that “every country in our sample experienced a higher rate of inflation in the period during which it was operating under a fiat standard than in the period during which it was operating under a commodity standard.”

Given that the driving force of free-market capitalism is competition, it stands to reason that the best way to improve money is through currency competition. Individuals should be able to choose whether they wish to carry out their personal economic transactions using the paper currency offered by the government, or to conduct their affairs using voluntary private contracts linked to payment in gold or silver.

Legal tender laws currently favor government-issued money, putting private contracts in gold or silver at a distinct disadvantage. Contracts denominated in Federal Reserve notes are enforced by the courts, whereas contracts denominated in gold are not. Gold purchases are subject to taxes, both sales and capital gains. And while the Constitution specifies that only commodity standards are lawful — “No state shall coin money, emit bills of credit, or make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts” (Art. I, Sec. 10) — it is fiat money that enjoys legal tender status and its protections.

Now is the time to challenge the exclusive monopoly of Federal Reserve notes as currency. Buyers and sellers, by mutual consent, should have access to an alternate means for settling accounts; they should be able to do business using a monetary unit of account defined in terms of gold. The existence of parallel currencies operating side-by-side on an equal legal footing would make it clear whether people had more confidence in fiat money or money redeemable in gold. If the gold-based system is preferred, it means that people fully understand that the purpose of money is to facilitate commerce, not to camouflage fiscal mismanagement.

Private gold currencies have served as the medium of exchange throughout history — long before kings and governments took over the franchise. The initial justification for government involvement in money was to certify the weight and fineness of private gold coins. That rulers found it all too tempting to debase the money and defraud its users testifies more to the corruptive aspects of sovereign authority than to the viability of gold-based money.

Which is why government officials should not now have the last word in determining the monetary measure, especially when they have abused the privilege.

The same values that will help America regain its economic footing and get back on the path to productive growth — honesty, reliability, accountability — should be reflected in our money. Economists who promote the government-knows-best approach of Keynesian economics fail to comprehend the damaging consequences of spurring economic activity through a money illusion. Fiscal “stimulus” at the expense of monetary stability may accommodate the principles of the childless British economist who famously quipped, “In the long run, we’re all dead.” But it shortchanges future generations by saddling them with undeserved debt obligations.

There is also the argument that gold-linked money deprives the government of needed “flexibility” and could lead to falling prices. But contrary to fears of harmful deflation, the big problem is not that nominal prices might go down as production declines, but rather that dollar prices artificially pumped up by government deficit spending merely paper over the real economic situation. When the output of goods grows faster than the stock of money, benign deflation can occur — it happened from 1880 to 1900 while the U.S. was on a gold standard. But the total price-level decline was 10% stretched over 20 years. Meanwhile, the gross domestic product more than doubled.

At a moment when the world is questioning the virtues of democratic capitalism, our nation should provide global leadership by focusing on the need for monetary integrity. One of the most serious threats to global economic recovery — aside from inadequate savings — is protectionism. An important benefit of developing a parallel currency linked to gold is that other countries could likewise permit their own citizens to utilize it. To the extent they did so, a common currency area would be created not subject to the insidious protectionism of sliding exchange rates.

The fiasco of the G-20 meeting in Washington last November — it was supposed to usher in “the next Bretton Woods” — suggests that any move toward a new international monetary system based on gold will more likely take place through the grass-roots efforts of Americans. It may already be happening at the state level. Last month, Indiana state Sen. Greg Walker introduced a bill — “The Indiana Honest Money Act” — which would, if enacted, allow citizens the option of paying in or receiving back gold, silver or the equivalent electronic receipt as an alternative to Federal Reserve notes for all transactions conducted with the state of Indiana.

It may turn out to be a bellwether. Certainly, it’s a sign of a growing feeling in the heartland that we need to go back to sound money. We need money that works for the legitimate producers and consumers of the world — the savers and borrowers, the entrepreneurs. Not money that works for the chiselers.

Ms. Shelton, an economist, is author of “Money Meltdown: Restoring Order to the Global Currency System” (Free Press, 1994).

Share or Bookmark

Hi Editor,

I love the article by John Silveira, If you don’t like it here why don’t you move to another country?

This article so aptly expressed what I so often feel – if people want to live in a country that is different than the USA then by all means move there, but leave us freedom loving Americans alone and stop trying to turn this country into something that is was not intended to be. As I see more and more liberties being under attack or taken away I become disheartened and wonder if anyone else feels the way I do. This article answered that for me and I knew I wasn’t the only sane person left in America!

Thanks for your great magazine, I found a copy at a health food store over 10 years ago and have been a fan ever since. I’m glad I’m not alone in my views and frustrations as of late.

Sincerely,

Anna Colbert

Share or Bookmark

About the only thing I don’t agree with [in Dave's editorial] is that Fox News is on our side, as an opposition to the left.

Fox is also part of the problem, as they appear to be conservative while leading us down the path of Fascism just as surely as the rest of the Mainstream Media.

In Liberty’s Cause,

Clell Adams
Alabaster, AL

Share or Bookmark