[Leanan]

Scary, but not unexpected. After the way they treated the protesters in NY during the GOP convention, the idea that they want to crack down even more is pretty unnerving.

But I can't say I'm surprised. It's what happens to societies as collapse approaches.

[NevadaGhosts]

Starting three years from now, if you live or work in the United States, you'll need a federally approved ID card to travel on an airplane, open a bank account, collect Social Security payments, or take advantage of nearly any government service. Practically speaking, your driver's license likely will have to be reissued to meet federal standards.

Real ID

The Real ID Act's identity cards will be required if one wants to drive, visit a federal government building, collect Social Security, access a federal government service or use the services of a private entity (such as a bank or an airline) that is required under federal law to verify customer identity.

It will be nearly impossible to live without such an ID. That creates a huge incentive for citizens and residents to get IDs and for states to comply with this unfunded mandate: If they didn't, their citizens and residents wouldn't be able to get access to any of the services or benefits listed above.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/08/12/ramasastry.ids/

Papers, please...

http://www.oilempire.us/fascism.html

[Leanan]

It's like Roger Zelazny's story, "My Name Is Legion." The programmer of the world's ID system leaves himself out of the database, and becomes the last person on earth who can be truly anonymous.

But seriously...how counterfeit-proof would this ID be? Would it be a disincentive to, say, illegal aliens or criminals on the run?

Or would it be as easily hacked as Diebold's voting machines? Will they be selling fake IDs on the black market, the way they now sell stolen social security numbers?

Call me a cynic, but I really wonder if they've thought this through. President Clinton was embarrassed at how easy it was for Mexicans to cross the border illegally. He ordered a crackdown...which has resulted in more illegals than ever. Why? Because it's so hard to cross the border now that instead of going back and forth, they're staying, and bringing their whole families to live with them. Requiring social security numbers for employees didn't make a dent in the illegal workers it was supposed to dissuade. Instead, citizens are getting their social security numbers stolen, sold for $40 and used dozens of times, often getting them in trouble with the IRS or the credit reporting agencies.

[PrairieMule]

Time to get one of these...

www.emvelope.com

[Leanan]

Why don't they just inject the chip under our skins, like they do with dogs and cats?

[AmericanEmpire]

The real ID sounds a lot like the mark of the beast.

[Doly]

The real ID sounds a lot like the mark of the beast.

No, because the mark of the beast is the same number for everyone, and ID is a unique number for each person.

[PrairieMule]

The real ID sounds a lot like the mark of the beast.

No, because the mark of the beast is the same number for everyone, and ID is a unique number for each person.

You go first...

[gnm]

Why don't they just inject the chip under our skins, like they do with dogs and cats?

OK, here you go! Sign up now and beat the rush!
Verichip Corp


-G

edit - bummer it appears they pulled the subdermal line in th US. They were implanting those up until 2005 I think. Still going on in other countries I believe - a spa in Spain, Mexican government workers, etc... Maybe they had a hard time getting the GPS in there. Don't worry it will be out again soon!

[gampy]

New on the boards here, but I have not seen any mention of the current administration's push towards the police state and the approach of the end of cheap energy.
I think it's safe to assume that the people who form policy in the U.S. are not ignoring the implications of peak oil. We do not hear much information on how the government plans to cope with it, but I have a theory that they are doing everything they can to prepare for it.
The more obvious preparations are military interventions, and placing military assets in the mideast. First, it was Kuwait (peak oil was known to the Cheney /Rumsfeld group even then.) Then Afghanistan. Now Iraq. Next is Iran. I think this is pretty evident.
Now, we have the War on Terror. Which is really just a way to justify some of the preparations for the peakoil collapse without alarming the population. The steady erosion of civil liberties and the militarization of the borders both north and south, are just prudent (in their eyes) ways of making sure the government can cope with the social problems sure to arise with the coming economic crashes.
I believe the government is planning for the worst case scenario, which is social chaos and deprivation.
I think the signs are there, but of course no one involved with this kind of policy planning would come on CNN and talk about it.

Instead of coming to terms with this "inconvenient truth", and mobilizing some kind of national strategy involving all sectors of the populace, I think they have just assumed that people will not be able to transform their lives willingly. They are preparing for war with not only opposing countries, but with their own populace.

Any thoughts on this?

Is there anything you see going on today that corresponds with a government trying very quickly to ramp up for a sudden need for a police state?

I can see the logic behind this. It does make sense in a way. Batten down the hatches and get ready for the storm. I think most politicians would give priority to preserving some semblance of central government over any other plans. That is how they think they can help the population best...by preserving order and government. Even if democracy as we now think of it is finished. I think I would prefer to live in a police state than complete anarchy.
Seems like the lesser of two evils.
Dictator rule vs hungry mobs attacking your permaculture islands.

Anyone see anything there?

EDIT: Just to prevent misunderstanding, the above line concerning the lesser of two evils is not MY idea....it was used to describe the government's mindset, among others. Sorry for any confusion. Should have worded that differently.

[AgentR]

Lots of folks see this, and a perusal of the Open forums will be show more threads on this topic than you could care to read.

My take on it is that the powers in the US have no need to resort to such inefficient and expensive methods.

Virtually every person in the US that would count for something in an insurrection is tied in to big mortgages, big houses, high rents, and extravegance the likes of which most of the world can only day dream about.

So the government doesn't really need to worry about "martial law" kinds of things.

The key, I think to their plans with regard to peak oil, is allowing a gradual increase in price of fuel that greatly exceeds core inflation and wage inflation, while simultaneously doing everything they can to keep the inflow rate of oil into the US steady. At some point, price can force demand down low enough that the economy will start to change,without going splat.

Thats the plan I sense.

Others disagree; but I think their disagreement is in large part predicated more on a visceral hatred of Bush, as opposed to any rigorous policy analysis.

[gampy]

Thanks for the reply...will definately check out the open forum for more on this subject. However:

The key, I think to their plans with regard to peak oil, is allowing a gradual increase in price of fuel that greatly exceeds core inflation and wage inflation, while simultaneously doing everything they can to keep the inflow rate of oil into the US steady. At some point, price can force demand down low enough that the economy will start to change,without going splat.

I hope I did not seem too much like a conspiracy theorist, or anti-Bush, anti-government weirdo.

It just seems too coincidental that putting helicopter bases on the Canadian border, certain aspects of the Patriot Act, this new fence they want to build on the Mexican border, as well other initiatives, just don't jibe with the reasons they currently give.

In all honesty, if I was involved in the planning for a permanent collapse of the economy, providing for the continuity of government and security would be at the top of the list. From what I have read of the more enlightened, and realistic scenarios, providing security for those who govern would be a prudent move.

I am not sure what you describe would be enough. I don't think market forces are robust enough to alleviate a problem of this kind.

I hate to be a pessimist, but the glass really is half empty.

[AgentR]

I am not sure what you describe would be enough. I don't think market forces are robust enough to alleviate a problem of this kind.

I don't know whether it will work either; I'm just suggesting what I think these various activities imply.

The key to true control of a population is to get them to WANT to do what you want them to be doing. What the folks in charge want people to do is go to work, move money, and pay to stay in a house or apartment. As long as they can keep that methodology running, they will do so.

If they can't keep THAT running, they'll never be able to cough up enough resources to initiate a true police state.

Keep in mind also, that as things get a little tough for Americans with our own internally overproductive agriculture, and several million barrels of domestic oil production; when we look out overseas and observe India, or Africa, people may very well get that "under seige" response going, very happy to keep the show running for just another week, by any means possible.

I hate to be a pessimist, but the glass really is half empty.

Long term.. I'm an extreme pessimist, but I think that part is a good fifty years out; and at that point, we'll all be down on our knees begging God to create a police state for us to live in.

[gampy]

and at that point, we'll all be down on our knees begging God to create a police state for us to live in.

Lol.

Anyways...I am curious if you see things happening today that might be construed as the first stages of a plan to provide for the security of the United States government should a peakoil collapse occur that would be overwhelming for the western economies?

I listed a couple of things, but I would be interested to hear of anything else that seems out of character for a country like the U.S.

I suppose it could be just a happy accident that as the end of oil approaches, so too do more laws that put more power in the hands of the executive branch.

Please understand...I am not actually opposed to this, per se. I am just curious if anyone out there is feeling the same or had similar ideas.

[AgentR]

First, you must factor in that the US is flush with food production, and has a very long run of at least 5mil bpd ahead of it. The difference of course is between what we want to use, vs what we produce internally, that difference is what gives us all such a cushy life here currently.

Chop oil down to domestic production only and a lot of stuff breaks; but not all. Food will still get produced, rail will still run, shipping will run, the military will still fly jets and drive tanks.

Government continuity wise, they have reasonable plans in place, mostly dating from cold war times; and they've discussed other newer ideas, but the end result of those ideas is usually that they make continuity harder, not easier. For instance, things work better, and are easier in a messed up US to just make the attempt at elections in Nov in the middle of chaos, and sort things out on the day Reps and Senators and Electors are accepted by the government. Its easier to ignore protestors than it is to round them up. Its easier to allow refugees to wander aimlessly to destruction or death, than it is to try and contain them. (The worthwhile ones being able to choose wisely between bad and worse without coersion, they'll go where they are asked to go.) Just shoot the looters and vandals, and don't worry about it.

All the border security talk and the recent legislation just provides a legal framework that aids in keeping the oil flowing for as long as possible, and should aid in taking the swell out of our population growth via illegal immigration.

[Carlhole]

Is there anything you see going on today that corresponds with a government trying very quickly to ramp up for a sudden need for a police state?

Apparently, you have entered the domain of Alex Jones at PrisonPlanet.com and InfoWars.com.

You could watch his latest film "Terrorstorm" for free online at:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 7579389947

The guy is a fog horn. He also thinks that Peak Oil is propaganda.
If you want a similar construction of events that includes Peak Oil, then you have to read Michael Ruppert but be prepared to catch alot of shit from people here at PO.com if you happen to agree with Mike; everyone loves to bash him.

If you like a more intellectual treatment of some of the subjects you mentioned, I would recommend the three books by Nafeez Ahmed:

The War on Freedom: How and Why America was Attacked, September 11, 2001

Behind the War on Terror: Western Secret Strategy and the Struggle for Iraq

The War On Truth: 9/11, Disinformation And The Anatomy Of Terrorism

And Richard Heinberg, author of "The Party's Over: Oil and the Fate of Industrial Societies" talks about some of these themes here:
Google Video: Oil, Smoke & Mirrors

[Jellric]

One of the first acts of the Bush administration policy-wise was to form Cheney's Secret Energy Task Force. One can only imagine what went only behind those closed doors, but I'm betting a large part had to do with Peak Oil. (If there has been a prior secret energy task force someone please let me know).

Yes, they know it and I believe it is correct to assume their current actions reflect this knowledge.

A police state may or may not be on its way, but the mechanisms for one are almost completely in place.

However, the very nature of peak oil will ensure a short lifespan for any type of centralized control over this continent.

[gego]

I think I would prefer to live in a police state than complete anarchy.
Seems like the lesser of two evils.
Dictator rule vs hungry mobs attacking your permaculture islands.

Just what this site needs, another person who needs a dictionary. Why do you assume that living without rulers means chaos or the absence of laws? The essence of the philosophy behind the formation of the US was minimum government. Ever hear of the idea that the government which governs least governs best; this is close to anarchy. It worked fine, but has steadily been eroded over the years precisely because of people who opt for more and more government and less and less freedom; maybe people like you.

I think you may have been indoctrinated into believing that anarchy is evil.

Let me point out that if mobs are hungry enough and able enough to attack a permaculture island, no dictator is going to stop them any more than the police prevent crime today. You have been reading too much science fiction if you think that roving mobs would stand a chance against a well armed, well entrenched rural population.

A guy who would opt for the illusion of safety from tyranny instead of the freedom of self protection needs his head examined.

Welcome.

[gg3]

It's a complete failure of will to assume the choices are anarchy or tyranny. And approx. 65% of Americans presently disapprove of Bush, including 30% or so of Republicans; so you're not a nutter to be one of 'em.

The Founders set up this whole system in the pre-petroleum era. We've survived a civil war, two world wars, and the cold war without descending all the way into anarchy or tyranny.

The wheels of tyranny have certainly been turning over the past six years and mischievous people have been afoot: habeas corpus, after all, dates back to the Magna Carta, and the Unitary Executive crap is half-baked theory with no basis in law or tradition. However the pendulum is about to swing, and even hardcore Reaganites such as Richard Viguerie and one of Reagan's speech writers are giving it a push. There is a landslide majority about to vote for significant change, as significant as the Republican sweep in 1994.

If, on the day after elections, we hear the mainstream media saying "Gee whiz, the pre-election polls and the exit polls were all wrong...." then I suppose we're over the edge (Just Say Diebold!). Otherwise I'll stick with the view that our political goose is not cooked yet.

"Maybe Christmas, he thought, doesn't come from a store.
Maybe Christmas, he though, means a little bit more..."

-Dr. Seuss, The Grinch who Stole Christmas.

[gampy]

I think I would prefer to live in a police state than complete anarchy.
Seems like the lesser of two evils.
Dictator rule vs hungry mobs attacking your permaculture islands.

Just what this site needs, another person who needs a dictionary.

Ok...my bad...I understand the classical definition of anarchy. A bad choice of words on my part. I don't want to argue with you about words and their colloquial usage, I think people get the drift of what I was saying. Instead of "anarchy", insert...chaos or riotous hungry mobs or whatever. That was lazy thinking and writing on my part.
I stand corrected.

I am not for one moment suggesting that living in a police state is optimal or desirable.
However, I am afraid that many people think it is...especially in times of severe privation and uncertainty. I have the feeling, to reiterate, that many of the policymakers, (not just in the U.S.) are choosing to go down that path, believing it is the only option available to save "The American Way"...whatever that means to them.

Hope you can add to the discussion, have you seen things or made any connections that might lend credence to idea? If not...that's cool.

I guess arguing about what kind of government, IF ANY?, we might have post oil-age was not the purpose of my original post.

Thanks.


EDIT: I am sorry, but I just don't want to get into a discussion of Libertarianism, Neo-liberalism, etc.
Big government, small government...blah blah blah. I just had an idea that maybe the U.S. is using the "War on Terror" thing for very pragmatic purposes...mainly getting ready for a shitstorm when the economies of the world collapse due to the effects of peak oil.