[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]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')tarting 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.

[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]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AmericanEmpire', 'T')he real ID sounds a lot like the mark of the beast.

[PrairieMule]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AmericanEmpire', 'T')he real ID sounds a lot like the mark of the beast.

[gnm]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Leanan', 'W')hy don't they just inject the chip under our skins, like they do with dogs and cats?

[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:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he 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.

[AgentR]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gampy', ' ')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.

[gampy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'a')nd at that point, we'll all be down on our knees begging God to create a police state for us to live in.

[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]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gampy', ' ') 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?

[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]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('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.

[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]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gego', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('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.