The Death of Liberty and Her Dollar
On Friday, March 18, 2011, a major blow was dealt to economic and political freedom by a federal court in Statesville, North Carolina. According to the FBI release:
Bernard von NotHaus was convicted by a federal jury in Statesville, North Carolina of making coins resembling and similar to United States coins; of issuing, passing, selling, and possessing Liberty Dollar coins; of issuing and passing Liberty Dollar coins intended for use as current money; and of conspiracy against the United States.
Those who collect coins, study monetary policy, or know the metals markets may already be familiar with the Liberty Dollar program. It was begun in the late 1990s and had been gaining steam in convincing merchants to trade in an alternative currency based on appropriate measures of precious metals. The official Liberty Dollar website was “Removed Due to Court Order,” but the good ol’ Wayback Machine still has a mirror of it here.
The Liberty Dollar may not have been perfect, but it was a well-arranged alternative to the current broken currency system, on top of being a numismatic novelty and a physical investment. It offered the United States a re-introduction to money that has intrinsic value, and in that it represented a potential threat to the Federal Reserve. If the program caught on, it might have unseated the economic powers-that-be.
Imagine what might have happened if Liberty Dollars had continued expanding and edged their way into the mainstream. Given the choice, would people opt for fiat paper that loses its value over time, or metal-backed currency that retains its value and appreciates against the fiat paper?
So serious was this threat that von NotHaus was, in addition to counterfeiting charges, convicted of conspiracy against the United States. He faces up to 25 years in prison. As reported by the Ashville Citizen-Times, U.S. Attorney Anne Tompkins, who prosecuted the case, had this to say:
We are determined to meet these threats through infiltration, disruption and dismantling of organizations which seek to challenge the legitimacy of our democratic form of government.
She also referred to von NotHaus’s actions as “insidious,” “a unique form of domestic terrorism,” and “a clear and present danger to the economic stability of this country.” In Tompkins’ words lies a very important message: opponents of the Fed are enemies of the United States and of democracy itself. If the federal government’s use of “war on terror” powers is any indication, this may represent the onset of a full assault on the freedom of currency-reform proponents. Ron Paul, be warned.
Democracy is not held together by all-powerful banks and economic chicanery. It is held together by the freedom of its participants to act on their own will in all matters—including economic matters. If anything, forcing an entire population to use debt as the exclusive medium of trade is a crime of the magnitude of von NotHaus’s convictions. It is the production and distribution of false money, and a conspiracy against the nation.
Who else but an enemy would arrange to saturate a country in valueless paper in place of its assets? Who else but an enemy would doom a national economy to a perpetual Ponzi scheme? Who else but an enemy would seek to swindle an entire country and its people?
Central banking is not a path to liberty, and the Federal Reserve is most certainly not a pillar of democracy. There is no semblance of freedom in it. Opposition to this long-term fraud is not insidious domestic terrorism; it is a form of patriotism. It is an effort of good will toward one’s countrymen, and in the case of the Liberty Dollar’s promoters, nearly martyrdom. Their noble sacrifice will not be forgotten.