Awakening to the Patterns: Open Your Eyes to What's Really Happening

zu Ihrer Sicherheit

(Opinion) Threads

I'd like to start with a personal note. My research approach is somewhat unconventional. I begin with the clear intent of disproving my own assumptions. This strategy has nearly eliminated confirmation bias in my work. This is one of those instances where I've disproven my own beliefs during my research. Not in every aspect, but in a particular area of this study. My understanding of income taxes in the US was incorrect, and I've proven it. I'm already adjusting my beliefs accordingly. If you find yourself needing to do the same, there's no shame in it; this is how we uncover the truth, right?

I have been digging deep into a lot of topics with Grok as my research assistant—and with this topic, I am going to pull it all together in a way that's hopefully easy to follow. Picture us in a cozy room, coffee in hand, no fancy slides or jargon, just me chatting like we're old friends about how these pieces connect like a big puzzle. We'll take our time here, explaining things step by step so everyone can get it, from the newbie to the expert. No big words or confusing terms—I'll break it down simply, because if we only talk to folks who already know this stuff, we're just preaching to the choir. We need everyone to see it.

But before we jump in, let me hit on something critically important, and I'll come back to it a few times: You must stop listening only to what you're being told and start paying attention to what's actually happening around you. What we're told in the news, by politicians, or even in schools, and what's really going down in real life—they're often two totally different things. This is and always has been my main goal in everything I write and talk about: To get you to realize it's all right there in front of you. All you have to do is open your eyes and see it for yourself. Don't take my word for it; observe the patterns in real time.

That's how we all wake up and start pushing back together. My role here is just to highlight these patterns for you, expose them, and explain what they might mean. But only you can act on that knowledge. I'm like a guidepost pointing the way, not an answer machine spitting out truths. I don't dictate what the truth is; I show you where you can discover it for yourself. Ultimately, the rest is up to you. As always, it's your choice.

Let's begin with the foundation of our country: the US Constitution. This is what the research started with, its original purpose, and then it blossomed from there. Think of it like the rulebook for how our government is supposed to work—it's meant to protect our rights and limit what the government can do to us. I started by looking at some laws or policies that, while they haven't been officially ruled unconstitutional by the courts, sure seem to go against what the Constitution says in plain English. For example, take civil asset forfeiture. That's when the police can take your stuff—like your car or money—if they think it was involved in a crime, even if you're never charged or convicted. We're talking billions of dollars seized every year. The Constitution's Fifth Amendment says you can't be deprived of property without due process, which basically means a fair chance to defend yourself. But in practice, owners have to prove their stuff is innocent, flipping the whole "innocent until proven guilty" idea on its head. We're told this helps fight crime, but open your eyes: It usually hits innocent people hardest, and it's still happening nationwide.

Another one is Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. This lets the government spy on foreign communications without a warrant, but it ends up collecting tons of data on everyday Americans, too. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches, usually requiring a warrant based on probable cause. Yet, this program keeps running, with hundreds of thousands of queries on US persons' data each year. Officials say it's for national security, but pay attention: It's a massive invasion of privacy, and courts haven't stopped it. These examples show how the government can bend the rules over time, eroding our protections. If we just listen to the "it's for your safety" line without looking at the real impact, we miss the slow creep.

Now, let's talk about where I proved myself wrong because I have always believed that income taxes specifically are illegal/unconstitutional. Are they constitutional? Yes, but only because of the 16th Amendment, ratified in 1913. Before that, there was no permanent federal tax on what people earned. Why? The original Constitution said direct taxes—like on income—had to be divided up among the states based on population, which made it super tricky, unfair in practice, and virtually logistically impossible as the population grew. We did have a temporary one during the Civil War from 1861 to 1872 to pay for the fighting—it was like 3% on higher incomes—and the Supreme Court validated it as an indirect tax. However, when they tried again in 1894 with a 2% tax on big earners, the Court in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. said no, it's a direct tax and needs that split.

So, Congress proposed the 16th Amendment to fix that (a workaround): "Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States." It was ratified by enough states, and Secretary of State Philander Knox certified it. Some people argue there were errors in how states voted, like punctuation mistakes, but courts have shot that down every time—it's solid law. Now, here's a common mix-up that I myself fell into: People say income taxes are "voluntary." What does that mean? The IRS uses the term "voluntary compliance" because we calculate and report our own taxes, like filling out forms honestly. But don't get it twisted—it's not optional. Laws like Internal Revenue Code Sections 6011 and 6012 require you to file if you earn enough, and Section 6151 says pay up. If you don't, it's tax evasion, a crime with up to five years in prison and huge fines. I stand corrected.

We're told it's a fair system everyone agrees to, but open your eyes: Non-payment leads to liens, seizures, even jail time for folks like Wesley Snipes. We survived over a century without it on tariffs alone—import taxes that funded everything from roads to defense. So why add it? They say it is for growing government needs, like wars and infrastructure, but observe: It shifted us to a system where the government takes a cut of our hard work first, gaining more control.

Speaking of the IRS, the agency that collects those taxes—is it constitutional? It's not mentioned by name in the Constitution, but Congress created it using its power under Article I, Section 8 to "lay and collect taxes" and the Necessary and Proper Clause, which lets it make laws needed to carry out those powers. It started as the Bureau of Internal Revenue in 1862 to handle the Civil War tax and was reorganized into the modern IRS in 1952. Courts have upheld it, like in Brushaber v. Union Pacific in 1916.

But let's think deeper, philosophically: Where does this authority come from? It feels like it's dictated by a small group in government, not directly from us, the people. In our system, we're supposed to have control over our lives—our destinies—but when an agency like this can audit you, fine you, or seize assets, it seems imposed. We're told it's democratic because Congress votes on it, but open your eyes: Representation often means lobbyists and elites calling shots, not everyday folks. This is just reality. And here's the kicker—they are funding ALL of this with our taxes, we are literally paying for the tools that are being used against us. The government has no money; it is all OUR money. Let that sink in.

Let's zoom out to the bigger picture: Our economy. When America started after the Revolution in 1789, it was basically a free-market setup. That means people and businesses traded freely, with very little government getting in the way. The government was small, mostly handling defense, mail, and basic stuff. Revenue came from tariffs (taxes on imported goods) and things like selling land. No big federal taxes on income, no massive regulations. It worked great for growth; think of it as a garden where plants (businesses) grow wild without too much trimming.

However, over time, we evolved into what's called a mixed economy—part free-market, part government involvement. How? Step by step through crises and changes. In the late 1800s, big companies got too powerful, so antitrust laws like the Sherman Act in 1890 came in to break up monopolies. Then, 1913 brought the Federal Reserve (our central bank) and the income tax. The Great Depression in the 1930s led to the New Deal under FDR: Programs like Social Security for old-age pensions, unemployment help, and public works jobs. These were meant to fix economic crashes, but they added government layers, meaning more control. After World War II, the Great Society in the 1960s under LBJ added Medicare (health care for seniors) and Medicaid (for the poor). Fast forward to today: Government spending is about 38% of our total economy (GDP), with half the federal budget going to these "entitlement" programs.

The Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom ranks us as "mostly free" with a score of 70.1 in 2025, down from higher scores decades ago because of more rules and spending. We're told this is all for the greater good—helping the needy, stabilizing things. But open your eyes: This shift has made us more like socialist systems, where the government decides more about money, health, and life. Socialism, simply put, means the government owns or controls a lot of the economy and redistributes wealth. We're not full-on there, but leaning that way—think universal health care debates or student loan forgiveness. And it's unconstitutional in spirit, since the Constitution limits federal powers to specific things, leaving the rest to states or the people. See the pattern? Slow changes, funded by our taxes, are herding us toward more control and less personal freedom.

The Federal Reserve fits right in. Created in 1913 after banking panics, it's a mix of public board and private banks to manage the money supply and act as a lender of last resort. Constitutionally, it's under Congress's power to "coin money and regulate its value." But I argue it's unconstitutional because it gives too much power to a group of bankers over our money, which should be the people's. No direct okay in the document for that. Then, abandoning the gold standard, in 1933, FDR stopped gold convertibility to fight the Depression, letting the government print more money. Nixon finished it in 1971, ending dollar-to-gold ties for good amid inflation and wars. Now we have fiat money—backed by government say-so, not gold—leading to massive debt, over $35 trillion. We're told this keeps the economy flexible, but pay attention: It means endless borrowing, inflation eating savings, and central control. I see it as part of a debt-based system trapping us, funded by our own taxes.

Broadening out, let's talk about the move to a cashless society, which is the uniparty's next step. Cash use is dropping fast—about 84% of payments are digital in 2025, with predictions hitting 94% by 2027. Think mobile apps, cards, no more bills and coins. We're told it's convenient and safe, but open your eyes: Without cash, every transaction is tracked by banks or the government. Miss a payment or say something "wrong"? They could freeze your accounts with a click. Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), like the digital dollar, are being explored by the Fed for faster payments. But look what's happening: Trump's executive order in January 2025 halted retail CBDCs, and Congress passed the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act in July, banning them over privacy fears. Good pushback, but trends like de-banking—closing accounts for political views—and behavioral credit scoring (Vantage Score 4.0 factoring in non-money stuff) feel like building blocks for a social credit system. No official one in the US like China's, where scores dictate your life, but observe: It's creeping in through private companies and laws, funded by our tax dollars on tech and surveillance.

All this connects to patterns I see in key books. First, "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinsky (1971): It's a guide for activists to challenge power structures using tactics like making enemies live by their own rules, ridicule, and keeping pressure on. Simple example: Polarize issues to divide people. Critics say you see this in today's cultural wars. Next, W. Cleon Skousen's "The Naked Communist" (1958): He lists 45 goals communists allegedly had to weaken America, like controlling schools to teach socialism (goal 17), discrediting the Constitution as outdated (29), or promoting things that break down morals (25-26). Many seem to have happened—think no prayer in schools or shifts in media. Finally, "The Black Book of Communism" (1997): Historians tally about 100 million deaths under communist regimes—20 million in the USSR, 65 in China—from purges, famines, camps. It shows what happens when central control goes extreme: Total loss of freedom.

And the latest piece: Even moderates fall in line because of fear. Take moderate Muslims—they might disagree with extreme Islamists, but non-compliance can mean death, or worse, like fatwas against critics such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Similarly, in socialist or leftist circles, step out of line and you get canceled—lose your job, friends, and become irrelevant. For some, that's a fate worse than death. This pressure keeps the radical agenda rolling, silencing voices that might slow it down. Tie this to financial control, and imagine: No cash, tracked everything, non-compliance means you're cut off. History's gulags and famines show where that leads—terrifying stuff if we repeat it through ignorance.

Wrapping it up: These tweaks to the Constitution, like the 16th for taxes, build a system funding a mixed economy that's breeding more socialism. The Fed and fiat money lock in debt and control. Digital shifts set up surveillance, enforced by fear and bullying. The pattern is clear: Slow erosion of our freedoms, herding us toward dependency and what feels like enslavement. But remember, it's all right there—open your eyes, see past the words to the actions. That's my call: Wake up, question everything, read those books, talk to your neighbors, vote with awareness. Don't fund your own chains blindly—push back before it's too late. We can turn this around if we all see it together. But again, I'm just the guidepost; the choice to act is yours.

Something to think about, guys, until next time. ~Ghost

---

That's about 2500 words—took the space to clarify and simplify.

Bibliography and References

For the books I mentioned (check them out in their own words):

• Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals (1971). Available on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Rules-Radicals-Practical-Primer-Realistic/dp/0679721134

• W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Communist (1958). Congressional Record entry: https://www.congress.gov/bound-congressional-record/1963/01/10/extensions-of-remarks-section

• Stéphane Courtois et al., The Black Book of Communism (1997). Harvard University Press: https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674076082

Inline, for more on the 45 goals: (from Skousen's text in public domain discussions).

Further Reading Suggestions

To expand on this theory of patterns and erosion:

• George Orwell, 1984 (1949)—Surveillance and control in a dystopian world.

• Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged (1957)—The dangers of collectivism and government overreach.

• Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom (1944)—How central planning leads to tyranny.

• Yuri Bezmenov, Love Letter to America (1984)—A defector's warning on ideological subversion.