Ecological National Socialists have no trouble understanding how two logical variables yield four possibilities when it suits their agenda. The NFPA circulates the above (admittedly garbled) chart in support of violent laws against anything liable to interrupt a game of dominoes at the government-owned fire station.
Genetics offers another illustration:
But teevee, subsidized by the Nixon anti-libertarian law to ignore everything except kleptocracy, can only focus on three possibilities.
Yet those same intellectuals become one-dimensional when challenged to understand anything that lies outside the Venn Diagram circles encompassing socialism in its populist and communo-fascist variants. A blinkered looter visualizes a straight line running from Hitler/Mussolini/Franco to Stalin/Ceausescu/Mao with nothing in between but religious gradations of socialist and mystical altruism.
To the entire satisfaction of mystical prohibitionists, adding alcohol to water eventually transubstantiates the latter into a Satanic alcoholic beverage, and adding (non-mohammedan) religion to a heavily-mixed economy gradually changes it from “bad” socialism to (by their lights) “good” fascism. Nowadays fascists and socialists alike refer to their own system as “democracy” and that other one, respectively, as socialism or fascism.
In These States the Tordesillas line was drawn at an alcoholic content of 0.5% in the Prohibition Enforcement act drawn up by Andrew Volstead of Minnesota. This distinction also made sauerkraut evil, Satanic and illegal. But when this law enforcing the Prohibition Amendment flipped off the lights of freedom on the night of January 16th, 1920, the U.S. Senate, by declining to be a party to the Treaty of Versailles, kept us technically at war with Germany, or The Accursed Hun as it was known at the time. So no True American™ really cared about sauerkraut.
Among today’s fanatics–struggling to ban electric power or plant leaves instead of beer–none have even the foggiest notion or how an individual right might be defined. To them a right is something the world owes them at your expense, not a moral claim to freedom of action. Most puzzling to this mentality is confrontation with the Nolan Diagram. Even survivors of the Argentine educational system can grasp a 2-gradient chart between freedom and orders at gunpoint when broken down according to the two primary contexts (individual personhood and agency as homo economicus) from which they fish for pretexts to justify aggression at gunpoint.
Here is an Argentine version of the Nolan Chart in its version tilted so as to allow the one-dementional to superimpose upon it their own universe of discourse confined to a horizontal line extending from Hitler to Stalin.
To American National Socialists, for whom Herbert Hoover, Richard Nixon and George Wallace are plain, regular folks, this Argentine chart makes no sense whatsoever. Ever since Carnegie Institute Liberals formed an anti-Klan, pro-Beer party in 1930, then published a platform demanding the repeal of the Prohibition Amendment, the word liberal changed its meaning. Shortly before Election Day, in late October of 1932, the ruling coalition redefined liberal to mean “godless communist drunkards who hate America” in the costume of its own imaginings.
Citizens of civilized nations are utterly baffled by this coinage–minted as it were in the very heart of the Sahara of the Bozarts over which Richmond Hobson of Alabama, Morris Sheppard of Texas and Volstead shone beatifically as the very embodiment of the Holy Trinity… while voters locked the head of the Republican Party into the stocks of the guillotine and gave the lever a satisfying tug.
Eighty-seven years later, liberal everywhere else in the world still means libertarian. Cowardly, spineless, unprincipled or gelded libertarian, true enough, but libertarian or liberal is in both cases lies at the root of the noun denoting an individual who recognizes the individual rights of fellow human beings–even in opposition to the Divine “right” (meaning sanction to murder and rob) of kings, popes, caudillos and klans.
So all is not lost. Looter values begin and end with “we must issue the following orders at gunpoint” because (__insert rationalizing pretext__). If the pretext is “because the Bible says altruism is good,” then the speaker is fascist-prohibitionist-totalitarian in value orientation. If the pretext is “because selfishness feels like it ought to be denounced as evil,” then the speaker is a conditioned socialist-collectivist-communist-totalitarian.
Argentinos–politically separated by a papal line on a map–cannot completely let go of the one-dimensional lay/progressive v. religious/fascist differentiation. But today they at least they grasp the concept of how two related choices generate four possible outcomes. That’s progress Americans would do well to understand.
Get the complete explanation of the 1929 Crash in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages
I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us
Pingback: Equal and Apposite Reaction | libertariantranslator