"Who Will
Represent The Liberty Of Our Posterity?" with Nathan Descheemaeker
FULL TWO HOURS
HOUR 1
HOUR 2
Nathan
Descheemaeker -and his family raise registered feeder calves in
Central Montana.
Descheemaeker is a Senior Research Associate and Policy Analyst
specializing in federal and local government administrative
procedures, land and natural resource policymaking, local
governmental relations, and program management. Nathan is also an
accomplished musician and a self taught theologian witha love for
the classics. Nathan has worked with local governments to identify
and challenge attacks on small farm and ranch operations facing
increased pressure and regulation by forces and groups outside of
Montana, and many times outside of the United States..
The Most Dangerous Man on Rumble is back with another great set of
Interviews. I present to you Mr. Nathan Descheemaeker, a presenter
at the Red Pill Expo in Salt Lake City. To see his full presentati
Nathan and his family raise registered feeder calves in Montana, and
he is a Senior Research Specialist and Policy Analyst specializing
in federal and local government administrative procedures, land and
natural resource policymaking, and local governmental relations.
Opinion Editorial by Nathan Descheemaeker. The public land law
review commission was a Congressional committee tasked with
analyzing and reviewing the history of public land laws in the US
and provide to congress a report which led to the codification of
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act as well as other
cornerstone statutes.
by Nathan Descheemaeker Can private property serve as a privileged
sanctuary from which multi-national tax-exempt foundations can
incrementally transition and consolidate millions of acres of
productive agricultural lands? The APR in its paper Building a
Legacy of Conservation pg. 1 states “When complete, the Reserve will
consist of more than three million acres of private […]
By Guest Contributor
Nathan Descheemaeker
In response to the youths bringing climate
change litigation in the case of
Held v. The State of Montana, it is
necessary to bring the flip side of the coin
regarding the youth in the State of Montana
and the issues they will face in their
future. I’m not talking about fires,
drought, or severe weather which man has
always encountered and endured. I’m talking
about the significant impacts that are and
will continue as a result of whole of
government, whole of the economy, executive
climate policy objectives which has
transformative effects on the economic and
political process which threatens the future
generations’ capacity for self-government
guaranteed in the state constitution.
As for ranchers, farmers, and other resource
producers who provide the fundamental goods
and services taken for granted within the
quiet comfort of a suburban home, we face
many uncertainties, unpredictable weather,
unpredictable breakdowns, etc. One thing
that is predictable is that if the direction
of law and government towards despotic and
arbitrary rule remains unchecked the last
vestiges of liberty of one’s person and
one’s property, the right to enlightened
self-government upon an objective base will
be impossible. If the means of production
(capital) is no longer aggregated among many
individuals employing themselves
independently in the market, the inevitable
result is a consolidation of the means of
production which history shows us the state
becomes the sole employer and the old saying
“he who does not work does not eat,” changes
to “he who does not obey does not eat.”
If the owner may do with his property
only that wich is prescribed to him, what
directs the national economic activity is
not property but that prescribing power.
. . This merely means that a given condition
of social production is to be preserved,
even though it would vanish under private
property.
Mises, 1922The state in the form of the
Judiciary, the Legislature, or the executive
which seeks to control and dictate economic
activity poses a far greater threat to the
liberties of the individual, without which a
clean and healthful environment becomes a
moot point. It is by the separate government
branches playing their limited enumerated
role to preserve the life, liberty and
property of the individual that accomplishes
the purpose for which governments are
instituted among men. The late Justice
Scalia said, “As a practical matter, he who
controls my economic destiny controls much
more of my life as well.”
I know no society, today or in any era of
history, in which high degrees of
intellectual and political freedom have
flourished side by side with a high degree
of state control over the relevant citizen’s
economic life. The free market, which
presupposes relatively broad economic
freedom, has historically been the cradle of
broad political freedom, and in modern times
the demise of economic freedom has been the
grave of political freedom as well.
Scalia, p.180, Economic Affairs as Human
AffairsIn order to enjoy self-government,
one needs legal protections of private
property rights and stable regulatory
frameworks enabling private investment in
our natural resource industries which our
laws have always, and rightfully so,
provided for. But this is what these climate
justice youth are seeking to upend, claiming
the state’s legislative policy allowing
responsible fossil fuel development violates
their constitutional right to a clean and
healthful environment. These are highly
conjectural claims being propagated, seeking
the solution by asking the courts to
disregard legislative prerogatives and
robbing the consumer of his choice by
prescribing what economic activity is
allowed based on the grievance of a group of
youths.
If people believe that hamstringing our
fossil fuel industries will mean that fires
will cease, and severe weather will subside,
they will be woefully disillusioned. These
phenomena happened to a lesser or greater
extent before industrialized civilizations
existed, and if the redistributors succeed
in dismantling industrialized civilization
the fires will persist as they did before,
and as data from the National Interagency
Fire Center (NIFC) below shows, they may
persist to a greater extent than today.
The Climate change litigation brought by
these kids arguing for the right to a clean
and healthful environment as justification
to eradicate our carbon-based industries
will find they are ripping the material
foundation from under their feet which alone
provides the leisure to enjoy a clean and
healthful environment. Forget a clean and
healthful environment. No one will have the
leisure to enjoy such things when all their
time and energy goes to trying to survive in
a place of subsistence living. This is
plainly evident in many countries where
private property and private investment in
natural resources accompanied by
self-government are lacking. There you will
find the environment suffers, as do the
people who live in such a system.
So, what about all the other young people in
the state of Montana who are guaranteed in
the Montana Constitution to a system of
self-government that directly implies a
free-market economy that many of our
counties have policies to foster in order to
secure self-determination? The
Doctrine of in Para Materia requires
that a body of law be looked at in its
entirety. Justice Frankfurter once said,
“Statutes cannot be read intelligently,
while the eye is closed to affiliated
statutes.” You cannot use one instrument of
the constitution to eradicate another
instrument of the constitution without
dismantling the structure to the ruin of
public liberty.
With this said the youth in this state have
far greater standing regarding the damages
resulting from the failure of the executive
branch to accurately assess the true cost of
government policies associated with climate
policy objectives. This along with the
out-of-control government spending,
subsidizing favored industries to benefit
from green projects, has extensive impacts
on the market. Nicolai Tangen, chief
executive of the world’s largest sovereign
wealth
fund explained that “companies
benefitting from economically ineffective
and inefficient projects through applying
for green subsidies has fundamentally
flipped free-market principles on their
head, an arrangement that is sure to invite
economic chaos.”
This kind of coercive influence in the
markets is a gross obstruction of the
otherwise broad economic freedom which has
always served as a basis for broad political
freedom necessary for the republican form of
government guaranteed to the States in
Article IV of the
U.S. Constitution. The late Supreme
Court Justice Antonin Scalia noted in a
speech at the Cato Institute conference on
Economic Liberties and The Judiciary in
1984:
We (the court) will ensure that the
executive does not impose any constraints
upon economic activity which Congress has
not authorized; and that where
constraints are authorized the executive
follows statutorily prescribed procedures
and that the executive (and much more
rarely, Congress in its prescriptions)
follows constitutionally required
procedures.
It has become evident that the court has not
ensured that the executive does not impose
any constraints upon economic activity
without express delegation. The timetables
and targets expressed in numerical terms for
decarbonization and the associated
international commitments have not been
approved by representatives accountable to
the electorate, and are currently impacting
individual citizens, homes, businesses and
governments with the inflationary result of
pumping dollars into the economy while
regulating the material conversion of
resources for consumption, creating high
demand and too little commodity driving up
costs across the board. And all this is
being done on purpose to target and destroy
traditional industries which have
consistently provided stable rates and
reliable energy to ratepayers and consumers.
Reliability of energy and other necessary
goods and services are becoming a thing of
the past and culminates in what could be
called a regulatory taking of the entire
country.
The lack of disclosure on the part of the
federal government relating to the
implications of accomplishing such goals as
Net-Zero by 2050 with the
extensive international guidelines to be
followed is in violation of the primary
intent of the rule of law and due process
which employ the essentials of public
scrutiny, without which the individual
citizen is left exposed to unrestrained
power. Where else would the injunction of
the judiciary be more important than the
preservation of fundamental principles as
enumerated by compact in the Federal and
State Constitutions and the
Declaration of Independence from which
they stand? Preserving the structure of our
system is the most pertinent importance for
preserving the rights of persons.
If the Executive cannot prove without a
reasonable doubt that the current inflation,
supply chain shortages and other impacts are
not in part a result of non-delegated
executive policy and rules touching vast
sectors of the economy (whole of government,
whole of economy
EO 14008) resulting in transformative
effects on the political process and social
relations, the individual citizen proves
damage to his property and well-being as a
result of unconstitutional process.