The “us” at Brock are all individuals who have suffered the impact, directly or indirectly, of the peculiar United States attitude toward its own nonresident nonaliens, and especially the perverse contortions of that attitude since 9/11.
That is going only by the Brock tag line. We attract some resident aliens, and various others as well.
The main “them” is the unsympathetic homelanders, above all those with power: the ones who manufacture a morass of so-called law; and the ones who enforce it, through taxation — the IRS, and through citizenship — Dept. of State.
A big part of our special agony is self-division. Each of us is also them, even after concluding the formalities of severing citizenship and filing the final paper. For those who stop short of that clear divorce, the duality is likely to fester, and to become ever more agonizing in times that will not even be “semi good.”
This is all leading up to the great discomfort that I experience in seeing what looks like a nasty case of ganging-up and scapegoating occurring at Brock. Almost a virtual lynching. A manufacture of a single them to pursue for various reasons.
I’m talking about the persistent and multiple harassments of ConfederateH. To the point of saying we don’t like you, why don’t you take yourself off somewhere else. You must be a troll. That piece of metaphoric language makes you look suspicious. You seem to be driving everybody away. You are polluting the unity (that we never had). Etc.
I would not say some of the things that CH has said. But then I wouldn’t say a lot of the things other Brockers say either. I cut slack. For problems like P we have sane and light-handed moderators, so far. Don’t forget either the great tolerance and good will shown to that idiot WhoaItsSteve. Because he was obviously younger and less experienced?
CH has also provided some very interesting content. Have you forgotten that? Too many Brockers seem to be getting a red flag in their bonnet and then going on blind attack. (Mixing metaphors can be fun, and provide comic relief?)
Two touchstones for the foregoing:
The privatio boni of St. Augustine. Réné Girard — “So, a paroxysm of violence would tend to focus on an arbitrary victim and a unanimous antipathy would, mimetically, grow against him. The brutal elimination of the victim would reduce the appetite for violence that possessed everyone a moment before, and leaves the group suddenly appeased and calm.”
Not sure why you referred to Whoa It’s Steve as an idiot. I think he’s a pretty open-minded guy. I recall his first post was quite negative … but then he read our posts, the side of the story that doesn’t get covered in theUS press, where he lives, and seemed to me he read our writings with an open mind, understood where we’re coming from, and got the big picture. From the posts of his I’ve read, I think he’s a good contributor, hope we hear more from him.
There is unity of sorts–“the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. Politically we come from naturally opposing camps, progressives, conservatives, libertarians, and thus, an unnatural coalition. We have a common foe, a government that wishes to assert jurisdiction over our finances just because at some point we all have or had something called “US citizenship”. I think that those who have participated in that unity want to feel part of a group–but when the group shows evidence of genuine diversity of opinion, some feel a need to try to steer the discussion away from certain uncomfortable directions–so that they can continue to identify with the group. So it is the perceived unity itself that seems to have driven the desire for conformity into an acceptable shape that is presentable to others to make the blog within the realm of what is fitting for public consumption, in the view of some.
To name two examples: (1) The Obama adminstration is racist against whites or (2) The Pennsylvania cops unlawfully beat up and imprisoned Robert Leone and the rest of us better watch out. Mentioning these items alone seems to have been wrong and embarrassing; There has been less concern to understand the reality and truth of the matters. We had debates over Bobby Fischer and Ken O’Keefe, each of whom had trouble with their renunciations, an obviously pertinent subject–but some thought that the main video evidence of their cases was too shocking and embarrassing to display at Isaac Brock. But I myself am resigned to the embarrassing facts. I believe that history will look unkindly upon this generation of Americans; we have all become victims of these embarrassing facts. Our goal should be to try to understand the facts and to do that we have to be willing to allow the conversation to go into embarrassing directions at times.
I’ve lost my US citizenship, so the “they” is clearly them Americans a group to which I no longer belong. I wouldn’t have any desire at all to go to their country except that I still have my Dad and my brother and sisters in the US.
I don’t think that “each of us is also ‘them.’” Personally, I severed myUS citizenship
several decades ago. I think most Americans were not yet born the last year I lived there, and it seems to be quite a different country now. I never felt a sense of self-division, as back then it just felt like changing one’s membership, so to speak, from one good, friendly country to another. Now, it feels like I’m being harassed/maligned by a foreign country. Also I’d guess that Brockers who were born accidental Americans may not feel like “them.”
I don’t like it when people talk about blowing things up, metaphorically or otherwise (unless of course, it’s fireworks or balloons).
Here’s my 2 cents. Brock can gain the most by being free and open. It must allow freedom of thought, enabling people to express their controversial views which are likely censured elsewhere. At the same time, it must be open, encouraging anyone to freely express their views by focusing on the issues and not the people. It shouldn’t matter who one is or which groups one belongs to. What matters rather is that one can collect the facts and organize them in such a manner that everyone can become convinced that the current political atmosphere could be heading in a better direction. Attacking people or pointing fingers of blame just turns people away. The focus should be on trying to figure out how “they” can helped to see the light. Being free and open is a huge challenge, maybe even near impossible, but it’s worth the effort.
Thanks for the support, usxcanada.
This is the first expat blog that I have felt comfortable enough to post
on, and it is great to be able to read and get feedback from people
with this common thread in their lives. It is similar to the kinship
one has with others who have lost a child, although I am sure there are
other catalysts.
I have been arguing the IBS case for over a decade, just not here. Most people just don’t want to know about citizenship based enslavement. You see, there I’ve done it. Hyperbole. Or is it?
I am used to being attacked in comments sections of blogs. I was last banned from Belmont Club for arguing vehemently with the neocons there about the wars, the empire, and Ron Paul. I would not be surprised if some ideal that is important to me comes along here where I “offend” so many people here that they start writing emails behind the scenes and then decide to chase me off. It has almost happened twice already with Mr. Mopsick and with racism. Don’t worry, I’ll get over it. But I will state my mind.
Ah ConfederateH, you don’t offend me. On the one hand, I share some of your views. But on the other I’ve gotten kind of cynical. I’m libertarian anyway and care little for the modern sophistry that informs American politics. I always like to say that the difference between Republicans and Democrats is like Coke and Pepsi. Nothing more and nothing less. Maybe a long time ago, the parties took firm stands on great issues like States’ rights, slavery, laissez faire economics, and peace and war. Now I only see the parties as one great self-serving morass of confused issues and principles. Not even worth an ounce of attention. If someone comes here and says the Democrats (or Republicans) are doing this or that, or will save the country or even help our expat issues, I’ll just shake my head and pity this person who has let themselves become beholden to mainstream 24/7 media.
Having lived abroad for so long and being able to peer back inside the US from the outside, all the silliness, political polarization, and self-deception is in full evidence. Definitely not the same country I once lived in — or was it… I was definitely young and naive back then. So maybe I had on a different pair of goggles than today 😉
I’m happy that IBS lives on, has such well-informed participants, and provides me with another solid outlet to witness first hand the evolving, silly policies of the US government.
First, I believe that US-Resident is much better than “homelander”. At least for me, the US is not my homeland anymore. (I cringe everytime someone uses that word).
Confederate, with your comments on race relations, you see the US perspective, but the world is a pretty big place with lots of different races. The US is not the center of the universe. AND you know how the media is, they pick one little thing, and they can spin the story to apply to all of us, as they have been doing for years.
You really seem so “American” that I have a hard time believing that you have lived 30 years outside of the US. Until I see otherwise, to me you are still guarding bridges.
For me, “homelander” is as much a designation of US residents as a designator of the person using the term. The word is politically charged, and my usage of it puts me in the IBS/expat camp. Thus, I have no problem using it.
*Thanks Pacifica777, although I’ll admit to being kind of a dumbie or “airhead,” and sometimes lacking in the “common sense” area or so I’ve been told, but I don’t think I’m an idiot, I try not to be one.
@WhoaIt’sSteve…
I was just wondering the other day where you had been and how you had been reacting to the most recent celebrity sensational story of renunciation and how the narrative is being spun in the press. Does this register with any of your friends and coworkers, or is it just a story that we are particularly sensitive to? I think it probably is the latter, but just curious and not sure. Is “offshore” in their minds a bad thing, and so has effectively been branded as some terrible thing that only cheats and evaders use? You are my poll of 1. LOL
@ConfederateH…
I must admit I have reacted to some of your language and attacks, on the other hand I have some very good friends just like you and am tolerant of them, so should be tolerant of your views too. I just get tired of conservative certainty at times, even when I feel the same way on various subjects, but probably without such colorful language or hyperbole… LOL. I have been mostly Republican all my life until the NeoCon war machine and W turned me totally off. I generally don’t like name calling, and yet I fail in frustration at times myself, so there you go.. Me calling the kettle black! 🙂 Anyway, I must admit to looking forward to seeing what comment you have, and if it is going to amuse me. Often it does, even when I say nothing. Wouldn’t want you to leave, and glad to see WhoaIt’sSteve back too.
@Just Me:
“I just get tired of conservative certainty at times, even when I feel the same way on various subjects”
I actually consider myself libertarian, not conservative, although both ostensibly have a strong distaste for large government its just that “conservatives” are far less consistent on this.
My certainty is rooted in the belief that leftism is inextricably linked to a strong and overbearing government. Libertarians don’t ask anything of leftists, but leftists want to tax and control the behavior of everybody. Libertarians want no government strong enough that special interests can hijack it. Leftists want a strong and overbearing government that begs to be taken over by special interests and if we look at history of the left, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Castro etc we see how unstable and unpredictable they are. Of this I am certain.
Well said and I’ll add my .02 here.
I’m a conservative/libertarian these days but I was raised by hippies (my mother actually used to say things like “when the Revolution comes..” with a straight face) and there was always room at the dinner table for people with wildly diverse (and sometimes very extreme) viewpoints. Nonetheless it took me years to understand that when someone’s opinion start to make me queasy, that’s when I need to sit up and pay attention. The world does not always go my way, sharp disagreement is only threatening to me when I’m not entirely sure of myself or I’ve stopped really thinking and am doing nothing more than spouting received wisdom that’s calcified into sheer stubborn idiocy. So let the debate go as it will. No one here (least of all me) has a monopoly on the truth.
@ConfederateH…
Ok, I will accept you as Libertarian, as that is position that I can respect, and feel a lot of kinship with on personal freedom agenda level. The libertarians were against the Iraqi war, while the Conservatives were all gunho. The libertarians are against the war on drugs, and while the conservatives think you can force people not to ingest something. Libertarians are more of a ‘live and let’ live philosophy, and Conservative thought gets all muddled up with social issues and forcing of religious or social mores onto others.
As for Me, I don’t specifically put a label on myself, other than to say, I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative and that means I am more comfortable with Libertarian thought than what is identified as Conservative in America today.
There is much to respect and appreciate about the Libertarian thought, and I admire Ron Paul a lot even though I think he is in a corrupt party called the Republicans. He is a real man of principle and has taken consistent positions on government policy. However… as certain as you are about leftist overbearing government (and I can’t argue with you), I am not certain that I know of a time in human history where there has been a functioning society built solely on libertarian individualistic principles.
I think its strength is in the opposition to collective or authoritarianism impulses on both the Trostsky Left and the bootjack fascist Right. I find Conservatives in America just as over bearing with their religious social and war agendas as the FATCA Fanatics are on the left.
There is a constant battle here with Libertarians countering the ebb and flow or pendulum swings between what is labeled left and right in our politics. This is part of the natural order of things, I think. It would be terrible if the libertarian countervailing force was not present in our political spheres. In fact, it needs to get stronger, but I don’t necessarily want it to prevail either. I hope Ron Paul gets a voice on the Republican Convention floor and makes things uncomfortable for the Conservatives and finds some common cause on the left for antiwar and social issues.
How libertarianism would work in an Utopian world, I am not sure. I have never seen an example of it. We have seen examples of society without order or structure or institutions, but have we never seen a real libertarian society, have we? Surely, if it were a workable model for human society, somewhere in our history we would have examples of it to point too.
We are social creatures, live in cities and are not scattered around the planet in individualistic clusters equal distance from each other, so as not to impose our wills or wants on another while respecting theirs. The phrase “no man is an island” is a truism, and yet libertarianism as I understand it, seems to want to create that which has not existed before. Correct me if I am wrong, as I could be.
So, therein lies my uncertainty about what a Libertarian America would look like? Would everything be “fee for service”, tolls for everything, and would we all live in gated communities or barter for all our needs and wants? Would we all carry around gold bullion as a means of exchange? How would we deal with the imbalances in social standing, order, and power, and what would the life be like for the “least of us”? We are not all born into the world with equal talents, skills, or intellectual prowess. How would libertarianism deal with those issues? Would we let people who get sick, just die if they had no financial means to pay for their care? Would taxes be voluntary like tithe, but without the possible stricture of God’s wrath for not contributing our 10% It is these practical questions that always stump me when it comes to libertarian thought.
And don’t feel you have to answer. These are more rhetorical questions or muses for me tonight before I shut down this damn computer… LOL
@Just Me, I have lived for 20 years in a small Swiss farming village. One thing that has been impressed on me in those years is that small government is beautiful. Unfortunately even here it has been looted and Switzerland may well be beyond the point of no return.
The Internet simultaneously offers the greatest hope as well as being one of the biggest threats. The Internet makes so many new forms and efficiencies in government possible, the problem is the old power elites. Just today we have Putin shutting down Internet dissent, and that is what the west is doing with ACTA and so many other globalist initiatives. The recording industry has us sold out completely to the elites in exchange for strangling us with new copyright laws. Google, Facebook and all the social networks are working with federal agencies to subvert us. Many IBS readers would rather ban people and destroy their right to free speech than risk reading something that “offends” them.
I can empathize to a certain degree with someone with a debilitating disease although none of us can ever really know what it is like to be somebody else. If these same disabled people would empathize with me, they would have to admit that there is no reason for me living in Switzerland to be forced to follow a far more rigorous US tax compliance burden then they do when they are living in the US. But if they could empathize as deeply as they expect me to, they would also realize that stealing far over 50% of my earnings (when ALL taxes are considered) and threatening to throw me into jail if I decline to subsidize their “rights” is a grave injustice and violates my fundamental human rights to a far greater degree. They just need to read the declaration of independence, its all there!
@JustMe If I wouldn’t have come here to see what you guys were all up to, I never would have seen the story about Denise Richards it’s not getting many people’s attention, the big news story’s have been the heat, DirecTV vs. Viacom, and the Jerry Sandusky stuff.
Offshore doesn’t have any particularly positive connotations because it’s usually linked to outsourcing and that’s a huge no-no. Mixing offshore with Romney or as far as politics go, I live in “the” swing state so among my friends and peers nobody is talking politics because we get beat over the head with ads, already I could name you several websites for both campaigns by memory because of their ridiculous ad buys and it is only going to get worse heading in to the fall. I don’t think moving away, living away, or “offshore” as a personal concept is viewed negatively among my friends and family beyond the initial bewilderment of why anyone would want to live in some other country forever, if they think or know about living overseas it would provoke a moderate response I think, nothing too extreme.
@WhoaIt’sSteve
That was what I suspected. Thanks for your comments. I never watch TV anymore, but when I got back to my mother’s place last night, and she had the TV on, I do take note of what news is spewing forth and it’s focus. I saw/heard most of what you mention…
I see CBS is running a piece online about the Rich and Famous that renounce, much of it old news, so not sure why they are bothering. Maybe I should check CBS nightly news to see if they are going to run something…. The narrative is always the same.
5 citizens who left the U.S. to avoid paying tax
As I have mentioned before, I am not one of those that are renouncing, I am CCW, (Comply, Complain but Warn) but I can certainly understand why others make that decision, even the Rich and Famous. It is a Big world out there, and frankly America is no longer the only game in town. I am not America centric. I could be happy living a lot of places. New Zealand is one.
For a host of reasons, family and marriage being one of the big ones, I can see why folks would shed the Tax complexity and US penalty risk. It is a logical thing to do. Very very few, I would guess, actually wake up one morning and say “To hell with it, I am taxed enough all ready, and I am as mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.” Then jump on a plane to the nearest consulate to renounce. When you think about it, just looking at Romney, paying only an effective tax rate of 15%, why would anyone like him renounce. Maybe Denise Rich wasn’t able to avail herself of the same tax professionals that he did to limit his tax liability, and she certainly made a dumb mistake then moving to a higher tax country.
However, if you read the popular culture media that purports to be news, that is the impression they imply. Of course, the story is much more nuanced and complex than that, but with only 2 minutes of news time available for the subject on NBC at nightly, they leave the nuance to the commercial time. The tax savings narrative breaks down when you examine it closely. Instead we learn how to solve erectile dysfunction in soft romantic tones inserted between Pop Cultural fluffertainment items! Or find out about the new exotic medical condition that we must consult with our doctor right now, so we can get the prescription to solve the problem we never knew we had. It makes me cringe to watch. 🙂
@ConfederateH
Point taken, and well said.
“I can empathize to a certain degree with someone with a debilitating disease although none of us can ever really know what it is like to be somebody else.” — CH
Funny thing about me, I can totally empathize with someone with a debilitating disease and also someone living in poverty, for whatever reason. Maybe because I know that the fickle finger of fate can point at absolutely anyone at anytime and rescind their health or wealth or even both at once. Furthermore, my life would be uncomfortable knowing many people would not fair well at all in the “utopian” libertarian world. Ron Paul thinks it would all work out because charities would step in to help. I think not and depending on charity makes a person much less than the overused expression of “second class citizen”. I value freedom very much but it must be there for everyone, to the fullest extent possible, even if I have to chip in to make it so. Besides, I really don’t see how being taxed means a person’s hard-earned wealth (in some cases, in other cases not) is being drained only by those who received a bad roll of the dice. Taxes are used, or should be used, for many things which benefit all of us and I don’t believe for one minute that only private companies provide the most efficient solution when it comes to healthcare, utilities, transportation, etc. However, the USA is way out of line trying to extract taxes from those who reside outside its boundaries, thereby stealing from the countries wherein their income was generated.
I think the biggest problem is the corruption of politicians who in my opinion have become nothing more than puppets of big banks, big corporations and big agendas. They, with few exceptions, do not serve the people at all. There is however one politician who comes to mind who truly tries to serve the people of his country and he isn’t in “the West”. There will be people here having a heart attack when I give his name — Ahmadinejad. Before you keel over, at least take a look at a quick youtube video titled “What You May Not Know about President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad”. I find the man hard to hate but the media and politicians are convincing a lot of Americans that he is the devil incarnate, a convenient pretext for yet another war for profit and agenda. I think that the only true servants in our society should be politicians and after their term of office is over they should then be as free as the rest of us. That’s my “utopia” but I can’t really put a label on what I am, except to say for certain that I am a “work in progress” and still have much more to learn.
@Just Me:
As many on IBS likely know, the UK has a non-domicile (“non-dom”) taxation scheme that allows certain foreigners, resident in the UK, to pay taxes only on income/ assets brought into the UK. There has been a minimum non-dom tax of GBP 30’000 p.A. (which apparently rises to GBP 50’000 after 12 years under the programme). It is conceivable that Denise Rich qualifies for the non-dom tax scheme. If interested, here’s an overview plus a Guardian article on it:
http://www.hsbcprivatebank.com/perspective/non-domicle-status-new-legislation-explained.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/23/budget-non-doms
@Innocente
Ha ha… Boy! You do like to tread on dangerous ground mentioning the Iranian devil incarnate! Ha. I chuckle, because I have found him fascinating, especially with his own conflicts with the military and the ruling class in Iran. He is also provocative in his interviews, (I think I have listened to them all.) He is clever and endlessly smiling and polite, while withstanding some pretty agressive questioning by US reporters. He is good at engaging in some pretty thoughtful questions back to the interviewer. He does not conform to their stereotype of who they try to portray him to be.
Now, when it comes to his religious beliefs, well I find them as strange as I find Catholic, Mormon and Evangelical beliefs , hoping NOT to offend those that are religious here. I was raised in a very straight and conservative religious family, and even as a kid I found what I was being taught strange. Maybe there are some religious neuron synapses that are missing in my brain. Just like I don’t seem to have an addictive personality for drugs or alcohol, I don’t seem to have an ability to engage in fantasies either, …but I digress.
I have always been interested in the quote where he has been alleged to want to wipe Israel off the map, (assumingly using a nuclear bomb) as the evidence as to why we need to engage in a pre-emptive strike at Israeli insistence to prevent Mr. Evil from getting the nuclear bomb Iran must be creating, but we just can’t seem to find. Iraqi WMD come to mind?
Of course, that narrative of “Wiping Israel off the the map”, has become an unchallenged one often repeated in the media, showing the evil nature of the man. However the words that were translated to create this statement attributed to him don’t seem to line up with the reality of what he said. But never mind.
It was the rumor of the Century, now transformed into the CW endlessly repeated, but it just doesn’t seem to be true. Now, I do not speak Farsi, but the words as attributed, I sent to a close Iranian friend. He agreed that the translation was wrong. He said it spoke of Regime change (something America talks about all the time.) You can read it yourself and decide... Meantime, I will watch your video. Cheers
@ Just Me
Innocente may be wondering at your comment right now. I just realized our gravatar graphics are very similar. 🙂 I too am missing those “religious neuron synapses” and I also share your non-addictive trait but I do like to fantasize about a better world. I just know I have to be realistic about the possibility that it could get worse. It was long ago reported (with proof) at the alternative news sites that Ahmadinejad’s statement was not translated correctly but boy did the MSM pick up that erroneous ball and run with it for their own purposes! I can’t seem to figure out what “CW” stands for.
@Em…. LOL Yes, I bet she is! Sorry about that. I promise to pay better attention next time! CW = Conventional Wisdom.
@WhoaIt’sSteve If you are still around. I just read this today, and for some reason, thought of you… 🙂
To Make America Great Again, We Need to Leave the Country
@Em… For your reading pleasure. The Free Market has spoken, and it is rigged!
@just me. Good article by Elliot Gerson. Alternate title: Admitting-your-problem-is-the-first-step-to-fixing-it. As divisive as congress is, it’s no surprise that they would be so resistant to ideas originating outside of the US, after all, didn’t dubya set the tone with how the US would interact with the rest of the world? “You’re either with us, or your with the terrorists”, or socialists, or nazis, or freedom haters, or…
Career barnacles, indeed. Calcified, irritating, and a drag on the vessel-personified by legislators like Sen Schumer, who publicly misdiagnose the problem for their own political gain.