For the Federalist the Revolution was to turn the British colonies from the hands of the British Parliament (where Landed Nobility (conservatism) power, City of London power (conspiracy) and commoners (liberalism -- as represented by Cobden, Gladstone, Bright etc) -- where Rothschild control was uncertain because of the "rights of Englishmen" etc. and place them in the hands of an American aristocracy headed by representatives of City of London banks managing Rothschild interests.
The new American system -- still venerated and still concealed as to its true intent and effect - by the LaRouche Democrats most laudly -- but also -- through the Masonic network and other secret socieities of privilege in the conspiracy) operated by a hidden aristocracy of priviledge who took the high positions by dint of a great network of favoritism and family alliances -- a sort of merging of families into a "crime family" / "conspraicy family" with its own wider nepotism.
This is the essence of American government today as I interpret it -- an honest conspiracy theorist is freakishly good at interpreting systems, probably because fear of the threat posed by the things they have already uncovered sharpens concentration to dig out the rest -- at any rate, to continue -- the essence of American government is still Hamiltonian versus Jeffersonian.
The Constitution was written in Philadelphia (where I was born) with Jefferson over in France. Jefferson did not belong in France -- the business that took him to France was deliberate trickery to get him away from the Constitutional Convention. Jefferson contributed only an afterthought -- we call it the Bill of Rights.
But all this is background for my point in this note.
My point: The Federal Government should not own lands and should never have owed any land of the states once the territories became states. The government administered the territories -- as capitalists speculate and grab in "developing countries" under colonialism and imperialism - unprotected by the laws of the states. (Colonialism is having the tax payer and the settler pay the "start up costs" -- Imperialism is having the banks take over operations.) BUT once a territory became a state - the Federal Government should not have owned any land. The government should only own post offices and federal government buildings or the land on any land improvements the Federal Government should make -- for example if they ever finished the water projects in the Grand Coulee Dam area that would provide the entire northwest with energy -- if the Conspiracracy would suffer us to have it. Water could also be siphoned from the Pacific Ocean Death Valley (500 feet below sea level) which would provide the energy needs of southern California and render the most inhospitable region of the "lower 48" a small Mediteranian Sea (especially good if sea levels were really raising due to "global warming" which, unfortunately they are not -- think how Russia would benefit with open seas in the arctic -- but I digress (I am a single draft writer -- the moving finger writes and I never look back -- the mark of a politician for whom once a word has escaped his mouth he must live with it) -- not a word seller, who sharpens his product, re-does it, for an editor and publisher or his advertizing purchasing audience.) I put out raw material for other political people to use in a political war against the politics of conspiracy, treason and larceny -- about which I return
My point continued: The Federal Government should not have owned the land after a territory was accepted as a state -- and the corrupt conspiracy was able to take over with brute force that would be illegal under the constitituion (in the days when we had an Anti-Masonic Party and a States Rights Party -- because Henry Clay and Webster (both Hamiltonains working for Biddle's bank of the US and thus ultimately for Rothschild) -- So there never should have been big blocks of public land off limits to settlement (which was done only to keep wage slaves in the Eastern States from running off to freedom in a log cabin out west. The westward expansion was a race to escape the Rothschild power.
Note - Jefferson had an idea of more states or of the enlargement of existing states when he urged congress to buy the Lousiana Territory from Napoleon.
Back to conclusion: Historians often talk of the closing of the frontier as a landmark event in the history of the US. But I say there was a landmark event that has never been given sufficient recognition. The frontier closed up -- but it was not closed up because we ran out of land. The Federal Government ended American geographical expansion by closing off vast tracts of land in the west and what is now the midwest -- to prevent commoner development. One spots some similarities in the effect of this on the population to what happened when the British elites - as the City of London imposed its ways on the system of landed aristocracy -- with the closing of the commons (unowned by nobility) -- in the 16th and 17th century there was a a surge of independent farming by peasant tenants who in their own time grew crops and fed cattle on the commons --for example the Midland Revolt of 1607 against enclosure of land - the last uprising of the commons against the ruling minority -- interesting that the free land and the lower classes are both called "the commons" --. but by about the time of founding of the bank of England in 1694 that was ended -- farmers as (once) known in the US were no longer to exist -- the ruling class would own its lands and the tenants would work for their agribusiness. (as Franz Oppenheimer teaches us). Without being able to live on land as an alternative the children of the tenants had to go to the cities to work in whatever new industry they could find with no bargaining power (since they had recourse to no land to go back to). In the US the creation of government land -- the holding on of the land of the territories by government and only letting land be settled that fit the economic development plan of Eastern speculators -- with once in a while a Jeffersonian exception to the process, but usually not.
And so the end of cheap land came. The speculators got in early and became the great rent collectors of the cities that built up (instead of farms and villages as Jefferson hoped) -- wages are low in cities because of high rent (as Henry George teaches us) BUT the end of land development was not the completion of the Hamiltonian American System of Aristocratic Banker Control. There was still a lot of people who went west and got land and built homes and farms and businesses of their own -due to the Jeffersonian freedom that had broken out and was never completely snuffed out until ....
BUT now we are seeing the end of Jeffersonianism (or are we?) as the money power at last is swallowing up all of those remaining assets with the Rothschild sucking machine -- the money system -- the seeds were planted in the COnstitution by Hamilton and were watered til they germinated by John Marshall in the Supreme Court and came to flower with the two (central) Banks of the United States, the gold system and later the Federal Reserve System -- all with the mechanism of the money lenders actually controlling the token counters by which Americans effect exchange -- all of our dollars are their notes -- their loans to Americans -- and all of their loans give the borrower only the amount of the loan which is equal to the principal that must be paid back and creating no purchasing power/debt-paying power with which to pay the compound interest also due -- and so the Aristicracy of Money -- Rothschild power -- gets to foreclose all the farms and businesses that Jeffersonian Freedom made possible for the people to create and own themselves. This mechanism is explained with diagrams here:
Aug. 9, 2011