Open Committee Toward Solutions On the Homeless Crisis

Here is a Thread where concerned Citizens may air their suggestions for Solutions to the ongoing Crisis of Homelessness in the United States of America. This Crisis is not - as President Trump has suggested - a situation that is peculiar to "sanctuary cities" that are run by "liberals" - Nor is it a crisis that began just a couple of years ago, as Donald Trump also has indicated.

Indeed, it is a Crisis that has been building for decades, now. The roots of it may be found in actions that Ronald Reagan undertook as soon as he became governor of California in 1966, and de-funded the Halfway Houses. The roots of the crisis lie in the philosophy of "benign neglect" that the right-wing Democrat, Daniel Moynihan, articulated when he began to work for Nixon in 1969.

I encourage Everyone who is concerned about Solutions, to enter into this Discussion. We may also request that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Doctor Ben Carson enter into the discussion - or at least listen in - and let us know what the current Administration has to offer in the way of long-term Solutions. -For we are concerned that the "clean places" where the Homeless are to be put not be "clean" FEMA Camps.

The fact that there already are "Camps" for the Stateless Refugees from Mexico and Central America along the Southern Border, gives us cause for concern on this score. Can I hear an Amen?

Here follows the Homestead Act of 1862. Ronald Reagan, upon coming into the Oval Office in 1981, abrogated it.

It needs to be re-instituted and amended, because there is a crying need for Land Reform in America. Furthermore, it needs to be adjusted with regard to the number of acres to be made available to applicants.

It would seem that one quarter acre - with a two-story 9' by 12' 'tiny house' in an intentional community for the Homeless - would be sufficient space for every homeless person.

Families ought to be able to obtain four acre parcels, in "intentional communities for families" in the near wilderness of former timber lands; Lands that were obtained by Fraud in violation of the terms of this Act:

Transcript of Homestead Act (1862)

CHAP. LXXV. —An Act to secure Homesteads to actual Settlers on the Public Domain.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any person who is the head of a family, or who has arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and is a citizen of the United States, or who shall have filed his declaration of intention to become such, as required by the naturalization laws of the United States, and who has never borne arms against the United States Government or given aid and comfort to its enemies, shall, from and after the first January, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, be entitled to enter one quarter section or a less quantity of unappropriated public lands, upon which said person may have filed a preemption claim, or which may, at the time the application is made, be subject to preemption at one dollar and twenty-five cents, or less, per acre; or eighty acres or less of such unappropriated lands, at two dollars and fifty cents per acre, to be located in a body, in conformity to the legal subdivisions of the public lands, and after the same shall have been surveyed:

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That the person applying for the benefit of this act shall, upon application to the register of the land office in which he or she is about to make such entry, make affidavit before the said register or receiver that he or she is the head of a family, or is twenty-one years or more of age, or shall have performed service in the army or navy of the United States, and that he has never borne arms against the Government of the United States or given aid and comfort to its enemies, and that such application is made for his or her exclusive use and benefit, and that said entry is made for the purpose of actual settlement and cultivation, and not either directly or indirectly for the use or benefit of any other person or persons whomsoever; and upon filing the said affidavit with the register or receiver, and on payment of ten dollars, he or she shall thereupon be permitted to enter the quantity of land specified: Provided, however, That no certificate shall be given or patent issued therefor until the expiration of five years from the date of such entry ; and if, at the expiration of such time, or at any time within two years thereafter, the person making such entry ; or, if he be dead, his widow; or in case of her death, his heirs or devisee; or in case of a widow making such entry, her heirs or devisee, in case of her death ; shall. prove by two credible witnesses that he, she, or they have resided upon or cultivated the same for the term of five years immediately succeeding the time of filing the affidavit aforesaid, and shall make affidavit that no part of said land has been alienated, and that he has borne rue allegiance to the Government of the United States ; then, in such case, he, she, or they, if at that time a citizen of the United States, shall be entitled to a patent, as in other cases provided for by law: And provided, further, That in case of the death of both father and mother, leaving an Infant child, or children, under twenty-one years of age, the right and fee shall ensure to the benefit of said infant child or children ; and the executor, administrator, or guardian may, at any time within two years after the death of the surviving parent, and in accordance with the laws of the State in which such children for the time being have their domicil, sell said land for the benefit of said infants, but for no other purpose; and the purchaser shall acquire the absolute title by the purchase, and be entitled to a patent from the United States, on payment of the office fees and sum of money herein specified.


SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That the register of the land office shall note all such applications on the tract books and plats of, his office, and keep a register of all such entries, and make return thereof to the General Land Office, together with the proof upon which they have been founded.


SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That no lands acquired under the provisions of this act shall in any event become liable to the satisfaction of any debt or debts contracted prior to the issuing of the patent therefor.


SEC. 5. And be it further enacted, That if, at any time after the filing of the affidavit, as required in the second section of this act, and before the expiration of the five years aforesaid, it shall be proven, after due notice to the settler, to the satisfaction of the register of the land office, that the person having filed such affidavit shall have actually changed his or her residence, or abandoned the said land for more than six months at any time, then and in that event the land so entered shall revert to the government.


SEC. 6. And be it further enacted, That no individual shall be permitted to acquire title to more than one quarter section under the provisions of this act; and that the Commissioner of the General Land Office is hereby required to prepare and issue such rules and regulations, consistent with this act, as shall be necessary and proper to carry its provisions into effect; and that the registers and receivers of the several land offices shall be entitled to receive the same compensation for any lands entered under the provisions of this act that they are now entitled to receive when the same quantity of land is entered with money, one half to be paid by the person making the application at the time of so doing, and the other half on the issue of the certificate by the person to whom it may be issued; but this shall not be construed to enlarge the maximum of compensation now prescribed by law for any register or receiver: Provided, That nothing contained in this act shall be so construed as to impair or interfere in any manner whatever with existing preemption rights : And provided, further, That all persons who may have filed their applications for a preemption right prior to the passage of this act, shall be entitled to all privileges of this act: Provided, further, That no person who has served, or may hereafter serve, for a period of not less than fourteen days in the army or navy of the United States, either regular or volunteer, under the laws thereof, during the existence of an actual war, domestic or foreign, shall be deprived of the benefits of this act on account of not having attained the age of twenty-one years.


SEC. 7. And be it further enacted, That the fifth section of the act entitled" An act in addition to an act more effectually to provide for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States, and for other purposes," approved the third of March, in the year eighteen hundred and fifty-seven, shall extend to all oaths, affirmations, and affidavits, required or authorized by this act.


SEC. 8. And be it further enacted, That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to prevent any person who has availed him or herself of the benefits of the first section of this act, from paying the minimum price, or the price to which the same may have graduated, for the quantity of land so entered at any time before the expiration of the five years, and obtaining a patent therefor from the government, as in other cases provided by law, on making proof of settlement and cultivation as provided by existing laws granting preemption rights.
Approved, May 20, 1862.

[ Source ]

Soon upon the heals of the Homestead Act of 1862 being enacted into Law, the Pacific Railway Act of 1862 also entered into Law.

But, Whereas the Homestead Act had stipulated that no “person” could receive more than one hundred and sixty acres of the Public Domain, the Railway Act gave millions of acres of the Public Domain to the fictional Persons incorporated as the Union Pacific, Central Pacific, and Western Pacific Railroad Corporations.

Perhaps I am missing something. –But then again, perhaps it takes a Railroad Lawyer to explain the seeming contradiction.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

Here is a Thread where concerned Citizens may air their suggestions for Solutions to the ongoing Crisis of Homelessness in the United States of America. This Crisis is not - as President Trump has suggested - a situation that is peculiar to "sanctuary cities" that are run by "liberals" - Nor is it a crisis that began just a couple of years ago, as Donald Trump also has indicated.

---

Just this morning I was watching a homeless advocate decrying the lack of action by Gavin Newsom and Co. concerning the homeless crisis. He wanted Newsom to declare a state of emergency. If I find a link, I'll post it later. Anyway, Santa Rosa made the big time. I wonder where Sebastopol ranks.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/homel...ink/ar-AAHIRt4

Michael Shellenberger makes case for declaring state of emergency

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6087733089001/#sp=show-clips

Ben Carson Speaks

https://video.foxnews.com/v/60888694...#sp=show-clips

Quote:

---

Just this morning I was watching a homeless advocate decrying the lack of action by Gavin Newsom and Co. concerning the homeless crisis. He wanted Newsom to declare a state of emergency. If I find a link, I'll post it later. Anyway, Santa Rosa made the big time. I wonder where Sebastopol ranks.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/homel...ink/ar-AAHIRt4

---

That's a good link, Jefferson, with good information, and related links. I agree, Gavin Newsom should declare a state of emergency. IMHO, the Crisis of Homelessness in California, has reached the level that is has become a genuine "State of Emergency."

However, the "Crisis" is nationwide, and it cannot be fobbed off on governors of the states that are run by the Democrats, as the whole gist of the dialog in the following two links - from FOX News - tends to do.

Quote:

---

Michael Shellenberger makes case for declaring state of emergency

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6087733089001/#sp=show-clips

Ben Carson Speaks

https://video.foxnews.com/v/60888694...#sp=show-clips

---

In the first link, we have talking head, Forbes correspondent, Michael Shellenberger, pontificating that there are three separate issues that comprise the problem: 1) a major housing shortage; 2) a drug epidemic & 3) an untreated mental illness problem.

I would say that his Analysis is correct - as far as it goes... What is left out of the picture, are the facts that I stated at the top of this thread:

"This Crisis is not - as President Trump has suggested - a situation that is peculiar to "sanctuary cities" that are run by "liberals" - Nor is it a crisis that began just a couple of years ago, as Donald Trump also has indicated.

Indeed, it is a Crisis that has been building for decades, now. The roots of it may be found in actions that Ronald Reagan undertook as soon as he became governor of California in 1966, and de-funded the Halfway Houses. The roots of the crisis lie in the philosophy of "benign neglect" that the right-wing Democrat, Daniel Moynihan, articulated when he began to work for Nixon in 1969."

FOX News is still holding to Donald Trump's party-line on the nature of the problem. In answer to Tucker Carlson's leading Question about why is this happening in San Francisco, Shellenberger says, @ 1:55, "I think, at bottom there is an "ideology" behind this..." -And that is the note on which Tucker Carlson wraps up his little three-minute sound-byte. Take heed. This is not just journalism. It is also propaganda.

In the other link, Doctor Ben Carson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development says, at the outset, that the Crisis is not the responsibility of the Federal government to solve. That is an undistilled expression of the sort of twisted libertarianism that has become fashionable in the Republican Party; for which Trump & company have become the latest - and most dedicated - mouthpieces.

INMO, the Crisis must be solved by all concerned agencies - both Federal & State governments, working in harmony. Also, we, as citizens can not fob off all of the responsibility for doing something about it on 'the government' - because it is a humanitarian crisis, and it affects all of us. No man is an island.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

FOX News is still holding to Donald Trump's party-line on the nature of the problem. In answer to Tucker Carlson's leading Question about why is this happening in San Francisco, Shellenberger says, @ 1:55, "I think, at bottom there is an "ideology" behind this..." -And that is the note on which Tucker Carlson wraps up his little three-minute sound-byte. Take heed. This is not just journalism. It is also propaganda.

---

Thank you for your reply Mark. Of course Tucker probably has a bias. But propaganda can be filtered and the facts examined. Gavin has money for a Bullet Train and a Smart Train and for trips to S. America. He has the ability to address the homelessness issue with more vigor. He's not, never has and he should be held accountable. Don't gaslight on the Federals.

Gaslighting on the Federals? According to this guest on Democracy Now, housing is a federal issue and has been since the founding legislation: https://www.democracynow.org/“Nothing Ends Homelessness Like a Home”: Advocates Slam Trump’s Attack on SF & Homeless People

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:

Thank you for your reply Mark. Of course Tucker probably has a bias. But propaganda can be filtered and the facts examined. Gavin has money for a Bullet Train and a Smart Train and for trips to S. America. He has the ability to address the homelessness issue with more vigor. He's not, never has and he should be held accountable. Don't gaslight on the Federals.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by sealwatcher:

Gaslighting on the Federals? According to this guest on Democracy Now, housing is a federal issue and has been since the founding legislation: https://www.democracynow.org/

---

This thread was created for discussion of Solutions On the Homeless Crisis. Housing is only part of the problem. Across the board, Gov. Moonbeam and Galloping Gavin have done little.

I suppose the usual blame will be heaped on Trump. But the Homeless problem started long ago, before Trump. Can't anyone in this state accept some blame? The homeless problem hasn't been getting better. Doesn't this show that past actions (mostly inactions) are not working?

If you dissected normal you would find many levels of psychological dissonance.

Where is the dividing line between when you have mental problems or your just going through a bad day?

What happens when you have so much unresolved imediacies you can't live with people in small spaces and living in a tent is so much better than that.

So Campgrounds with Mechanics Quarters making small easily ported shelters as if NASA designed it.

When people have a privacy they can come out from somewhere. When they don't they are frantically needing it.

An interesting re-socializing project.

Providing Privacy

Maybe these people could be enticed to use their tech

https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/1/2...funding-launch

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Thad:

If you dissected normal you would find many levels of psychological dissonance.

Where is the dividing line between when you have mental problems or your just going through a bad day?

What happens when you have so much unresolved imediacies you can't live with people in small spaces and living in a tent is so much better than that.

---

Identify and evaluate.

What is a 1799 medical hold?

In addition to these holds, the law provides for a 24-hour 1799 medical hold, placed by a physician, in which a patient who comes to the emergency room for medical treatment and is then discovered also to have a psychiatric problem that requires attention. If necessary, a 1799 hold can be converted into a 5150 hold.

What I would like to do with this thread, as the rest of you toss information around as to where people who are homeless might camp, short-term; is deal with the long view: History & the Future – and attempt to arrive at a permanent Solution of the Quandary.

How did we come to this juncture in Time, where the Crisis of Homelessness is so acute in the United States? -When North America at the time of the first European settlers was such a vast and wealthy continent - in every way?

It has become a truism on the Left that the North American continent is “Stolen Land.” The other position – the one that the “conservatives” tend to take, is to say, as S.I. Hayakawa said of the Panama Canal, “We stole it fair and square.”

The romantic exposition of this position is perhaps best expressed in the book, The Course of Empire, by Bernard DeVoto, the Mark Twain scholar who taught creative writing at Harvard.

I do not know if the quotation – supposedly by Jefferson - about the children of those who conquered the continent, waking up homeless, is authentic or not (for its authenticity is debated) yet it has come to pass, as if it were a prophesy.

One thing is certain: the Republican Party, which traces its beginning to anti-slavery elements on the Frontier in Wisconsin, became the party of “Free Soil.” This meant two things:

A) That the lands West of the Mississippi should not become Slave States…
&
B) That the lands of the West should be made available for Homesteading.

The western states of Texas, Arkansas & Missouri were already Slave states when the Republican Party began, & Kansas soon became a battleground between militant Abolitionists like John Brown and equally militant pro-slavers in the years leading up to the Civil War. The Democrat Party in 1860, we must remember, was the Party of the South, and of Slavery.

Yet, although the Republican Party & Abraham Lincoln were firm on the point of limiting the spread of Slavery in the West, they had no problem with the practice of taking the Land away from the Natives. Thus we see an essential - and early - contradiction between the ideology and the practice of the more “progressive” of the two parties of 1860. It seems that the Republicans were selective in their racism.

This contradiction continued after the Civil War, when the Union general Phil Sheridan - who was all for giving the freed Negro slaves “forty acres and a mule” in Kansas, pushed westward with the Union Army through Indian country in Nebraska, to make the West safe for the Union Pacific Railroad Corporation. The Union Army was not disbanded after the Civil War, and the Question has arisen in the minds of some just whose Army it actually was.

Thank you, Mayacaman. Quite recently, out of my dismay and sorrow occasioned by the reign of Trump has come the realization that this time is quite probably the natural progression of what the European invaders have brought to this country. In Sebastopol-speak, it's karma, straight up.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

What I would like to do with this thread, as the rest of you toss information around as to where people who are homeless might camp, short-term; is deal with the long view: History & the Future – and attempt to arrive at a permanent Solution of the Quandary.

How did we come to this juncture in Time, where the Crisis of Homelessness is so acute in the United States? -When North America at the time of the first European settlers was such a vast and wealthy continent - in every way?

It has become a truism on the Left that the North American continent is “Stolen Land.” The other position – the one that the “conservatives” tend to take, is to say, as S.I. Hayakawa said of the Panama Canal, “We stole it fair and square.”

The romantic exposition of this position is perhaps best expressed in the book, The Course of Empire, by Bernard DeVoto, the Mark Twain scholar who taught creative writing at Harvard.

I do not know if the quotation – supposedly by Jefferson - about the children of those who conquered the continent, waking up homeless, is authentic or not (for its authenticity is debated) yet it has come to pass, as if it were a prophesy.

One thing is certain: the Republican Party, which traces its beginning to anti-slavery elements on the Frontier in Wisconsin, became the party of “Free Soil.” This meant two things:

A) That the lands West of the Mississippi should not become Slave States…
&
B) That the landsof the West should be made available for Homesteading.

The western states of Texas, Arkansas & Missouri were already Slave states when the Republican Party began, & Kansas soon became a battleground between militant Abolitionists like John Brown and equally militant pro-slavers in the years leading up to the Civil War. The Democrat Party in 1860, we must remember, was the Party of the South, and of Slavery.

Yet, although the Republican Party & Abraham Lincoln were firm on the point of limiting the spread of Slavery in the West, they had no problem with the practice of taking the Land away from the Natives. Thus we see an essential - and early - contradiction between the ideology and the practice of the more “progressive” of the two parties of 1860.It seems that the Republicans were selective in their racism.

This contradiction continued after the Civil War, when the Union general Phil Sheridan - who was all for giving the freed Negro slaves “forty acres and a mule” in Kansas, pushed westward with the Union Army through Indian country in Nebraska, to make the West safe for the Union Pacific Railroad Corporation. The Union Army was not disbanded after the Civil War, and the Question has arisen in the minds of some just whose Army it actually was.

---

[QUOTE=Mayacaman;229583]

Quote:

---

It has become a truism on the Left that the North American continent is “Stolen Land.” The other position – the one that the “conservatives” tend to take, is to say, as S.I. Hayakawa said of the Panama Canal, “We stole it fair and square.”

One thing is certain: the Republican Party, which traces its beginning to anti-slavery elements on the Frontier, in Wisconsin in 1854, was the party of “Free Soil.” This meant two things:

A) That the lands West of the Mississippi should not become Slave States...
&
B) That the lands of the West should be made available for Homesteading.

Yet, although the Republican Party & Abraham Lincoln were firm on the point of limiting the spread of Slavery in the West, they had no problem with the practice of taking the Land away from the Natives. Thus we see an essential - and early - contradiction between the ideology and the practice of the more “progressive” of the two parties of 1860. It seems that they were selective in their racism.

This contradiction continued after the Civil War, when the Union general Phil Sheridan - who was all for giving the freed Negro slaves “forty acres and a mule” in Kansas, pushed westward with the Union Army through Indian country in Nebraska, to make the West safe for the Union Pacific Railroad Corporation. The Union Army was not disbanded after the Civil War, and the Question has arisen in the minds of some just whose Army it actually

---

I must take issue with your rather romantic and partisan view of history. The Left (as the Party of victimization) has always found it convenient to fold, bend and spindle history.

Rather than boring you with a long winded dissertation on my part, I would ask you to view the following presentations concerning our history with the Native Americans.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K84c...ndex=121&t=34s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNHKDJzgqJg&list=PL4k16X62ciwJjIutBvm09rlx1rZE3NYJO&index=120&t=0s

Rather than boring us with a long-winded dissertation, you let Jared Taylor of American Renaissance speak for you. Here's what Southern Poverty Law Center had to say on this man:

"Taylor is the founder of the New Century Foundation and edited its now-discontinued American Renaissance magazine, which, despite its pseudo-academic polish, regularly published proponents of eugenics and blatant anti-black and anti-Latino racists. After the last print issue of American Renaissance magazine was published in January 2012, Taylor concentrated entirely on the magazine’s website, Amren.com. Taylor also hosts the annual American Renaissance Conference, where racist intellectuals rub shoulders with Klansmen, neo-Nazis and other white supremacists."

No time tonight to look at the second video but surely it's just more of the same blatant racism anchored in "They did it too! We did it better!"

[QUOTE=sealwatcher;229591]Rather than boring us with a long-winded dissertation, you let Jared Taylor of American Renaissance speak for you. Here's what Southern Poverty Law Center had to say on this man:

The Southern Poverty Law Center has lost all semblance of rational behavior. Known for their fundraising attacks and very biased operation, they shouldn't be taken seriously.

https://reason.com/video/the-southern-poverty-law-center-scam/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-southern-poverty-law-center-is-a-scam

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/2022301001/

Quote:

---

The Southern Poverty Law Center has lost all semblance of rational behavior. Known for their fundraising attacks and very biased operation, they shouldn't be taken seriously.

https://reason.com/video/the-southern-poverty-law-center-scam/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-southern-poverty-law-center-is-a-scam

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/2022301001/

---

ok, time for source-vs-source. Your sources are pretty biased, in the technical sense of the term. For example, even the USA Today article (to pick the least-ideological of them) embedded a teaser to this article in their opinion piece:

"In April 2016, my then 14-year-old daughter became convinced that she was my son. In my attempt to help her, her public school undermined me every step of the way."
.. with 'help' meaning: force her to accept female pronouns, etc. These sources are bastions of MAGA. Not really helpful in convincing the undecided.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

ok, time for source-vs-source. Your sources are pretty biased, in the technical sense of the term. For example, even the USA Today article (to pick the least-ideological of them) embedded a teaser to this article in their opinion piece:

"In April 2016, my then 14-year-old daughter became convinced that she was my son. In my attempt to help her, her public school undermined me every step of the way."
.. with 'help' meaning: force her to accept female pronouns, etc. These sources are bastions of MAGA. Not really helpful in convincing the undecided.

---

Not surprising that listed sources are discounted. Part of the D playbook. Still, I list three and you list......crickets.
How about John Stossel? He's a Libertarian in good standing. Should this source also be discounted?

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/john...lander-machine

Jefferson Donley, aka “cyberanvil” wrote:

Quote:

---

“Thank you for your reply Mark. Of course Tucker probably has a bias. But propaganda can be filtered and the facts examined. Gavin has money for a Bullet Train and a Smart Train and for trips to S. America. He has the ability to address the homelessness issue with more vigor. He's not, never has and he should be held accountable. Don't gaslight on the Federals.”

---

There is one point that I missed, when analyzing the following:

https://video.foxnews.com/v/60877330...#sp=show-clips


What is the name of the ” ideology” that Michael Shellenberger mentions in this three-minute sound-byte, and that Tucker Carson sounds off on?

Neither one of them cares to name it; though they imply that it is a “liberal” ideology, peculiar to Democrats. And Tucker Carlson engages in a little self-righteous moral indignation while he shows himself to be a “compassionate conservative.”

Again, it was Ronald Reagan who turned the dysfunctional and semi-functional out of the Halfway Houses, upon becoming governor of California in 1966. The so-called “conservatives” can not and will not deal with this “true fact” when it comes to addressing the issue of the current crisis of homelessness. I’m sure they would prefer that it be forgotten.

I suggest that the “Ideology” that these two men refer to obliquely, is common to Both of the Two Major political Parties in America.

I suggest that the “ideology” – which they prefer not to name - has its roots in the doctrine of “Survival of the fittest” that Herbert Spencer and Thomas Huxley extracted out of the Thesis of Charles Darwin back in the nineteenth century.

Jefferson Donley wrote:

Quote:

---

“I must take issue with your rather romantic and partisan view of history. The Left (as the Party of victimization) has always found it convenient to fold, bend and spindle history.

Rather than boring you with a long winded dissertation on my part, I would ask you to view the following presentations concerning our history with the Native Americans.”

---

To suggest that the white man did not steal, or ‘take’ the land comprising the North American continent from those who inhabited it is preposterous. There is nothing “romantic” about this notion. It is entirely factual, and rests upon the evidence of the trail of broken treaties.

Open that link and click on any one of those images, and you will find a wealth of information.

It is a Fact that every treaty save one that the White man ever made with the Native Americans was broken.

The one exception was the Treaty that the Quakers of Salem, New Jersey made with the Salem Indians. After three hundred years there were no pure blood Salem Indians left; they had all intermarried into the settler population, which was the original Quaker Colony that predated Philadelphia.

Now, the “romantic” view of American history vis-à-vis the Indians, as I have said, is the “conservative” viewpoint. -And it is far better represented by Bernard DeVoto, than by Jared Taylor of “American Renaissance.”

If you are intent on pursuing that course, cyberanvil, I suggest that you familiarize yourself with the books of Bernard DeVoto, the Mark Twain scholar who taught creative writing at Harvard. He, at least, was a good writer and an authentic intellectual.

With regard to the second video-lecture: Stephen Molineux often makes legitimate points – whether or not one agrees with the gist of his lectures. And he has a point: the word “genocide” is a bit of a stretch in the case of the North American Indians.

But I am not speaking of “genocide.” We are speaking of Land – and the Land of North America was taken from the Natives by émigré Europeans through force of superior numbers and superior arms – as well as many, many broken promises.

In 1823, Chief Justice John Marshall, in a Supreme Court decision in the case of Johnson & Graham v. M’Inntosh, elaborated the Legal Doctrine of Discovery. In the words of Wikipedia:

“The discovery doctrine or doctrine of discovery is a concept of public international law expounded by the United States Supreme Court in a series of decisions, most notably Johnson v. M'Intosh in 1823. Chief Justice John Marshall explained and applied the way that colonial powers laid claim to lands belonging to foreign sovereign nations during the Age of Discovery. Under it, title to lands lay with the government whose subjects travelled to and occupied a territory whose inhabitants were not subjects of a European Christian monarch.

The doctrine has been primarily used to support decisions invalidating or ignoring aboriginal possession of land in favor of colonial or post-colonial governments.”

The lands lying west of the Allegheny and Appalachian mountains and east of the Mississippi River had already been made safe for Democracy by the time Justice Marshall rendered his learned opinion in 1823.

Thomas Jefferson had obtained the Louisiana Purchase for fifteen million dollars in gold from a cash-strapped Napoleon in 1803.

It only remained for the Union Army - which was not decommissioned after the Civil War - to march west under the firm hand of general Phil Sheridan, and secure the lands west of the Mississippi that Jefferson had “purchased” from Napoleon, and that Chief Justice John Marshall had proclaimed “ours” by right of “Discovery.”

Phil Sheridan had already proved his zeal and efficiency in the Civil War in his campaign in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, where he'd ordered his troops to blast & dismantle every single structure: be it barn, mansion-house, or bridge that was built out of stone.

I think it is fair – and accurate – to establish the Fact that the Lands that Thomas Jefferson purchased from Napoleon were inhabited by folks whose way of life was not altogether - shall we say “edified”? - by the process of dislocation. It is also fair to repeat the old {Native American} adage in this regard, “White man speaks with forked tongue.”

-Because, from the middle of the Civil War through the end of the nineteenth century, every single Treaty that was made by Washington D.C. with the Native tribes was callously broken in a matter of a few years – usually considerably less than a single decade.

Case in point: The Wind River Treaty of 1868

Here is what was promised.

Needless to say, the end results were considerably less. In fact, the ultimate “Res” was very, very small.

Here is what comes up in a search when you spiel “map, broken Indian treaties” in the search box @ DuckDuckGo. (my favorite Search Engine)

Thank you Mark for your Opine.

[QUOTE=Mayacaman;229678]


What is the name of the ” ideology” that Michael Shellenberger mentions in this three-minute sound-byte, and that Tucker Carson sounds off on?
He didn’t name an “ideology.” But since the present CA leadership is Democratic you can surmise. He does mention “vacuum of leadership.”
Neither one of them cares to name it; though they imply that it is a “liberal” ideology, peculiar to Democrats. And Tucker Carlson engages in a little self-righteous moral indignation while he shows himself to be a “compassionate conservative.”
It’s obvious that the present Dem leadership is lacking. Being equal opportunity, I’d like to blame the Repubs also, but since they haven’t had power in CA for decades that’s hard to do. Jan 1999 (Gray Davis) to the present have been all Dem. Arnold came in as a Republican with great reform ideas, but quickly turned into a RINO turtle and caved to the Dems in Sacramento.
Again, it was Ronald Reagan who turned the dysfunctional and semi-functional out of the Halfway Houses, upon becoming governor of California in 1966. The so-called “conservatives” can not and will not deal with this “true fact” when it comes to addressing the issue of the current crisis of homelessness. I’m sure they would prefer that it be forgotten.
It’s really not relevant to go back to Reagan. The farther back you go, the more miniscule the homeless problem was. But in the present (Gavin is so green) we have Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown as the poster child of inaction.
I suggest that the “Ideology” that these two men refer to obliquely, is common to Both of the Two Major political Parties in America.
Speculation, not relevant.
I suggest that the “ideology” – which they prefer not to name - has its roots in the doctrine of “Survival of the fittest” that Herbert Spencer and Thomas Huxley extracted out of the Thesis of Charles Darwin back in the nineteenth century.
To a degree you’re right. But don’t disparage reality. What has been happening in the distant past, present time and probably into the future is reality. You know, more than one political forum uses and also disparages “whataboutism” and here you give an example. Interesting, huh? Do try to forget partisanship and accept that the present leadership is bankrupt concerning the homeless. Maybe if Republicans were in charge there would be no improvement, but we can only guess. Focus on the present and demand action.

[QUOTE=Mayacaman;229679]

Thank you Mark for your observations.

To suggest that the white man did not steal, or ‘take’ the land comprising the North American continent from those who inhabited it is preposterous. There is nothing “romantic” about this notion. It is entirely factual, and rests upon the evidence of the trail of broken treaties.
The Left, being the party of "victimisation” would naturally label it as “steal” whereas the Right prefers terms such as “settle.”
Open that link and click on any one of those images, and you will find a wealth of information.
No thanks. I am aware.
It is a Fact that every treaty save one that the White man ever made with the Native Americans was broken.
There’s a point coming and I can feel it.
The one exception was the Treaty that the Quakers of Salem, New Jersey made with the Salem Indians. After three hundred years there were no pure blood Salem Indians left; they had all intermarried into the settler population, which was the original Quaker Colony that predated Philadelphia.
Now, the “romantic” view of American history vis-à-vis the Indians is, as I have said, the “conservative” viewpoint. -And it is far better represented by Bernard DeVoto, than by Jared Taylor of “American Renaissance.”
I’m a realist and you seem to be an apologist. The two rarely meet.
If you are intent on pursuing that course, cyberanvil, I suggest that you familiarize yourself with the books of Bernard DeVoto, the Mark Twain scholar who taught creative writing at Harvard. He, at least, was a good writer and an authentic intellectual.
I just know the point is coming.
With regard to the second video-lecture: Stephen Molineux often makes legitimate points – whether or not one agrees with the gist of his lectures. And he has a point: the word “genocide” is a bit of a stretch in the case of the North American Indians.
But I am not speaking of “genocide.” We are speaking of Land – and the Land of North America was taken from the Natives by émigré Europeans through force of superior numbers and superior arms – as well as many, many broken promises.
Point is, assimilated Natives are reaping the rewards of society. Those that cling to Balkinization are also. We even have an example right in Rohnert Park. You decry the past, but seem to be blind to the present. What do you suggest? Perhaps Native reparations could be added to the Democratic mix.

Jefferson wrote:

Quote:

---

It’s obvious that the present Dem leadership is lacking. Being equal opportunity, I’d like to blame the Repubs also, but since they haven’t had power in CA for decades that’s hard to do. Jan 1999 (Gray Davis) to the present have been all Dem...

---

I also am an "equal opportunity" critic - of both parties. That is my confirmed position. Mercutio said it best: "A plague on both your houses."

Quote:

---

It’s really not relevant to go back to Reagan. The farther back you go, the more miniscule the homeless problem was. But in the present (Gavin is so green) we have Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown as the poster child of inaction.

---

It is totally relevant to go back to RR. I'm going back to the Homestead Act of 1862, to offer a Legal Remedy. So I beg to differ. The past is prologue. Besides that, you are mistaken when you say "The farther back you go, the more miniscule the homeless problem was."

Not so. "Homelessness" first became a national issue in the 1870's. Then there was "Coxey's Army" back in 1894. There were also multitudes of homeless on the roads in the 1930's, after the Crash of '29. Multitudes. Back then, however, the problem was not so acute, since there was more space on the edge of the city - space for "Hoovervilles." This problem is recurring and endemic in Amerika.

Mayacaman wrote:

Quote:

---

I suggest that the “Ideology” that these two men refer to obliquely, is common to Both of the Two Major political Parties in America.

---

Jefferson Donley wrote:

Quote:

---

Speculation, not relevant.

---

Not speculation. How about I offer this as my confirmed opinion, based on observation.

Quote:

---

Do try to forget partisanship and accept that the present leadership is bankrupt concerning the homeless. Maybe if Republicans were in charge there would be no improvement, but we can only guess. Focus on the present and demand action.

---

Done. This one ( i ) am not a partisan to either of the two wings of the Party of Wall Street. I have long maintained that we live in a political Duopoly. And, though I have been a registered Democrat (twice) in my life, and voted for Billy Boy Clinton in '92, I soon came to regret it.

You are correct, Jefferson, on this point: That the present Democrat Party leadership is bankrupt on the score of doing anything beyond issuing temporary motel vouchers & offering handouts in the form of free lunches to the Homeless. When Willie Brown was Mayor of San Francisco, the issue came up big as to opening the Armory. He passed on it.

[QUOTE=Mayacaman;229680]

Thank you Mark for the history lesson, but how does it relate to homelessness?

Quote:

---

“Thank you Mark for the history lesson, but how does it relate to homelessness?”

---

Patience, Jefferson Donley, patience. I am getting there. First I establish the historical context, and then the reasonable ground of the Argument.

I have already supplied a few hints as to the Remedy: for a good portion of the Remedy is to be found in the Homestead Act of 1862 – which should be re-written and re-enacted in accordance with current conditions and the current State of the Union.

The Republican Party Platform of 1860 – the Platform on which Abraham Lincoln ran and was elected president stated:

“13. That we protest against any sale or alienation to others of the public lands held by actual settlers, and against any view of the free homestead policy which regards the settlers as paupers or suppliants for public bounty, and we demand the passage by congress of which has already passed the house.”

Thus we see, that the Republican Party of 1860 - which was at the time, the more progressive of the two parties {according to the old, classical definition of the word} - held to the principle of establishing Homesteads (read, Homes) in the wilderness of the West, for the dispossessed and underprivileged working men. (After the Civil War, this came to pass, in Kansas, for the Freed Slaves.)

Indeed, the Republican Party Platform of 1860 spoke to the needs of the families of the poor and downtrodden (to borrow a little Marxist Jingo.) Karl Marx himself, you may not be aware, established a correspondence with Abraham Lincoln.

The Republican Party Platform of 1860 was also adamantly opposed to the Extension of Slavery in the West:

“8. That the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom; that as our republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no "person should be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law," it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the constitution against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any territory of the United States.”

And it endeavored to speak to the economic needs of Farmers, Mechanics & Workingmen:

“12. That while providing revenue for the support of the general government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interests of the whole country, and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the workingmen liberal wages, to agriculture remunerating prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence."

All I am suggesting, Jefferson, in my recitation of American History, is that the “Grand Old Party” return to the principles upon which it was founded. I hope that Donald Trump and Doctor Ben Carson are listening...

[ TO BE CONT’D… ]

[QUOTE=Mayacaman;229693]

Thanks again Mark for another fine read. :hmmm:

Patience, patience, Jefferson Donley. I am getting there. First I establish the historical context, and then the reasonable ground of the Argument.
Sorry, but I really don’t play the captive audience role very well. Haven’t I related before that other pursuits limit my time here. You really only need to jump to the bottom line of your dissertation because…….well it’s not going to work. And another 411, my solution won’t be taking place either. And yet, my solution is the most reasonable, most likely to succeed and the most cost effective.
I have already supplied a few hints as to the Remedy: for a good portion of the Remedy is to be found in the Homestead Act of 1862 – which should be re-written and re-enacted in accordance with current conditions and the current State of the Union.
In 1976, the Homestead Act was repealed with the passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, which stated “public lands be retained in Federal ownership.” With provisions for homesteading in Alaska until 1986. Alaska was one of the last places in the country where homesteading remained a viable option into the latter part of the 1900s.

The Republican Party Platform of 1860 – the Platform on which Abraham Lincoln ran and was elected president stated:
“13. That we protest against any sale or alienation to others of the public lands held by actual settlers, and against any view of the free homestead policy which regards the settlers as paupers or suppliants for public bounty, and we demand the passage by congress of which has already passed the house.”
Thus we see, that the Republican Party of 1860 - which was at the time, the more progressive of the two {according to the old, classical definition of the word} - held to the principle of establishing Homesteads (read, Homes) in the wilderness of the West, for the dispossessed and underprivileged working men. -And after the Civil War, for the Freed Slaves. This came to pass, in Kansas.
Indeed, for the families of the poor and downtrodden, to borrow a little Marxist Jingo. Karl Marx himself, you may not be aware, established a correspondence with Abraham Lincoln.
The Republican Party Platform of 1860 was adamantly opposed to the Extension of Slavery in the West:

“8. That the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom; that as our republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no "person should be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law," it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the constitution against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any territory of the United States.”
And it endeavored to speak to the economic needs of Farmers, Mechanics & Workingmen:
“12. That while providing revenue for the support of the general government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interests of the whole country, and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the workingmen liberal wages, to agriculture remunerating prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence."
All I am suggesting, Jefferson, in my recitation of American History, is that the “Grand Old Party” return to the principles upon which it was founded. I hope that Donald Trump and Doctor Ben Carson are listening...
I fail to see your logic. Why should the homeless issue not be a state responsibility? I know that Democrats favor government control, oversight and in general intrusion by the big Federal government, but really! Moonbeam and son of Moonbeam need to suck it up and stop ignoring the problem.

sealwatcher wrote:

Quote:

---

Gaslighting on the Federals? According to this guest on Democracy Now, housing is a federal issue and has been since the founding legislation: https://www.democracynow.org/“Nothing Ends Homelessness Like a Home”: Advocates Slam Trump’s Attack on SF & Homeless People

---

Quite so.

cyberanvil wrote:

Quote:

---

In 1976, the Homestead Act was repealed with the passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, which stated “public lands be retained in Federal ownership.” With provisions for homesteading in Alaska until 1986. Alaska was one of the last places in the country where homesteading remained a viable option into the latter part of the 1900s.

---

Just because the Feds closed the Public Lands to occupation by humankind in 1976, does not absolve them of the responsibility of taking action today, when Homelessness has grown endemic and has become a national disaster & disgrace.

cyberanvil wrote:

Quote:

---

Why should the homeless issue not be a state responsibility? I know that Democrats favor government control, oversight and in general intrusion by the big Federal government, but really! Moonbeam and son of Moonbeam need to suck it up and stop ignoring the problem.

---

Mayacaman wrote:

Quote:

---

INMO, the Crisis must be solved by all concerned agencies - both Federal & State governments, working in harmony. Also, we, as citizens can not fob off all of the responsibility for doing something about it on 'the government' - because it is a humanitarian crisis, and it affects all of us. No man is an island.

---

cyberanvil wrote:

Quote:

---

Sorry, but I really don’t play the captive audience role very well. Haven’t I related before that other pursuits limit my time here. You really only need to jump to the bottom line of your dissertation because…….well it’s not going to work. And another 411, my solution won’t be taking place either. And yet, my solution is the most reasonable, most likely to succeed and the most cost effective.

---

No one is forcing you to be a "captive audience" Jefferson. No one. If you lack the patience to wait for the ultimate package I am preparing at the end of my series of lessons, you can leave the station anytime you wish to. The train shall arrive on time eventually without you.

I would appreciate it, also if you would not drop useless memes like the caveman one above. They add nothing to the dialog. Could you please delete it? I hesitate to call you a troll, yet your behavior as a kibitzer is borderline trolling.

Anyone who has ever flown over the North Coast Range in California, Oregon, or Washington State in a small plane has seen and can appreciate just how much of the terrain of the Pacific Northwest is empty of human habitation.

Much of it - far too much, indeed - is owned by private Timber corporations, which/who obtained hundreds of thousands of acres of the Public Domain by an elaborate system of Fraud, in the late nineteenth, into the early twentieth centuries.

Herein lies the solution to the "Homeless Crisis" : Occupy the Wilderness

It has been Looted from the Public Domain. The Timber Corporations have harvested generations of trees, and have made Billions upon billions of dollars off of it already.

I am not suggesting a lawless approach to this Occupation. It should be done decently and in order. But it should be done.

If the Federal government and the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) can be persuaded to make lands available, and to subsidize the establishment of intentional villages for the homeless, all well and good.

If it takes a group of concerned Citizens, and a PAC, armed with a battery of radical lawyers to take on the Timber companies, and wrest possession of the timber-lands currently held in "possession" by the Timber Corporations, then so be it.

We can not rely on either the Federal government =OR= the State governments to "fix" the Homeless situation in America. They must be goaded into action by the People - the middle class householders who still have homes, and the working poor; families who can handle the responsibility of a 4.444 acre parcel on former timber land.

The Homeless, also should be allowed at least the opportunity of a small 9 x 12, two story, earth-rammed block house with a fir ceiling, and a parcel of .49377777778 of an acre {that's almost half an acre} in planned, supportive, self-sufficient, agricultural communes, in the former timber-lands.

No one should be homeless in America. This land is a vast and rich continent - still. There is much empty space. It is a crime against humanity that so much of the Land of North America is owned by private, for-profit Corporations.

That this is so, is a serious violation of the spirit of the 1860 Republican Party Platform, the platform upon which Abraham Lincoln ran, for it stated:

“13. That we protest against any sale or alienation to others of the public lands held by actual settlers, and against any view of the free homestead policy which regards the settlers as paupers or suppliants for public bounty, and we demand the passage by congress of which has already passed the house.”

A campaign, how does it start, where does it start, what does it look like?

First thing to note is that the only population available with the time to do this is the homeless population.
Ever pondered the notion of "herding cats"?

One of the problems of letting someone occupy a piece of land, room, etc by someone who has had no personal space besides their backpack or vehicle to call home is the immediate territorial imperative that takes place which is a problem even to those with a lengthy history of sensible decisions.

Its why for a certain population the mobile solution is not only the most immediately provisioning solution but a re-socializing solution as one learns the ways of being a crew-member, it also provides the means of relocating away from those who do not choose to participate as well as creating its own publicity and bringing attention to another way of solving problems.

Vocational Academy à la carte I emphasize the cart, can you imagine the media effect of 100 people being funded for rakes arriving in a home depot parking lot with their assembly putting the question to Trump, We've got our rakes, where do we go? With interesting cottage industry ready as underbrush is cleared and to be used for fuel.
In Sebastopol is a place called Chimera, in Santa Rosa is a place called 180 Studios, these are Makers spaces, its a movement and full of fun

The Carrot that's needed to start a Pied Piper tour is a makers studio on wheels as part of the campaign.

The Pied Piper, contracted to get the rats out of town but as it turned out after the rats left town they turned back into humans
It seems that for the new dispensation any Nimby that votes no must provide a yes vote to an alternative or their no doesn't count.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

Anyone who has ever flown over the North Coast Range in California, Oregon, or Washington State in a small plane has seen and can appreciate just how much of the terrain of the Pacific Northwest is empty of human habitation....

---

Forty Acres Divided into Nine Parcels





4.444 - Acre Parcels for Nuclear Families

Here is my suggestion as how the former "Public Domain" may be reasonably allotted to the currently un-landed masses: families and single persons of the able-bodied and willing, working, dispossessed of America.

There are thirty-six square miles in every "Township" lying on a square grid on the map. There are six hundred and forty (640) acres in every square mile - otherwise known as a "Section." There are one hundred and sixty (160) acres in every Quarter-Section. -And there are forty acres (40) in every quarter of those "Quarter-Sections."

Each parcel of forty acres can be divided by nine into parcels of 4.444 acres, with a 4.444 acre "commons" in the center. Thus, Eight nuclear families may form a Commune to share 40 Acres, with a Commons.

= Thus, there may be as many as one hundred and forty-four (144) 4.444 -acre homesteads per every Square mile of turf. First come; first served. Bring your Kraal with you =

Q. How many Square miles of timber-lands in the Pacific Northwest have been burned over in the recent fires?

Q. Who ( =which corporations=) own(s) those thousands upon thousands of acres?

...This needs to be looked into...

What I am proposing, is that the Lands that are currently under the domain of the Bureau of Land Management (over two hundred and forty-five million acres in the lower 48 states) be made open to Homesteading. The lands that were stolen from the Public Domain in the manner described in the book by Stephen Puter, "Looters of the Public Domain" should also be made available for settlement by the People.

Every group of friends may bloc with their companions to press forward to make this happen. Naturally, it would be fitting and proper for folks of like affinity & like sentiments to occupy each forty acre parcel.

These may be considered "Communes." Each nuclear family -or- single person, willing to settle in the country should be allotted a 4.444 acre parcel. In order for this to happen, the Homestead Act must be re-drafted & re-instituted, in accordance with the current Situation.

Down the road from these Homesteads of the "working poor" should be established mini-homesteads for the "Homeless" who are not able to fend for themselves - the ones who have fallen through the cracks in the current "System" in Amerika.

Some of these folks would do well if they were offered, free-of-charge, something close to half an acre, with a 'tiny house' built from rammed earth blocks, with a fir roof & rammed earth tiles on the roof.

Those who are able to work, should be required to build their own 9x12 houses, and assist the less able-bodied and more dysfunctional in the construction of their tiny houses, out of rammed earth blocks. They should get points ( i.e. "money") for the work that is concluded; {not by the hour, but by the results.}

The "working poor" who live up the road - in the 4.444 -acre "homesteads" - may assist in setting up the quarters for the Homeless. It is all do-able. The technology exists to make it happen.

All that is needed are Alaskan (&/or "mobile-dimensional") mills, to make timbers out of the burned firs from the late fires - the firs that are still standing - & equipment to manufacture earth-blocks from the earth itself. Rammed earth blocks are easily created; only three (3) ingredients are necessary:

1) Earth.
2) Lime.
3) Water.

Truckloads of Lime may be shipped from Kansas and Missouri, where there is an abundance of Lime. It is all do-able. Folks with Green degrees from Humboldt State, who are adept at Perma-culture can find their life-work and a permanent home in the Process. They can become the mentors of the former veterans and more able-bodied among the "Homeless."

After the majority of the burned timber that is still standing has been harvested and milled, the hills may be planted with orchards of fruit-trees. Orchards that are tended, are far less susceptible to "wild-fires" than timber-lands that are not properly maintained.

What did John Lennon say, shortly before he was murdered? "There are no problems, only solutions."

If the Democrat Party wishes to embody this in their 2020 Platform =OR= If the current Democrat -controlled Congress wishes to move forward towards this as a "Solution" to the Homeless Crisis, they may. I'm not going to hold my breath - but they may.

If, on the other hand, Donald Trump and Doctor Ben Carson wish to redeem themselves as worthy heirs of the Republican Party Platform of 1860, they are welcome to take up the gauntlet, and run with this proposal.

Otherwise, I suggest, that the common people Organize and force the hands of those who up-hold the vested interests of the plutocrats who have stolen the Land from those who dwell upon it.

= A G A I N =

We can not rely on either the Federal government =OR= the State governments to "fix" the Homeless situation in America. They must be goaded into action by the People - the middle class householders who still have homes, and the working poor; families who can handle the responsibility of a 4.444 acre parcel on former timber land.

The Homeless should be allowed at least the opportunity of a small, 9 x 12, two story, earth-rammed block house with a fir ceiling, and a parcel of .49377777778 of an acre {that's almost half an acre} in planned, supportive, self-sufficient, agricultural communes, in the former timber-lands.

[ TO BE CONT'D...]

[QUOTE=Mayacaman;229712]

Just because the Feds closed the Public Lands to occupation by humankind in 1976, does not absolve them of the responsibility of taking action today, when Homelessness has grown endemic and has become a national disaster & disgrace.
Why do you insist on bringing the Feds into a State problem? Why do you dwell on history to substantiate a plan of yours that hasn't been laid out? Wouldn't it be better for the readership see concisely what you are proposing? Btw, CA has the money and the land to handle the problem.
http://publiclands.org/Get-Books-and...p?plicstate=CA
No one is forcing you to be a "captive audience" Jefferson. No one. If you lack the patience to wait for the ultimate package I am preparing at the end of my series of lessons, you can leave the station anytime you wish to. The train shall arrive on time eventually without you.
Yes, I will be stepping off the slow boat to China. Your laboured retelling of history is really not productive. We just wanted your IDEAS and not a history lesson.
I would appreciate it, also if you would not drop useless memes like the caveman one above. They add nothing to the dialog. Could you please delete it? I hesitate to call you a troll, yet your behavior as a kibitzer is borderline trolling.
I am shocked that you would limit free speech, used to make a point. The meme was not useless, but it looks like it went over your head. And your use of "labeling" shows a intellectual tenderness that is disappointing.

Homeless Community on Forty Acres





.49377777778 - Acre
Parcels for the Homeless

I did the Math, and the numbers work out on the Forty-Acre grid, if the Homeless are allotted .49377777778 acres apiece. This is almost half an acre.

Thus, each settlement - or commune - for the Homeless resembles the 4.444 -acre allotments of the Homestead parcels up the road - the settlements / communities that should properly be made available for nuclear families and those who can handle a parcel of 4.444 acres.

Dividing forty acres by nine you get nine 4.444 acre parcels. As before, in the midst of the forty acres there should be a Commons of 4.444 Acres. As in the Eight-parcel / eight family Homesteads up the road, each one of these Communities for the Homeless should be established with the intention of them ultimately becoming Self-sufficient. As I said before: "...planned, supportive, self-sufficient, semi-agricultural communes..."

Likewise, in the midst of these nine 4.444 acre parcels - which in the case of the indigent homeless, are divided again by nine - there is another Commons, specific for each "cell of eight." Thus there are Eight "cells of eight" on each forty-acre Parcel that is so subdivided in order to provide a Home for the Homeless. This makes a potential total of sixty-four parcels each with a "tiny house" for the currently downtrodden indigent poor on every parcel of forty acres.

[ TO BE CONT'D...]

This is a Collection of Tools & Resources

Here in good faith I offer what I hope may be the effective Playbook on how the Citizens may combine to Alleviate & End the Homeless Situation in America.

I am confident that the Legal Leverage exists to wrest many of the Titles to the Timber-lands away from the Timber Corporations that obtained the timber-lands of the West in the late nineteenth into the early twentieth century, through an elaborate System of Fraud, that is laid bare in the book, “Looters of the Public Domain” [1908] by one Stephen A. Douglas Puter, the self-proclaimed "King of the Oregon Land-Fraud Ring."

Here is a link towards obtaining a hard copy of the book Looters of the Public Domain - essential reading for any radical lawyer who is sincerely concerned about finding a Just Solution for the problem of Homelessness in America:

=AND= Here is a link to the free pdf of the book “Looters of the Public Domain”

The Democrat Party of the past several decades has not shown any “leadership” in the realm of solving the problem of Homelessness – but then, neither has the Republican Party shown any serious "leadership" on this score. And it was under two Republican Party administrations - those of Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan - that the Homestead Act of 1862 was ultimately ended.

The original Republican Party Platform - of 1860 – showed that Party to be the advocates of “Free Soil” – which meant, as well as being the party of anti-Slavery, the party of Free Homesteads in the West. Here is a link to the Republican Party Platform of 1860.

It was the Party of Abraham Lincoln that passed the Homestead Act of 1862 - which was the fulfillment of Plank 13 of the Republican Party Platform of 1860. Here is a link to that document; the Homestead Act of 1862.

It is my confirmed belief, and also the hope of my heart, that the Solution to the Problem of Homelessness - the problem that President Donald Trump and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Doctor Ben Carter, have so recently expressed concern about - can be ended, or at least seriously “healed” by the re-drafting, and the re-institution of the Homestead Act, in conformity & in adjustment with the current Situation.

There is no statute of limitations on Fraud. – And it was through an elaborate System of Fraud that the lands of the Public Domain were stolen by the Timber Barons of the late nineteenth century. Perhaps the will exists within the radical legal community to find the legal leverage to take on the timber corporations who “own” and are sitting, like the proverbial “dog in the manger” upon the Lands, that by right should be occupied by the Commons.

No Statute of Limitations on Fraud...

Whatever Happened to the Wilderness and the Frontier?

“There was nothing but land; not a country at all,
but the material out of which countries are made”.

—Willa Cather
My Antonia, 1918

When the first European colonists came to North America, it was a vast, verdant Continent that we would not recognize today. Relative to what it was like in pre- Columbian times, it has become a Wasteland.

So what happened? We all know a little about the original Thirteen Colonies, and how they were established – We are all taught some of that in our schools. We know that the Thirteen Colonies united to fight a Revolutionary War against Mother England.

Left out of those lessons in the school text-books, is the story of how, in the wake of the Pontiac Rebellion in 1763 at the end of the French & Indian War, the Bank of England, the Board of Trade, & the Crown and the Company blocked to sign the Proclamation of 1763 with the Iroquois Confederacy.

The Brits and the Iroquois had economic interests in common - to perpetuate the Fur Trade - and to keep the “wild colonial boys” east of the Allegheny/Appalachian ridge, so as not to deplete the raw materials of the Fur Trade - which was a big deal in Europe in that era.

The Brits had gone into the French & Indian War with their eyes open, and also fully intending to open up the Ohio River Valley to settlement after they had wrested New France from the French. But the Pontiac Rebellion changed all that, and it became expedient to agree with the Iroquois Confederacy that the Colonials were to be prevented from settling on the other side of the Mountains. This is the reason for the “Proclamation of 1763”

It was a Proclamation with a Promise to the Indians that was impossible for Whitehall to keep. The interests of the Merchants in London were definitely at odds with the land-hunger of the second, third, & fourth sons of the landed “Americans” in the Colonies - who became the Rebels in the Revolution. The young turks who made up the Continental Army were definitely more interested in acquiring Land for themselves than they were concerned about keeping the Fir Merchants in London in beaver pelts. Thus was lit the “long fuse” that led to the Revolution.

After Daniel Boone saw what was on the other side of the Cumberland Gap, it was all over. The Redcoats who were posted in the forts west of the Appalachians - the ones who received the fir pelts that the Indian hunters brought them - were not able to stem the stream of the poor Scots-Irish folks pouring into Kentucky and Tennessee. It became a River around 1774 - two years before the Declaration of Independence.

The Story of what happened on the Frontier {which, at the time, was Kentucky & Tennessee} from the time of the "French & Indian War" {aka the Seven Years War } (1756-1763) until about 1825, is an important Chapter in American History. It is one that most Americans know very little about. As Dylan said, “Look out kid, they keep it all hid.” They like it that way. We are most pliable when we are kept as ignorant as possible and know next to nothing about our own History.

We are not taught in our public schools that the Royal Proclamation of 1763 was just as important as the Stamp Act of 1765 in fomenting the discontent that led up to the Revolution. We are not taught about why Kentucky was called the “dark and bloody ground” during the Revolution {1775-1783}.

There were no major battles there; just a long bloody war of attrition between the English & their Indian allies against the Colonials {mostly Scots-Irish poor folks} who were willing to Occupy & fight for the Land.

Here are a few good Books on the Subject:

The Crucible of War: The Seven Years War, and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766

The Long Fuse: How England Lost the American Colonies, 1760-1785

The Trans-Appalachian Frontier: People, Societies, and Institutions, 1775 – 1850

How the West Was Lost: The Transformation of Kentucky from Daniel Boone to Henry Clay

A Way through the Wilderness: The Natchez Trace and the Civilization of the Southern Frontier

How the Indians Lost Their Land: Law and Power on the Frontier

Conquest by Law: How the Discovery of America Dispossessed Indigenous Peoples of their Lands

There are many lessons that may be gleaned from that pile of books. By 1825, the “Frontier” had crossed the Mississippi River. Daniel Boone himself – who had title to several claims around Boonesborough & Lexington, Kentucky lost all of his property in a series of Court litigation. So he moved on. He ended his days in Missouri. Later, in the nineteenth century, some of his descendants settled up in Mendocino County.

The same thing happened to most of the Scots-Irish poor folk whom Daniel Boone had led into Kentucky after he first set eyes on the Cumberlands in 1769. They had come into the territory West of the Appalachians in Violation of a Royal Proclamation. They fought Redcoats and Redskins to the death in order to settle there. They had cleared the land in a nearly impenetrable forest, composed of trees many of which were thousands of years old.

They had built houses from the timber of ancient trees they had felled with much labor; and spent much effort in clearing fields and making Farms. They had essentially wiped out the Buffalos of the Southeast by the Summer of 1782 -Yet they were to lose their houses and lands in Court, after the Revolution ended in 1783, because they could not contend with the Lawyers of the Rich, who became the Gentry in the nascent horse-culture in the Bluegrass region of Kentucky in the wake of the Revolution.

It seems that the Lawyers who were employed by the Gentry who moved into the Lexington basin after the Revolution - in 1783 - were able to eventually gobble up just about all of the Lands that the Scots-Irish poor folks had been able to wrest from the Wilderness. So the poor folks crossed over into Arkansas & Missouri, along about 1825.

This seems to be the consistent pattern throughout much of post-Revolutionary American History: Poor, un-landed folks were used to break the ground in the West, then dispossessed and forced to find - and Pioneer - another home further West...

This pattern & process is described very well in the {very important} book, The New Nation: A History of the United States During the Confederation 1781 - 1789, by Merrill Jensen, New York, Alfred A, Knopf, 1950

Check out the links ! zey are footnotes; some very visual

[TO BE CONT’D…]

Whatever Happened to the Wilderness and the Frontier?

= Part Two =

During the 'Era of Good Feelings' {1817-1825} the amity within America was pretty much general. Relations between the Americanized people of European descent and the Native Americans was also at a high level of stability and mutual acceptance. In 1819 the United States of America gobbled up Florida in a land grab that was part imperialism / part retrieval of lost property. But, in general, Peace returned, after the end of the momentous & bloody Napoleonic Wars {which included, on our side of the pond, the War of 1812}.

One branch of the Cherokees in the Southeast willingly took on the ways of the White man: They acquired an Alphabet, found Jesus, went to church in little brown churches, and sent their children to learn about European history in little white school houses. Cherokee men put on britches, and worked on their own farms.

Out on the Prairie, in the lands West of the Mississippi River, the lands that Jefferson had “purchased” from Napoleon, the Natives roamed freely. They wore their own garb, and still practiced their old ways. Many Americans admired the Indians of the Prairie. They were regarded in Rousseauvian terms, as “noble savages.”

All of that was to change after the rise of Andrew Jackson, and the birth of the Democrat Party of 1828 – the Party of Andrew Jackson - the Party that morphed out of the pro-Slavery faction of the old Democratic-Republican Party of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.

Although there were “populist” tendencies in Jacksonian Democracy, there was also a dark side to it. The hero of the Battle of New Orleans in 1815 was a Slave owner, and a prolific Indian killer. Andy Jackson was also joined at the hip with the Real Estate Interests that wanted the South-east to be Indian-free – not to be confused with judenrein.

So, after much to-do and soul-searching among the more conscientious white folks who opposed Jackson’s Indian Policy – and there was considerable opposition - Jackson had his way; he was President after all, and the Cherokees, Choctaws, Seminoles, Creeks and Chickasaws were forcibly removed from their homes, and made to undergo the Trail of Tears.

A Treaty was signed, solemnly, and the Indian Nations were promised the lands of the Indian Territory in the West {the present State of Oklahoma} in perpetuity, for “as long as the grass shall grow…”

as above, the footnotes provide visuals

[TO BE CONT’D…]

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

---

Please Dr. History, stop with the lessons. What do they have to do with the topic YOU started? Action is needed, not off topic meandering.

https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/CDC/Homeless-Services/Homeless-Count/
https://d3926qxcw0e1bh.cloudfront.ne...d9ccf4b53e.jpg

Whatever Happened to the Wilderness and the Frontier?

= Part Three =

https://apushcanvas.pbworks.com/f/13...rants%20RR.jpg

If it may be said of Andrew Jackson, that he had a “dark side” it may also be said of Abraham Lincoln – a far greater and more complex individual - that he also had a dark side.

The Republican Party, going back to 1856, when it rose from the ruins of the Whig Party, always contained within itself a fundamental contradiction: Simultaneously, it was the Party of Northern Capitalists, Industrialists, and Railroad Barons (in other words, of Wall Street) but it was also the party of radical “Western Progressives,” who tended to be “Free-Soilers” and Abolitionists.

Ultimately, the Wall Street faction within the Republican Party prevailed over the Progressive faction… It is ironic that the Republican Party Platform of 1860 promoted the Homestead Act, yet it was the Republican administrations of Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan under which the Homestead Act finally was terminated.

Hard on the heals of the Homestead Act of 1862, came the Pacific Railway Act of 1862, which gave away millions of acres of the Public Domain to the Railroad corporations. It seems clear that the provisions of the Pacific Railway Act themselves violated the terms of the Homestead Act, which immediately preceded it.

During the period that Mark Twain called the “Gilded Age” in the late nineteenth century, the Homestead Act of 1862 was violated through a system of institutional fraud under which millions of acres of the public domain were fraudulently acquired by the timber barons.

It seems clear that many of the families whose names appear in the roster of the “Commissioners of the Pacific Railroad Corporation” and the families of those who acquired title by fraud, to the remaining lands of the former “Public Domain” by the System of fraud described in the Book, Looters of the Public Domain are some of the same families.

Theodore Roosevelt, who quashed the class-action suits against these timber barons as one of his last acts as President, in 1908 was one of the Republican presidents whose decisive actions, in closing the American Frontier to Homesteading by the commons led to the current “Crisis of Homelessness” in America today.

Cyberanvil wrote:

Quote:

---

Please Dr. History, stop with the lessons. What do they have to do with the topic YOU started? Action is needed, not off topic meandering.

---

In the course of these "lessons" Jeferson Donley, I am answering the Big Question "Whatever Happened to the Wilderness and The Frontier ?"

I am establishing the Facts about where it went...

How that the Wild West, which was "purchased" with gold by the Federal government, paid to the French (1803) and Mexican governments (1848), and gotten by those governments through some erroneous European notion of divine right of kings, Papal dispensations, &/or legal mumbo jumbo about the "Right of Discovery" wound up in the hands of:

A] The Railroad Corporations,
B] The Lumber Corporations, & after generations of logging, deforestation & looting, sold to:
C] The BLM, a (sub rosa) Delaware Corporation, and
D] The "Nature Conservancy" - a Crown Corporation (City of London) -OR-
E] The several States themselves...

Yes, the Land is there. The poor do not have to be dying of exposure to the elements on the streets of the cities.

I agree with you, cyberanvil, that the State of California could solve the problem of Homelessness in California, without any Federal involvement at all. For the state has available lands to do =OR= Allow others (private parties, or humanitarian groups) to do what I have suggested (Above) in posts numbers 32, 34, & 35.

But I question why you take the Trump party line, & put the whole responsibility for the "Crisis" on some unnamed "Ideology" which Tucker Carlson subtly implies is peculiar to the Democrat Party, when the larger picture of Federal malfeasance & long-term advocacy for Corporate ownership of the vast bulk of the continent has led to the current "Crisis" - and it has been a "bi-partisan policy" to say the least.

Let us consider the Question : "What is the justifying "Ideology" for the "Nature Conservancy" =AND/OR= the "Bureau of Land Management" ?

Thad, you wrote:

Quote:

---

A campaign, how does it start, where does it start, what does it look like?

---

If I tried your patience somewhat in my digression into the History of how the continent was gobbled up by the Rich, bear with me...

I shall answer your Question now, Thad. There must be an organized Program. The Homeless are not in a position to organize this, but they may certainly participate - indeed, they must be active participants...

The Homestead Act must be re-written in conformity with the current situation, so that eight nuclear families may share forty acres (See schema, post #32) -And that as many as sixty-four currently Homeless single people may share forty Acres with Commons, (See schema, post #34)

This program of this movement must be promoted, become known, and gain traction...

Then the State and Federal Governments must be pressured to move forward on this Program until it happens.

The city fathers of the towns & cities in the United States really do not want to have the homeless camping on the streets of their cities. Neither do the bourgeoisie. I don't really blame them.

It seems to me that the only just solution - and the opportunity for the classical "elegant solution" inasmuch as the burned over districts may be replanted (Watch this Video) - is for the Homeless & the able-bodied & willing "working poor, who are currently renters, to be allowed to Occupy homes & lands in the burned-over districts in the semi-Wilderness of the Pacific Northwest.

The formerly "green & rolling hills of West Virginia" & eastern Kentucky, that have been strip-mined & made barren may also be repopulated & regenerated in like manner. The barrens of Western Kansas - which are relatively flat - would be perfect situations for the subdivision of lands as I have suggested in posts #32 & #34, where the homeless of the Midwest & of Denver may also find pasture.

If there is a Public Will to make this happen - and it is in the Interest of Everyone - it should be allowed to happen...

And It can happen - Unless there really is something to the "conspiracy theory" that the intention of "UN_Agenda_21" is to drive humans out of rural lands, & settle them in cities. So far, the local governments are not doing so well in providing pasture for the multitudes of homeless in the cities, however...

Activists who are zealous to obtain homesteads themselves (4.444-acre parcels) must get on board and fight the good fight.

The fact that there are two (2) schedules of Homesteads to be made available in this Plan should mitigate the qualms that land-owners have about giving away a "free home" to "bums" or "ne'er-do-wells"...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

But I question why you take the Trump party line, & put the whole responsibility for the "Crisis" on some unnamed "Ideology" which Tucker Carlson subtly implies is peculiar to the Democrat Party, when the larger picture of Federal malfeasance & long-term advocacy for Corporate ownership of the vast bulk of the continent has led to the current "Crisis" - and it has been a "bi-partisan policy" to say the least.

---

And I question you as to why you are building a case where the premise is "bad Americans". I question why Gov. Moonbeam and Gov. Gavin can tout CA as having the world's 5th largest economy and having a budget surplus. Why Progressives feel the need to raise gas taxes to the 1st or 2nd in the Nation. CA has the money, push your representatives to spend some of it on the homeless problem and stop building Bullet and SMART trains.

On with the history lesson. Forgive me if I go dark for a bit.

cyberanvil wrote:

Quote:

---

And I question you as to why you are building a case where the premise is "bad Americans". I question why Gov. Moonbeam and Gov. Gavin can tout CA as having the world's 5th largest economy and having a budget surplus. Why Progressives feel the need to raise gas taxes to the 1st or 2nd in the Nation. CA has the money, push your representatives to spend some of it on the homeless problem and stop building Bullet and SMART trains.

---

The point of the history lesson was to give an account of what happened to the vast interior of the North American Continent & to bring us up to this point in time where there are hundreds of thousands of homeless souls, and millions & millions of uninhabited acres that could be put to better use than to be the property of corporations.

It is my contention that the problem of Homelessness - and a host of other problems as well - can only be solved by Land Reform. The Homestead Act must be re-instituted - with adjustments - taking into account the fact that no one needs forty acres these days. What the future settlers in the burned-out districts of the Pacific Northwest need is the opportunity to experience Community and to practice Mutual Aid.

The problem is both a State and a Federal Issue, Jefferson. There are homeless in every state; not just in California. There are also an increasing number of Homeless in Canada, these days. The "problem" of all the asylum seekers along the Mexican Border is also a function of people who have been made homeless and rootless in their own countries South of the Border. In every case, the "problem" can be solved by Land Reform - by allowing Pasture on which the Homeless may dwell.

By the way, your link, to the "Public Lands Interpretive Association" is a good resource, Jefferson. Thanks for the tip.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:

And I question you as to why you are building a case where the premise is "bad Americans".

---

why is the right so afraid of self-examination? When you're building a case, there's no THE premise. His point isn't to target the policy makers. But I think I understand what you mean - because the case he's building does imply criticism, that becomes the interesting squirrel. It's too hard to accept the conclusion, or even focus on it, when that might imply accepting the criticism as valid.

This is a good example of why people think the right is obsessed with their role as victims. They throw that charge at "the left". The key difference is that a group asking for redress of wrongs is focused not on their status as victims, but on ways to address it. The right just whines about how unfair it all is.

One Township = Thirty-Six {36} Square Miles

Here is how I envision a rural township (36 square miles) of rugged, burned-out terrain being lightly inhabited in the near future by humans.{hopefully} Each square within the block of 36 is what is known as a "Section" - or one square mile of turf. Again, there are six hundred and forty (640) acres in every Section.

The lettered examples: A, B, C, D, are one-hundred sixty-acre parcels made up of four parcels of forty acres. These 160-acre parcels - which may be thought of as villages - may be more frequent throughout the wilderness than I have depicted in this diagram.

The incidence of how many villages may be settled in the wilderness is determined by the availability of ground water for human consumption & agriculture and the relative flatness & suitability for building & habitation on the specific, local terrain.

Some of the forty acre parcels should be subdivided by nine, as described in post #32, making eight nuclear homesteads for single folks & couples to be made available as Homestead grants to the working, able-bodied, & un-landed souls of generation X.

About three times as many of the parcels of forty acres should be subdivided by 81, in order to create Communes for the Homeless, as described in post # 34, Above. Again, every village should ideally be established with the intention of it being self-sufficient, and self-sustaining. When wisely designed, human systems may run uphill.

There should be one forty-acre parcel of eight 4.444 acre parcels, with a central commons adjacent to every three parcels of forty acres dedicated to the Homeless. There should be social workers (retired is o.k.) living on parcels of 4.444 acres able to work among the Homeless camps.

There must also be carpenters and builders, and gardeners & gentle souls with all manner of Green degrees & homestead & earth-skills from Humboldt State & similar institutions throughout the Pacific Northwest. Such people exist. At the present they are scattered like sheep on a thousand hills. They could do well in such a situation & with such purpose. It does take a Village.

Just Consider This:

( a very informative book)

The Bureau of Land Management was created in 1946, by merging the General Land Office and The U.S. Grazing Service. It was created as a preliminary corollary & adjunct to the Hoover Commission Report of 1947, which advised the creation of the National Security Agency, and the Central Intelligence Agency. At this point in time {2019} the BLM has “oversight over 247.3 million acres (1,001,000 km 2). It governs one eighth of the country's landmass.” - (Wikipedia)

In 1976, thirty years after the creation of the BLM, the Homestead Act of 1862 was terminated in the lower forty-eight states. In 1987, the Homestead Act of 1862 ended in Alaska. Since then, the “oversight” over the formerly “Public Lands” has basically served the corporate interests of logging, mining, and grazing concerns – in general, corporate entities. Where is the human & social element in this equation?

If Tucker Carlson can pontificate about some unnamed “ideology” that has led to the Homeless crisis that we face in America today, perhaps we might do well to ponder the nature of the “ideology” that has determined that almost two hundred and fifty {250 *} million acres of the former “Public Domain” have been closed to Homesteading, or Occupation by human beings…???

{* That's one eighth of the Land Mass of the Continental United States }

-Especially when there is a crying need for homes for the younger generations, and for the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Homeless souls in America today. There are no accurate statistics on their actual numbers…

One Hundred & Sixty Acre Intentional Community





Four Parcels of Forty Acres, with Commons (C)
= One Quarter Section

This then is the sum of an ideal, self-sufficient agricultural village in the hinterlands of the North American continent. It need not be in the shape of a square, as I have shown in post #45, above.

What factors should determine the sites of these communities?

A] The relative arability and levelness of the terrain.
B] The presence of ground water to sustain the humans, animals & agriculture.
C] The availability & accessibility of the land.

Obviously, these qualifying conditions eliminate much of the two hundred and forty-seven million (247,000,000) acres of the Land owned by the BLM. But there are doubtless, still, hundreds of thousands of acres that are arable, accessible, relatively level & where water may be coaxed out of the earth. It is fitting that the land should have sufficient grade that a backhoe may dig into appropriate locations to obtain earth for the rammed-earth blocks.

Being in the quasi-wilderness, there should be a limit on the number of vehicles that can travel to the trunk highways, & town. Every parcel of forty acres should have one Backhoe, one Cinva Earth Ram, and one Mobile dimensional mill, and trained and competent operators who can teach others how to use this potentially dangerous equipment. This is the modern equivalent of “forty acres and a mule.” All of the building materials can be extracted –with care- from the materials at hand: earth & timber. There is no necessity for electrical or sewer hook-ups, when solar panels and out-houses do suffice. The outhouses may be of the movable kind and orchards may be planted over time.

Commons are an important feature of this Design: Building the Community Centers should be a priority. Every able-bodied person who receives a Homestead should be expected to build his/her own house –with the help of the Community– even as the Community Center is being built. Everyone should also be expected to work in the garden & in the tending of farm animals. In the deep country, if you don’t grow your own food, you can’t eat. Adjacent to the village, there will also be work: planting trees, and working with Nature to restore Nature from the ravages of fires &/Or mining.

This design for a rural village may be accomplished and implemented with or without the assistance of the Federal or State governments =OR= the Homestead Act being in place. Philanthropists, also, may step up as benefactors to buy land to set up pilot projects based on this model of a planned community. This model may also be employed by any group of eight couples who wish to pool their resources to purchase forty to one hundred and sixty acres and subdivide it as shown in this diagram. If they wish to take on Homeless souls they may be selective, and pick and chose from the destitute that fill the streets of our cities. The point is for every able-bodied person to become self-sufficient, and not only that, but ultimately productive in society at large.

I am hoping that folks in our government[s] are listening, and will see the wisdom in my proposals, and take note that a safe and “clean” place to provide low-budget housing for the indigent and homeless is in the burned out districts of the Pacific Northwest, the barrens of Western Kansas, and the strip-mined regions of Kentucky and West Virginia. There, they may not only find shelter; they may also be put to work in planting trees, terra-forming, and assisting Nature in her process of recovery.

I hope that Dr. Ben Carson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, will find it more compassionate and reasonable in his heart to follow this path rather than the broad road of "crackdown" & "internment" with regards to the homeless: 'Internment Camps for the Homeless'

An Open, Public Appeal to President Donald Trump and
Housing & Urban Development Secretary, Dr. Ben Carson:

Your Administration has shown signs and made statements to the effect that you are intent on finally doing something concrete about the current Crisis of Homelessness in the United States.

Since the Crisis has reached enormous proportions coast to coast, even in Washington D.C., west Baltimore, and other cities of the Megalopolis on the eastern seaboard, I ask that you take time to consider the Spirit of the 1860 Republican Party Platform, the platform upon which Abraham Lincoln ran. For it stated:

“...That we protest against any sale or alienation to others of the public lands held by actual settlers, and against any view of the free homestead policy which regards the settlers as paupers or suppliants for public bounty, and we demand the passage by congress of which has already passed the house...”

Yes, Mister President, and Secretary Carson, the Republican Party was once the Party of Free Soil.

I ask that you ponder those words and consider the fact that the Bureau of Land Management is, at present, sitting on "alienated land." - On over two hundred and forty-five million [245,000,000] acres of "alienated land" in twelve western states. In California alone there are approximately seventeen and a half million [17,500,000] acres of land owned by the BLM.

These lands were once known as the "Public Domain." During the period between 1862 and 1976, they were open to Homesteading by freeborn American Citizens - and to newly emancipated former Slaves also, Mr. Secretary. While many of the two hundred and forty-five million acres acres are not suitable for habitation and development into intentional communities and villages, many of them are. With a sustained program of deep drilling, down to the level of the Primary Water, even the desert can be made to bloom and become a suitable habitat for Humanity.

So I ask you Mr President, and you, Mr. Secretary, If You, Mister President, can propose a Seven Hundred and Fifty Billion [$750,000,000,000] dollar Budget request for “National Security” for the fiscal year 2020, perhaps you might take the time to consider what a small fraction of that vast allocation could do in alleviating the Housing and Homeless Crisis in our Nation.

Mr. President, You ran as a Populist. In 2016, you appealed to disaffected supporters of Bernie Sanders. If you are actually on the side of the People, show us. Make some moves. Surely there is a more humane way to deal with the Housing Crisis and the tangential and related Homeless Crisis than warehousing the homeless in former Correctional facilities and FEMA Camps.

Sincerely,
Mark Walter Evans,`
Freeborn North American

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

An Open, Public Appeal to President Donald Trump and
Housing & Urban Development Secretary, Dr. Ben Carson:

---

Rather than doing a Newsom shuffle, it's time to lay the blame on the people who created it. Newsom touts California's economic strength, so there must be money available. Newsom has seen the problem in close proximity and for a considerable time. He's of the party that claims to be of the working (and homeless) people. It's time to put the screws to whatever politician or Group that doesn't develop and act on resolving this crisis. The best observations are made by those closest to the problem. Time for Gavin to step up or step out.

environmentalprogress.org: Unwilling To Address Homelessness Crisis

Quote:

---

Rather than doing a Newsom shuffle, it's time to lay the blame on the people who created it.

---

Are you implying, Jefferson Donley, that I am pitch-hitting for governor Newsom? Because, I assure you, I am completely non-partisan. And “the people who created it” [the homeless crisis] are all dead. This thing has been a long time in coming.

We can blame Teddy Roosevelt, who as a favor to his buddy George Weyerhaeuser quashed the class action lawsuits in 1908 against the Timber barons - lawsuits which intended to subsume back into the jurisdiction of the Land Office the millions of acres of the Public Domain that the Timber Corporations had fraudulently stolen through an elaborate system of fraud.

We may blame Ronald Reagan, who upon becoming governor of California in 1966 immediately closed down the halfway houses. And who later, as president, defunded and slashed many, many social programs. Yes, we may assign a certain amount of the blame for the current crisis on things that Ronald Reagan did, both as governor and as president.

We may attribute a certain amount of responsibility for the current crisis on the 94^th Congress whose members did not read the fine print and passed the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 – the Act that effectively ended Homesteading in the lower 48 states.

But neither governor Gavin Newsom nor president Donald Trump exactly “created” the current crisis. –And, although both of them may have exacerbated it, so far neither of them has done anything concrete or tangible to alleviate the hemorrhaging of the social fabric that we are witnessing locally on the Joe Rodota Trail.

Quote:

---

Newsom touts California's economic strength, so there must be money available. Newsom has seen the problem in close proximity and for a considerable time. He's of the party that claims to be of the working (and homeless) people.

---

I agree that Gavin Newsom should do more. One thing the State could do is buy some of the burned-out timber lands from the timber corporations along the Mendocino coast, and help establish the sorts of intentional communities that I have detailed in this thread.

Quote:

---

It's time to put the screws to whatever politician or Group that doesn't develop and act on resolving this crisis.

---

I fully agree with that. But I disagree with the right-wing libertarian ideology of Grover Norquist – which is exhibited in the attitude of Secretary Carson when he says that resolving the homeless crisis is not the responsibility of the Federal Government. Because it is.

Solving the Crisis in Homelessness in America should be both a State and Federal matter. And only the Federal government has the authority to open up the Bureau of Land Management lands to Homesteading once more.

Most of the seventeen and a half million [17,5000,000] acres of BLM land in California are in South-eastern California; not too terribly far from Los Angeles, where there are many, many homeless souls on the streets. - And out on the desert, where it is relatively warm in the Winter.

President Harry Truman had a small sign on his desk in the Oval Office that famously proclaimed “The Buck Stops Here.” One may fault the man for any number of things, but I respect that aspect of him. Newsom and Trump are both passing the buck. Where will it end? I am calling on them both to do the right thing.

Bottom Line is this: No one should be Homeless
in the US. It is a matter of National Security.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

Are you implying, Jefferson Donley, that I am pitch-hitting for governor Newsom? Because, I assure you, I am completely non-partisan. And “the people who created it” [the homeless crisis] are all dead. This thing has been a long time in coming.
I agree that Gavin Newsom should do more. One thing the State could do is buy some of the burned-out timber lands from the timber corporations along the Mendocino coast, and help establish the sorts of intentional communities that I have detailed in this thread.
Solving the Crisis in Homelessness in America should be both a State and Federal matter. And only the Federal government has the authority to open up the Bureau of Land Management lands to Homesteading once more.

---

Response to Mark Evans, aka “Mayacaman”

Your postings have been, in many cases, long and varied. They have been entertaining and informative to an extent. To be kind and generous, I salute your vigor. But in my heart I feel that you’re following a different path than I. Your solutions and criticisms always seem to fall the same way. Bias, perhaps.

Your historical retelling of history in order to justify land giveaways is especially mirth some. Do you really think “communes” in the wilderness would be the answer? Asking "townies" to establish themselves in the wilderness, really?

Two people sleeping in the gutter is troubling. And what of 200 people sleeping in the woods? When did the great explosion begin? Was it really decades ago? Is that when the pee, poop and needles appeared in the streets of SF?

Keep posting, keep expounding, but so far you are not resonating with me.

Mark Evans, aka “Mayacaman” wrote

Solving the Crisis in Homelessness in America should be both a State and Federal matter. And only the Federal government has the authority to open up the Bureau of Land Management lands to Homesteading once more.

Most of the seventeen and a half million [17,5000,000] acres of BLM land in California are in South-eastern California; not too terribly far from Los Angeles, where there are many, many homeless souls on the streets. - And out on the desert, where it is relatively warm in the Winter.
---------------------------------------------

Perhaps the BLM could stop leasing land to the Burning Man Project and turn the land over to more useful purpose. Just a thought, what do you think?.
Btw, the desert is far from warm at night, but I suppose solar would solve that. :wink:

cyberanvil wrote:

Quote:

---

Your historical retelling of history in order to justify land giveaways is especially mirth some.

---

What is not so funny or mirthsome is how the railroad and timber corporations gobbled up the West, in violation of the Homestead Act. The Union Pacific Railroad Act of 1862 itself was a violation of the Homestead Act that preceded it by only two months.

Later, in the nineteenth century, the lands of the Public Domain in the North West were subjected to a systematized program of looting. Finally, in 1946, the Land Office was folded into the Bureau of Land Management, a Delaware Corporation.

Quote:

---

Do you really think “communes” in the wilderness would be the answer? Asking "townies" to establish themselves in the wilderness, really?

---

I have asked several folks on the Joe Rodota Trail if they would rather live on plots of close to half an acre and build their own tiny houses and have gardens in the near-wilderness of the burned-out former timberlands of Northern California and Oregon, and they have answered me emphatically, "Yes !"

So I think the solution might work for some of them. It would also be a way to go cold turkey for all of those who would choose that route.

Quote:

---

When did the great explosion begin? Was it really decades ago? Is that when the pee, poop and needles appeared in the streets of SF?

---

That's real recent, Jefferson. The proverbial shit hitting the fan, since DJT and his Budget cuts in Social Services....

Quote:

---

And what of two hundred people sleeping in the woods?

---

As I have written above, on this very thread:

"What I am proposing, is that the Timber-lands be made open to Homesteading. Every group of friends may bloc with their companions to press forward to make this happen. Naturally, it would be fitting and proper for folks of like affinity & like sentiments to occupy each forty acre parcel.

These may be considered "Communes." Each nuclear family -or- single person, willing to settle in the country should be allotted a 4.444 acre parcel. In order for this to happen, the Homestead Act must be re-drafted & re-instituted, in accordance with the current Situation.

Down the road from these Homesteads of the "working poor" should be established mini-homesteads for the "Homeless" who are not able to fend for themselves - the ones who have fallen through the cracks in the current "System" in Amerika.

Some of these folks would do well if they were offered, free-of-charge, something close to half an acre, with a 'tiny house' built from rammed earth blocks, with a fir roof & rammed earth tiles on the roof.

Those who are able to work, should be required to build their own 9x12 houses, and assist the less able-bodied and more dysfunctional in the construction of their tiny houses, out of rammed earth blocks. They should get points ( i.e. "money") for the work that is concluded; {not by the hour, but by the results.}

The "working poor" who live up the road - in the 4.444 -acre "homesteads" - may assist in setting up the quarters for the Homeless. It is all do-able. The technology exists to make it happen.

All that is needed are Alaskan (&/or "mobile-dimensional") mills, to make timbers out of the burned firs from the late fires - the firs that are still standing - & equipment to manufacture earth-blocks from the earth itself. Rammed earth blocks are easily created; only three (3) ingredients are necessary:

1) Earth.
2) Lime.
3) Water.

Truckloads of Lime may be shipped from Kansas and Missouri, where there is an abundance of Lime. It is all do-able. Folks with Green degrees from Humboldt State, who are adept at Perma-culture can find their life-work and a permanent home in the Process. They can become the mentors of the former veterans and more able-bodied among the "Homeless."

After the majority of the burned timber that is still standing has been harvested and milled, the hills may be planted with orchards of fruit-trees. Orchards that are tended, are far less susceptible to "wild-fires" than timber-lands that are not properly maintained.

What did John Lennon say, shortly before he was murdered? "There are no problems, only solutions."

If the Democrat Party wishes to embody this in their 2020 Platform =OR= If the current Democrat -controlled Congress wishes to move forward towards this as a "Solution" to the Homeless Crisis, they may. I'm not going to hold my breath - but they may.

If, on the other hand, Donald Trump and Doctor Ben Carson wish to redeem themselves as worthy heirs of the Republican Party Platform of 1860, they are welcome to take up the gauntlet, and run with this proposal.

Otherwise, I suggest, that the common people Organize and force the hands of those who up-hold the vested interests of the plutocrats who have stolen the Land from those who dwell upon it."

cyberanvil also wrote:

Quote:

---

Perhaps the BLM could stop leasing land to the Burning Man Project and turn the land over to more useful purpose. Just a thought, what do you think?.
Btw, the desert is far from warm at night, but I suppose solar would solve that. :wink:

---

Yes, Yes, & YES !

Here is an important link about how the Capital of Texas, Austin, has established a working model of housing for (some) of those who were formerly on the Streets:

Community First! Village


If this can happen in Texas, California can do it also.

If you would like, I could introduce you to Joe Basel who has worked on the Austin project. You can PM me.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

Here is an important link about how the Capital of Texas, Austin, has established a working model of housing for (some) of those who were formerly on the Streets:

Community First! Village


If this can happen in Texas, California can do it also.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by DBR2019:

If you would like, I could introduce you to Joe Basel who has worked on the Austin project. You can PM me.

---

Thank you David. The main thrust of this thread has been my advocacy for Opening up to Homesteading a {reasonable} portion of the two hundred and forty-five million [245,000,000] acres that the Bureau of Land Management has been sitting on since 1976, when what was formerly known as the "Public Domain" was closed to Homesteads for the People of America.

One of the major eye-opening experiences I have had when relating with the folks on the Joe Rodota Trail is coming to grips with the large number of Native American people who are currently Homeless in these United States.
It is truly amazing and truly tragic, too.

I truly believe that the People, United, can prevail. How is it that the B.L.M. can sit on those 245,000,000 acres of "Public Lands" in twelve Western States, and not allow We the People - especially the Native Americans among us - to dwell upon them?

"Forty Acres, an Alaskan, a Bobcat & a Cinva Earth Ram"

Mark Evans (aka Mayacaman) opines

Quote:

---

I truly believe that the People, United, can prevail. How is it that the B.L.M. can sit on those 245,000,000 acres of "Public Lands" in twelve Western States, and not allow We the People - especially the Native Americans among us - to dwell upon them?

---

Hold on to your hat, things could be changing. And not to your liking I'd guess.

The New Guy in Charge of Public Lands Thinks We Should Sell It All
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/j...ld-sell-it-all

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:

Hold on to your hat, things could be changing. And not to your liking I'd guess.

The New Guy in Charge of Public Lands Thinks We Should Sell It All
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/j...ld-sell-it-all

---

What else would one expect of Donald Johann Drumpf, the Businessman-President? Today, I ran the term "Bureau of Land Management" through the on-line Index of the State of Delaware, Department of State: Division of Corporations website. No luck. If the Bureau of Land Management ever was or is yet a Delaware Corporation, the facts of the matter are quite hidden from the Public. But does it really matter?

Harold Ickes was one of the Trustees of several of the Alphabet Agencies that were established in 1933 & 1934 as Delaware corporations. That is a matter of Public Record * -&- The BLM was established in 1946 by President Harry Truman and Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes. This set of coincidences proves nothing. Nevertheless, it is evident that the Creation of the BLM was presided over by a Secretary of the Interior who had definite Corporatist tendencies.

The General Land Office, dating back to 1812, was folded into the Bureau of Land Management in 1946, and the Homestead Act of 1862 was terminated in the lower 48 in 1976. And Now, the Businessman's President wants to "Sell off the Public Lands." Ha !

To whom, may I ask ? - The Chinese? And for what? - To pay off the National Debt?

It is quite a negative trajectory, this downward spiral. That the land of Turtle Island - which No one owned in 1492, because the indigenous peoples had no concept of "land ownership" before the Europeans arrived - is now off-limits to habitation by We the People.

There is great irony in this, and also that the push for the privatization of the former Public Domain is being promoted by men who claim to be the heirs of the party of Abraham Lincoln - who ran in 1860 on a platform of Free Soil.

But whether it is in fact, a Delaware Corporation or Not, the BLM is an entity that should be dissolved - or at least broken up the way I.G.Farben was broken up after the War - because the BLM has abrogated its lawful powers and has outlived its usefulness as any sort of Public minded, Civil institution, for all of its pretense of serving the ideals of "conservation" & "ecology." For many years the BLM has functioned in the interest of Big Business; not in the Interest of the American People -Or- of the EARTH...

= FURTHERMORE =

At least twenty-five million of the two hundred and forty million acres of the former "Public Domain" that the BLM currently "Possesses" in the name of the "People" should, by right of Natural Law, return into the possession of a resurrected "General Land Office" and become available for homesteading & habitation by We the People - including, of course, the sons and daughters of the indigenous peoples of all of North America.


* Scroll down to page 4048 for the beginning of the full text, in context.

I see in this verse: Ezekiel 34:18, a picture of what the Establishment in America has done with the Public Lands; formerly known as the “Public Domain.”

The Homestead Act in 1862 stated that no person could acquire more than 160 acres of the Public Domain.

But the Pacific Railroad Act of 1862, (two months later) gave every other Section of the Wild West, in a vast checkerboard, to the Railroad Corporations. O well, White man speaks with forkéd tongue.

Then, beginning in 1870's, the Homestead Act began to be systematically violated by an elaborate System of Fraud and Graft, which was countenanced by the powers-that-be. That was how the Timber Corporations got their Millions of Acres.

In 1908, just as he was leaving office, Teddy Roosevelt quashed the Class-action Lawsuits that were attempting to wrest the title to the Timber-lands from the Lumber Cartels that had acquired possession of such lands by Fraud, and in Violation of the Homestead Act. This he did as a parting favor to his buddy, George Weyerhaeuser.

In 1946, the Public Land Office was merged with the Grazing Service to form the Bureau of Land Management. Then, in 1976, they shut down the Option to Homestead in the lower Forty-eight.

And Now, Trump's new man at the Bureau of Land Management, William Pendley, wants to 'privatize' & sell off to private corporations the 245,000,00 acres {in the lower 48} that the BLM has been “managing” for the last 73 years. Meanwhile, roughly one million people in the United States are homeless.

Meanwhile, the POTUS and the Vice-POTUS and the whole hallelujah chorus in the Republican-controlled Senate pay lip-service to the Bible - as evidenced by their unctuous public piety during the State of the Union Address.

But, Alas, they have destroyed the Pasture of the Poor. The prophets of Israel, who were of old, would have had plenty to say to these hypocrites of Capital Hill. And, Alas, they would have been stoned...

Jeremiah 23

Ezekiel 34:18

Mark Evans (aka Mayacaman) writes

Quote:

---

Meanwhile, the POTUS and the Vice-POTUS and the whole hallelujah chorus in the Republican-controlled Senate pay lip-service to the Bible - as evidenced by their unctuous public piety during the State of the Union Address.

But, Alas, they have destroyed the Pasture of the Poor. The prophets of Israel, who were of old, would have had plenty to say to these hypocrites of Capital Hill. And, Alas, they would have been stoned...

---

Take solace in that fact that Pelosi (pious woman that she is) cries and prays for Trump every day. At least that's what she says.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:

Take solace in that fact that Pelosi (pious woman that she is) cries and prays for Trump every day. At least that's what she says.

---

Trump, by his punching down, belittling and denigrating everyone who doesn't grovel for him, deserves any cynical take you can bring to him. People may decide they don't mind his act, (Laura Ingram or whatever her name is comes to mind) saying it's all in fun, but I think that is pretty indefensible. It's fun and games until he insults your mama, I suppose.

But I have never seen any reason that Pelosi earns such a cheap shot as taking her profession of faith at anything but face value. Romney, same thing. But the dude of Corinthians volume II, maybe he's a different story. He shows no evidence of faith in anything; instead he prides himself on his brutal "realism".

She doesn't cry for him, sure. Remember, this is her reaction when accused of hating him. If you've ever met anyone of her cultural background, you might understand. It's a more in sorrow than in anger thing, and it's indoctrinated in Catholic girls of a certain generation pretty well. I'm sure she's totally sincere about not hating him. I'm sure she's full of disgust, though.

But don't forget, the Inquisition and Crusades were Catholic things too. Refusing to hate the sinner isn't a sign of weakness.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

In 1908, just as he was leaving office, Teddy Roosevelt quashed the Class-action Lawsuits that were attempting to wrest the title to the Timber-lands from the Lumber Cartels that had acquired possession of such lands by Fraud, and in Violation of the Homestead Act. This he did as a parting favor to his buddy, George Weyerhaeuser.

---

Do you have any evidence for this? I believe it is completely untrue. First of all it was Frederick not George Weyerhsuser who was Roosevelt's contemporary, and he spoke out against him several times. (from The Vault: "Back in 1905 President Theodore Roosevelt laid aside his prepared speech at a forestry congress to let fly with some spontaneous remarks about people who cut down the forests—"Who skin the country and go somewhere else!" he said. He denounced "that man whose idea of developing the country is to cut every stick of timber off of it and leave it a barren desert.... That man," he concluded, "is a curse!"

He was talking about Frederick Weyerhaeuser (among others), the founder of the company, George Weyerhaeuser's great-grandfather.") TR was a very strong conservationist, and in fact it was Taft's shortcomings in that regard when he succeeded him as president that drive a breach between the two who were previously very close friends. In fact if you said it was Taft who gave away the land it might be more believable (though I believe also wrong). George was not born until 1926. Furthermore presidents cannot as far as I know "quash" class action lawsuits.

Patrick Brinton

Patrick, I concede that it was Frederick Weyerhaeuser who was the contemporary of Theodore Roosevelt, and not his descendant, George Weyerhaeuser. Touché.

But the fact remains that back in 1908, there were a series of Class-Action Lawsuits against the Timber Barons, the intent of which was to wrest the title to the timber-lands away from the possession of such by the Timber Corporations. And T.R., in one of his last acts as President, jettisoned those lawsuits. Now, whether a President may lawfully "quash a class-action lawsuit" or not, I do not know. But it happened. Presidents tend to act "presidentially" you know.

You ask for evidence; some of it is in the book "Treason in America" by Anton Chaitkin; in a chapter with the somewhat rabid title "Environmentalism Destroyed the American Frontier" {or something to that effect.) I would provide you with the details that are contained in the fulsome footnotes, but at present the book is in the hands of my lawyer / friend. It is our intention to rewrite the Homestead Act, and make it current, for 2020. Next week, when I am able to obtain my copy of the book again, & study the footnotes, I can provide further details.

It is far more important to the thesis of my argument, Patrick, to stress that the Timber Corporations did not obtain their millions of acres by lawful means. Because the acquisition of the timber-lands (with the exception of those acres which were obtained from the Land Grants to the Railroad Corporations, under the Pacific Railway Act of 1862) was all done in violation of the Homestead Act of 1862 - which stipulated that no one [person] should by any means obtain more than one hundred and sixty acres of the Public Domain.

In point of fact, none of the Timber Corporations were legitimate, because the titles to the contiguous holdings of hundreds of thousands of acres were obtained by an elaborate system of Fraud - in violation of the Homestead Act of 1862. This is detailed in the book "Looters of the Public Domain" by Stephen Puter, who was the compradore for the Timber Barons, and was in a position to know how it was done, since he was the one who accomplished the transfer of the titles of the parcels from the General Land Office to the nascent Timber Cartels.

When it became generally known that this elaborate system of Fraud and Graft had "Looted the Public Domain" - to borrow Puter's phrase - there was a public clamor that something be done. In that event, Stephen Puter was made to walk the plank, figuratively, and the Timber Barons - who lived in nice neighborhoods like Hyde Park, Chicago; Whitefish Bay, Milwaukee; and Beacon Hill, Boston - were not prosecuted.

They never had to sully their hands with the dirty business of obtaining the lands; and they never even had to venture out of their robber baron estates in the Mid-west and in the East. Stephen Puter, who had been the fixer, wrote the book as a tell-all from prison after he was made to take the fall. "Looters of the Public Domain" was published in Portland, Oregon in 1908 - at which time there were a number of Class-action Lawsuits extant against the Timber Corporations. I'll get back to you about the details in the footnotes of the other book, Patrick. -If you wish.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

Do you have any evidence for this? ...

---

I had hopes, back in September when I initiated this thread, that We, here in California (& the Rest of America) could come to a 'Elegant Solution' of the Homeless Crisis. I had hoped that Everyone would see the clear logic in my proposal to Open up the vast lands of the Bureau of Land Management to Homesteading, Once Again. That such an initiative would radically alleviate the problems we have been facing with the Housing Crisis.

But Alas, the Coronavirus has taken to the Stage...

The Arrival of a total Game-Changer.... What is to become of the Homeless?

Congress leaves out homeless response from coronavirus-relief packages


Health experts want $5 billion in emergency funding to increase housing and care for people experiencing homelessness during the crisis.


So, What is to become of Amerika's Homeless? The Trump Administration Plan (seconded by bi-partisan support in both Houses of Congress) is for them to perish on the streets, until they are rounded up (for being infected with Covid-19) and shuffled off to FEMA Camps. That's the New Plan.

(This post was moved here from another thread - Barry)

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

As I shared with you all, the B.L.M. is sitting on almost a Quarter of a Billion acres. The "problem" lies in the fact that we are saddled with an over-class - commonly called "billionaires" - who want to have it All.

---

BLM is "sitting on" large areas of desert land, Alaskan tundra and the like, much of it is designated wilderness, wildlife refuges, historic sites, scenic areas, and national monuments. The reason it wasn't patented by homesteaders is because it's fucking desert with no fucking water. Sure, park the homeless 10 miles down a 4wd road in a shack with no water supply, see how that works out.

Mayacaman wrote:

As I shared with you all, the B.L.M. is sitting on almost a Quarter of a Billion acres. The "problem" lies in the fact that we are saddled with an over-class - commonly called "billionaires" - who want to have it All.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by geomancer:

BLM is "sitting on" large areas of desert land, Alaskan tundra and the like, much of it is designated wilderness, wildlife refuges, historic sites, scenic areas, and national monuments. The reason it wasn't patented by homesteaders is because it's fucking desert with no fucking water. Sure, park the homeless 10 miles down a 4wd road in a shack with no water supply, see how that works out.

---

Sorry, But I didn’t clarify: those Quarter of a Billion Acres that the Bureau of Land Management is sitting on in are in Twelve Western States. There are millions and millions more acres of the former "Public Lands" in Alaska. But just try to find out how many. As Dylan said, "Look out kid, they keep it all hid." Here, You do the search:

How many square miles of "Public Domain" in Alaska?

I stand by my words that the Billionaires want it All. It used to be called the “Public Domain” –ever hear of that? Are you able to render an reasonable definition of what that term meant in America in the Nineteenth Century? -That is without referring to wikipedia? Because the meaning of the term "Public Domain" has shifted since 1976. It now means "intellectual property" - not "Public Lands."

Apart from that, I notice that you have yet to open the link “ B.L.M. “ –because your mocking two-liner of a response indicates that you did not look into the pile of data that I assemble here at WaccoBB, in the Fall. The Homestead Act which was annulled in the lower ‘48 in 1976 was certainly not annulled for the reasons that you encapsulate in your little screed. Your little screed is a perfect, little, mocking, rendition of the Green "cover story."

I bid you to open that link, geomancer, aka, Richard Ely, and get back to me when you are a little more familiar with the “turf”- and with the “history” of the turf. Anyway, it’s all moot. The present, younger generation - including the homeless among them - are not going to be allowed to Homestead anywhere. As I said, the billionaires want it All. And their Plan to complete the acquisition of All of it is in full swing.

The closing of the American Wilderness to Occupation by humans was done by stealth in late 1976, during the last few months of the administration of Gerald Ford {that useful tool who - as a member of the Warren Commission - participated in the cover-up of the truth about the assassination of Kennedy.)

I repeat: the Closing of the American Wilderness (in some ways akin to the Closing of the American Mind) was done in stealth. There was no fanfare in the Press or the Media at the time. In this manner it resembled the “Crime of ‘73” [1873].

Mark my words: "The Crime of 1976 was akin to the Crime of 1873." Get back to me after you‘ve done your homework, and can wrap your head around the meaning of that sentence, and make a more fitting rebuttal of my position, geomancer, aka Richard Ely. I'm ready to deal with any articulate critique of the material i assembled behind the green Door.

Open Letter to Homeless Action, Sonoma County

Dear Homeless Advocates, Greetings

I would like to ask a favor of you'all - in accord with Adrienne's gracious offer of 'help' on October 12, 2020.

I have written to this group, in general, since being burned out, about my own experiences, and I have posted an essay about the "Highland Clearances in the 21st Century." But I found that there were no responses, other than a couple of personal letters from Anita LaFollette.

My thesis regarding the "real reason" for the now annual - hereafter perennial & new normal - "wildfires" in the West has been met by stony silence from all of you Homeless activists. Perhaps you {plural} think, 'Alas, the poor man having lost his home, has become delusional and has fallen into the dark realm of "conspiracy thinking".'

Let me disabuse you of that thought. To do that, I would invite All of you - or as many as are willing to make the trek up to my land - to observe the aftermath of the Fire that consumed Los Alamos Canyon del Norte on the night of September 27, 2020. For there is plenty of evidence of lasers having been used – either from drones -or- satellites. -Evidence that is still in place, as of today, December 30, 2020.

Back in the Spring, Summer, & Fall of 1979, I worked for a period of six months as a puller on the Salmon boat of Nat Bingham, out of Noyo Harbor. One day as we were reaching - at sixteen knots - from Point Delgado down to Bodega Bay, Nat told me something that I will never forget. He told me that every other year he would go back to Connecticut to schmooze with his cousins at their Family Reunions. The Bingham Family is one of "America's Sixty Families".

What Nat told me, in short, was this: "The power elite / ruling class have a Plan: In the Future they want there to be only two classes: "Alphas" (after Huxley's "Brave New World") and "Drones" (after the social structure of the Bee-hive). "You just watch.. They intend to break the Middle Class until it no longer exists..."

It is happening Now, in the Present, way out West. I myself was a down-wardly mobile son of the Middle Class. My daddy was a Doctor, who worked hard & made it up from the working class into the upper middle class in one generation. My own "net worth" prior to the fire in Los Alamos Canyon, was roughly five hundred thousand dollars. I can personally testify that "They" are not only "intending to break the middle class" ; they are well under way.

So what I would ask from You, my chosen affinity group, is support on this Front : that you organize a party to come up to witness the Evidence of Corporatist {Federal & Corporate] Malfeasance {via Directed Energy Weapon lasers from space} - and that you bring a videographer along, to help document it, while the evidence is still in place.

=ALSO=

It would be nice - if someone knows a 'forensics expert' - to bring that person along, to make a statement before the camera, that : "This is not the way that fires normally burn, in Oak forests." =AND= "This is not the way that houses normally burn."

In All Sincerity,

Mark Walter Evans