What to Buy With Your Liberty Dollars

The Amero has arrived:

Colorado artist Daniel Carr has been selling amero coins for months on his Web site, www.dc-coin.com, in denominations ranging from 20 to 1,000. The fact that the currency doesn't exist hasn't stopped thousands of orders from coming in.

The design is Carr's own, but the coins he came up with do look plausible, with Pocahontas on one side and an eagle bestriding the Western Hemisphere on the other. Made of copper, silver and 24-karat gold, they're available for $11 to $990, depending on the material and, of course, the coin's denomination.

I gather that buying Carr's Ameros is supposed to be a protest against the North American Union or Aztlan or something. I just want some so I can pay the tolls on the NAFTA Superhighway. They're also ideal for donating to the "Tancredo for a Secure America" campaign. 

Comments

J sub D | October 25, 2007, 4:16pm | #

P.T. Barnum was right.

Warren | October 25, 2007, 4:17pm | #

They're also ideal for donating to the "Tancredo for a Secure America" campaign.

Actually if they have a significant gold content they'd be ideal PAUL 2008 donations.

Episiarch | October 25, 2007, 4:21pm | #

I gather that buying Carr's Ameros is supposed to be a protest against the North American Union or Aztlan or something.

Why protest a kindly, wise lion who is a Jesus figure? I don't get it.

Jozef | October 25, 2007, 4:31pm | #

Glenn Beck mentioned the Ameros yesterday or two days ago in his CNNHN show as an example of encroaching Mexicanization (if that's a real world at all) of the US.

John | October 25, 2007, 4:43pm | #

Let's merge, Canada can bring their national healthcare system and Mexico can bring its tradition legal integrity and respect of their citizens' rights. It is like that old joke about Canada; it was supposed to combine French Culture, British governmental efficiency and American economic prowess. Instead, it got American Culture, French governmental efficiency and Labor Britain's economic prowess. A North American Union would give us American culture, Canadian socialism and nannystatism combined with Mexican corruption and authoritarianism. No thanks.

BakedPenguin | October 25, 2007, 4:51pm | #

I don't know why all the anti-illegal immigration folks are against the NAU. It would stop all illegal immigration from Mexico.

Cesar | October 25, 2007, 4:51pm | #

For the last fucking time, even if this were real instead of the product of a bunch of Freeper's fevered imaginations, theres no way Canada or Mexico would ever agree to the Union.

A Mexican politician who tells people "Hey, lets join up with the gringos!" would have bricks thrown at him.

MikeP | October 25, 2007, 5:01pm | #

This offering has everything for the numismatically minded libertarian: Intrinsically valued metal currency, a private mint, the sense of a sweeping free trade zone... Plus, to top it all off, it's a complete fantasy inciting fury in the conspiracy bent.

Sign me up!

DangerMan | October 25, 2007, 5:22pm | #

From www.SPP.gov:

Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency.

Fact: The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.

I am posting this so that I can claim "I-told-you-sos" once the Amero hits the streets! :-)

Jay D | October 25, 2007, 5:23pm | #

The Amero's real, but, for now, as part of a "long term, very long term" plan.

LARRY KING: E-mail from Mrs. Gonzalez in Elizabeth, New Jersey. "Mr. Fox, I would like to know how you feel about the possibility of having a Latin America united with one currency?"

VICENTE FOX, FORMER PRESIDENT OF MEXICO: Long term, very long term. What we propose together, President Bush and myself, it's ALCA, which is a trade union for all of the Americas. And everything was running fluently until Hugo Chavez came. He decided to isolate himself. He decided to combat the idea and destroy the idea...

KING: It's going to be like the euro dollar, you mean?

FOX: Well, that would be long, long term. I think the processes to go, first step into is trading agreement. And then further on, a new vision, like we are trying to do with NAFTA.

BakedPenguin | October 25, 2007, 5:23pm | #

Cesar, Of course it's real. Lonewacko told me so.

javier | October 25, 2007, 5:28pm | #

wow, that guy is selling those coins way above market. $1000 per ounce(au) not for another few years at least

Stomper | October 25, 2007, 5:44pm | #

"Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency."

Fact: SSP is a power company based in Amarillo.

TLB | October 25, 2007, 5:53pm | #

On his recent tour, VicenteFox promoted the NorthAmericanUnion at least three times. And, it's pretty interesting to see so-called "libertarians" taking government denials at face value, especially when all signs point to this being something they're working towards. Most of those who seek to deny such as desire use mockery to avoid debate, and what little "proof" they can muster is usually from government officials who are pushing the plan. And, it's being done without Congress being involved; in fact, there's even a resolution against it:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.CON.RES.40:

I collect some links about this here, but for the original source see these:

worldnetdaily.com/news/archives.asp?AUTHOR_ID=246
eagleforum.org/topics/NAU/

When you do your research, you'll see that no one who tries to halt discussion of this issue should be trusted: they're hacks of one kind or another.

TLB | October 25, 2007, 6:03pm | #

Regarding "Aztlan", I collected a few of the comments from this video: youtube.com/watch?v=k_Dw1ioGPGY

YT is a bit like AOL, in that their commentors are wider spectrum than visit sites like this; these comments represent popular opinion rather than the sanitized version presented by the corporatists at Reason.

Such sentiments could directly lead to a SeparatistMovement of some kind in the Southwest, led by racial demagogues like this: youtube.com/watch?v=3jwqQ8DtlPQ

--------------
by-the-way. that old man has no more claim to live here than any of thoseb legal hispanics, his people came to America and persecuted my ancestors [the filmmakers posted a reply saying they wanted to interview that poster]

That old white guy needs to go to school. Every race here except for the Natives shouldn't be here. It was rightfully their land before the white people.

BTW I am not hispanic but I feel for them.some parts of Mexico was forcefully taken in violence hence California,Colorado,Texas now U.S.A..

you said it, this land is stolen... so, Mexicans are just recovering it

the fact that europeans have been illegal in this country since 1492 doesnt seem to cross anyone's mind

They think they own the land that they are on right now, and think it always belonged to them. When in all actuality it belongedbelongs to the Indians.

The Native Americans were in the country first until a pack of people from another country decide to take it over. Some Hispanics (primarily Mexicans) are mixed of European and Native American blood, so technically his "we were here first" argument is completely invalidated by that fact alone.

When each group(Irish, German, Italian) came to this stolen country they had their languages they spoke and if you were in a deli or store you heard it. We slaughtered the Native Americans and as far as this side of the world Natives of South America were here first. We shot and killed and stole land from them. I dare you to find me a spoiled white kid who is willing to leave their ipod or X box to work when their parents hand them everything.

If that american guy actually studied HIS history he would know that the americans as we know it today KILLED all the natives and claimed this land as theirs.

Tym | October 25, 2007, 6:03pm | #

If you do an image google search on Amero Coin, this image comes up.

Happy Jack | October 25, 2007, 6:05pm | #

WorldNutDaily is research?

Pig Mannix | October 25, 2007, 6:06pm | #

Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency.

Ok - why is this a bad idea? I understand (and agree with) the objections to open borders. But it seems to me this would address all of those objections, along with providing all of the economic benefits advanced by advocates of open borders.

ian | October 25, 2007, 6:08pm | #

who gives a fuck?

MikeP | October 25, 2007, 6:15pm | #

When you do your research, you'll see that no one who tries to halt discussion of this issue should be trusted: they're hacks of one kind or another.

Perhaps you should add http://www.reason.com/blog/show/123188.html to your list of original source links. When you go there, you will find this comment:

The North American Union is a ludicrous fantasy that would require so many obvious actions from so many disparate current government bodies that there is no way it can arise without the considered understanding of entire governments and populaces. Cementing the wackiness is the fact that the powers granted those governments under their constitutions mean they could end any effect of any conspiracy to form an NAU with a stroke of a pen.

Rhywun | October 25, 2007, 6:29pm | #

I never expected anyone, ever, to advocate heaping anything other than scorn and ridicule on the commentary that goes on at YouTube. Wow.

MikeP | October 25, 2007, 6:33pm | #

Pig Mannix,

I myself think that a North American Union in the form of the Common Market or the European Community is a good thing. However, the sad fact is that these things perpetuate themselves. In a mere two generations a Common Market allowing free trade and free migration throughout Europe turned into a European Union, with a life of its own, trying to constitute itself as a supersovereign state.

Of course, it is now running into resistance from the constituent states' populaces, as any surreptitious attempt to form an NAU would.

Needless to say, the difference between an SPP that does little more than standardize trade and entry and an EU that has its own branches of government and the supposed legitimacy conferred by direct representation is vast.

The bottom line: The sphere of trade and migration should be as great as possible, and the sphere of government and sovereignty should be as small as possible.

Franklin | October 25, 2007, 7:29pm | #

Here's CNBC's coverage of the Amero.

Here's the original blueprint published by the CFR (PDF).

And, the NASCO Corridor website.

MikeP | October 25, 2007, 7:37pm | #

Here's the original blueprint published by the CFR (PDF).

• North America is different from other regions of the world and must find its own cooperative route forward. A new North American community should rely more on the market and less on bureaucracy, more on pragmatic solutions to shared problems than on grand schemes of confederation or union, such as those in Europe. We must maintain respect for each other’s national sovereignty.
• Our economic focus should be on the creation of a common economic space that expands economic opportunities for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital, and people flow freely.

The horror...

prolefeed | October 25, 2007, 8:11pm | #

Anyone else click on the link and get an embedded ad railing against drug use (meth, if you must know)? On REASON?

Most ... ineffective ... ad ... ever.

J sub D | October 25, 2007, 8:15pm | #

Please, somebody help me out here.

Is the Council on Foreign Relations the new globe spanning, conspirational boogie man supplanting the evil, treasonous Trilateral Commision?

You see, I've lost my paranoid nutjob scorecard and am sooo confused.
In advance, I thank you for your assistance.

J sub D | October 25, 2007, 8:25pm | #

And are they in league with the Freemasons and International Jewry?

I just gotta know!

TLB | October 25, 2007, 9:02pm | #

OK, so far we've got simple-minded mockery and baseless claims that somehow our leaders could end it immediately (except they're the ones pushing it). Plus, we've got a rather unique subspecies of denial: "it doesn't exist, but if it did it wouldn't be a bad thing."

To be frank, what the idiots who wrote the post and most of those commenting need is an authority figure to point out to them how they're wrong. At least one libertarian understands the danger of not paying attention to this, but, then again, I don't think too many people are confusing those here with those who actually believe in freedom rather than coercion and corporatism.

Syloson of Samos | October 25, 2007, 9:41pm | #

John,

FWIW, Canada has had for some time now a very strong economy from the standpoint of GDP, unemployment, etc.

Syloson of Samos | October 25, 2007, 9:46pm | #

TLB,

From the link:

Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether.

If the EU becomes a federal government then national sovereingty would be transferred to that government.

Anyway, why should I take Paul's statement as the definitive word on the issue?

TLB | October 25, 2007, 10:48pm | #

One shouldn't reflexively believe everything RP says. However, when he warns about this issue, and when other U.S. Congressmen sign on to a Hour Resolution warning about the issue, and when our leaders seem to be working towards the plan, and when a foreign leader comes here and promotes the plan, well then it's pretty obvious that we aren't just dealing with far-out conspiracy theories.

So, people should look into this and make sure that our leaders aren't allowed to proceed any further down the path. And, people should not trust anyone who seeks to claim that this is simply a tinfoil hat issue. They're either stupid or they're following someone else's agenda for some reason.

Syloson of Samos | October 25, 2007, 11:49pm | #

TLB,

Given what environmental groups can do to block roads, etc. in the courts I am not terribly afraid of this Superhighway coming into existances.

Agammamon | October 26, 2007, 12:51am | #

. . .it got American Culture, French governmental efficiency and Labor Britain's economic prowess. A North American Union would give us American culture, Canadian socialism and nannystatism combined with Mexican corruption and authoritarianism. No thanks.

Heh - so many jokes about the low quality of American culture, but everyone's buying the stuff.

cls | October 26, 2007, 6:06am | #

God, I wish the conspiracy loonies would stop lurking in libertarian sites, go over to the nutty Right and stay there. And anyone who quotes Worldnetdaily as a source needs their head examined.

And once for the morons: an article published by the Council is not a blueprint. The Council publishes the views of lots of people on lots of things including people who contradict one another. It published articles for the war and against the war. It has published articles in favor of free trade and against free trade. And it published an article by a professor who promoted the ideas that the wacko Birchers have been hysterical about. Since then the Birchers, in their usual dishonesty, have been touting that article as proof that the banking/illuminati conspiracy (at least they don’t make them reptilian aliens) is pushing this.

Are their businesses lobbying to connect highways to make trucking of goods easier, to facilitate trade? Yes but how that is a sinister conspiracy is not explained. That is typical rent seeking.

And reading the answer from Fox it sounds like a typical politicians answer. Some nutjob calls in wanting a statement on the “conspiracy” and Fox just says anything like that is very, very long term. Then the tinfoil hat types here say he was “promoting” it. Sounds like one of them was promoting and trying to get him to say anything on it. Fox wasn’t promoting it, he was responding to a question from the lunatic fringe and he did so by simply pushing it aside as being irrelevant. But the conspiracy minded leap on the flimsiest of evidence to prove their fantasies.

robc | October 26, 2007, 9:12am | #

I support a (North) American Union as a part of my view of manifest destiny of the USA: I dream of a United States (under our constitution, the other countries would go away) stretching from sea-to-sea from Baffin Bay to Tiera del Fuego.

R C Dean | October 26, 2007, 10:27am | #

A Mexican politician who tells people "Hey, lets join up with the gringos!" would have bricks thrown at him.

That's because the only Mexicans still in Mexico are the ones who don't like Americans. All the rest have already joined up with the gringos.

[ducks]

Franklin | October 26, 2007, 1:03pm | #

RE: MikeP

I'm not sure I understand the rules since you didn't explain them but, based on your post, it seems the game is to pull a quote from the CFR document and post it here. Here's another. Your turn.

To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.

Does Reason have a lot of non-libertarian readers or are libertarians just learning to like government? Reading comments on the Reason blog, it's hard to tell.

MikeP | October 26, 2007, 1:24pm | #

The game I was playing was to demonstrate that even an organization that presumably sits at the table of the NAU shadow government is not proposing an actual NAU government or any transfer or loss of sovereignty.

Does Reason have a lot of non-libertarian readers or are libertarians just learning to like government?

Given that it restricts the ability of government to hamper trade and migration, the proposal you quote is well in tune with libertarian thinking and most definitely not pro-government.

Brandybuck | October 26, 2007, 2:30pm | #

I was in a "discussion" with NAU conspiracists not long ago. They showed me a photo of an 2007 Amero as "proof" that it would happen this year. Now I find out that all the Ameros are being minted by the conspiracists themselves! Any small sense of sympathy I had for conspiracists, as being mere stupid retards deserving of pity, has just vanished.

Franklin | October 26, 2007, 5:30pm | #

RE: MikeP

Given that it restricts the ability of government to hamper trade and migration, the proposal you quote is well in tune with libertarian thinking and most definitely not pro-government.

Are you joking? Why do you think I posted that quote? How is a common external tariff well in tune with libertarian thinking?

How about this?

While each country must maintain its right to impose and maintain unique regulations consonant with its national priorities and income level, the three countries should make a concerted effort to encourage regulatory convergence.

Oh yeah, that sounds as if Lysander Spooner could have written it himself. Do you also think NAFTA and CAFTA are well in tune with libertarian thinking? If so, then I have my answer... libertarians are learning to like government. Let me guess, you're one of those Mainstream Libertarians, just like Dondero. I shouldn't be suprised that someone that would think Rudy is "libertarian" would think that another level of regulatory bureaucracy under the guise of "free trade" would be well in tune with libertarian thinking.

And, what is with all the conspiracy talk? Since when is government leading to more government a conspiracy? It's the natural order of things. The EU wasn't a conspiracy perpetrated by some satanic illuminati but it exists none the less. I'm sure glad that there are no conspiracists claiming that the illuminati made 2 plus 2 equal 4. Otherwise, we'd have a bunch of BrandyBuck's claiming that the number 2 obviously doesn't exist.

MikeP | October 26, 2007, 6:08pm | #

How is a common external tariff well in tune with libertarian thinking?

It will presumably run lower than extant tariffs, and it will mean the elimination of tariffs between the nations. Do you find the fact that the several United States have only a common external tariff among them unlibertarian?

Granted, the external tariff can be abused too, and to greater effect. But my impression is that larger trading blocks include more multitudes of interests that make trade restriction more difficult rather than less difficult. Do you have any argument or evidence to the contrary?

Do you also think NAFTA and CAFTA are well in tune with libertarian thinking?

While not perfect, and n-1 pages too long each, yes: NAFTA and CAFTA are more in tune with libertarian thinking than the only politically viable alternative, which is continued trade restrictions at the whim of the legislature.

If so, then I have my answer... libertarians are learning to like government.

I am for unilaterally terminating all tariffs, trade barriers, and immigration quotas. If you call recovering the powers usurped by government over the freedom of movement of goods, capital, and people "liking government", what would disliking government be?

gabe harris | October 29, 2007, 3:54pm | #

Franklin,
Yes lots of pro-big government folks are on here...some like to call them neo-cons that like pot....and they pretty much call anyone who is agaisnt the CFR or the UN "a -right wing nut", "a troofer" or a gun nut.

And now we see them saying that the NAU is a good idea, never mind the elimination of the US dollar...after the dollar collapses tehy will claim that it was jsut a accident that no one could have predicted.

never mind the adoption of UN rules and courts taking precedence over US courts and rules...if you have read any of the UN and CFR documetns proposing this stuff you are a nut.

Get The Guns Ready | November 3, 2007, 5:13am | #

Not sure if this link was posted, but...

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

Don't get caught with your head in the sand...

No pun intended on the religion side - but interesting stuff don't you say?

What this world has come down to...

Peace!