The U.S. Constitution is the shortest on the American continents. All of the people’s states, caudillo juntas and banana republics have constitutions up to ten times as wordy as the U.S. Constitution. People face danger and expense in order to flee those countries and try to enter These United States, not each other’s countries. Is this coincidence? Is the number of words or pages in a country’s Constitution a negative indicator for individual freedom and prosperity? Continue reading
Before the pill, on the eve of the Panic of 1873, Comstock laws gave one zealous fanatic the power to stop American women from having access to any and all birth control drugs, devices, literature, calendars or even motherly advice to a daughter–by robbing their property and putting them on a chain gang for ten years. (link) These and fanatical blue laws became less popular after the Liberal Party repeal plank tossed Herbert Hoover out of office, repealed the 18th Amendment.(link) A 20th Amendment was immediately added to stop defeated partisan zealots from wrecking the economy before leaving DC.(link)
Condoms were legalized stateside only after they were found to have been issued to German solders–but not for contraception, and in 1938 a sort of diaphragm could finally be sold without fear of felony indictment. After that, basically nothing changed outside of Russia. Pregnancies could be terminated there from 1920 until 1936, when Christian National Socialism sprayed itself across Europe and the Americas.
By 1955 women had again regained as few rights as anyone else in the USSR.(link) Then came The Pill, and the second derivative of the global population growth curve changed sign. This movement away from Malthusian disaster brought shrieks of hatred from ku-klux race-suicide mystics who went on a Comstockian rampage. Agitation by American women to again press for the 1923 Equal Rights Amendment was reinforced by the 1972 Libertarian Party Plank.(link)
We support an end to all subsidies for childbearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children. We further support the repeal of all laws restricting voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days. We shall oppose all coercive measures to control population growth.
The plank was folded into Roe v Wade by the Supreme Court shortly after the votes were counted. Women suddenly had some reproductive rights.(link) The Prohibition Party and its sheepskin, the Republican Party, in 1976 began concerted screaming for constitutional amendments to send men with guns to coerce pregnant women and their physicians. As you’d expect, subsidized religious fanatics began a campaign of stalking, intimidation, threats, arson and other violence that spread as far as New Zealand.(link)
This sort of gratuitous aggression quickly drew pushback as Patti Hearst defected from socialite to socialist circles carrying automatic rifles. Two separate female assassins targeted unelected Nixon replacement Gerald Ford in September of 1975, and girl-bullying became a riskier proposition. Religious Army of God jihadists, with no regard for even their own lives escalated the violence.(link) The papers were soon full of firebombing arsonists attacking clinics, shooting receptionists, bystanders and unarmed doctors in the back, bushwhacking them through the windows of their homes, and other such acts of Jesus-like heroism.(link)
George Holy War Bush didn’t help by attacking Ottoman trouble spots while calling for the death penalty for plant leaves, amendments to ban burning cloth and to bully girls. Soon Americans were attacked by mohammedan fanatics every bit as berserk as nativist Warriors for the Babies. These latter, perhaps out of admiration, began putting fake anthrax spores in threat mail. After Bush Jr’s prohibitionist brigandage wrecked the economy in 2008, faith-based mental illness, amplified by racial resentment against Obama’s party, ramped up.
Now, with God’s Trump displaying consummate skill in pleasing the yokels with race-suicide hobgoblins, religious terror is again on the march. Communist and socialist agitators gleefully exploit the resultant fear to enlist women voters in stocking Congress with parasitical looters. Since the Nixon subsidy law of 1971, voters for entrenched major parties can ONLY choose between hate candidates pushing religious fascism versus communist socialism.(link)
So where is the Libertarian Party while the fair sex is under siege? With Stephanie Slade turning Reason Magazine into a minor offshoot of L’Osservatore Romano, female readership is down to one in ten, and the magazine’s Commentariat is entirely overrun with Warriors for the Babies and Army of God Trumpistas–so no help there.(link) But what about the Libertarian Party of Roe v Wade fame? Since 2012, Libertarians–cowed by Peter Schwartz sycophants,(link) Tea Party infiltrators, the Army of God and the usual ku-kluxers appalled at Obama–have adopted a birth control straddle plank to bolster GOP televangelism and throw women’s rights under the bus.
Out of evident sympathy for clinic bombers, doctor-killers and cop-killers such as Pro-Life poster boy Robert Dear–not to mention faith-based government funding for OBRIA, the LP has also modified its once-successful migration plank to now invite mohammedan and papist zealots to invade These States by uninspected entry–then added a plank to free terrorists and physician-killers from the death sentence while assigning executions to vigilantes and junta-style death squads. From the 2018 “Libertarian” platform:
1.8 Death Penalty
We oppose the administration of the death penalty by the state.
Just in case Reason magazine and Fox News didn’t let you in on it, Robert Dear was just indicted on 68 counts by a federal grand jury and faces a well-deserved death penalty.(link)
Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.
Jon Roland is Austin’s premier expert on the Constitution. Here’s a sample from constitutionalism (link)
I recommend the following planks in the platform of any 2020 presidential candidate:
- Strict construction of the Constitution, more strict than is likely from any of the Trump-nominated judges
- Disclosure — Anyone who does not understand what this means is not likely to benefit from an explanation. It is critical to solving the problem of the “shadow government”.
- Monetary Reform Act. To be proposed to Congress. Necessary to avoid economic collapse.
To this I would add the Atlas Shrugged Amendment: Congress shall make no laws restricting or abridging the freedom of production and trade.
Much of the political strife of the prohibition era, and the economic consequences of the two rights-destroying force amendments, are covered in Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929. Live on Amazon Kindle in two languages
If legalized murder and anarchism were my goal I would work against the Libertarian Party by removing 1972 choice planks and replacing them with invitations for anarchists and religious fanatics to again institutionalize extrajudicial killings–as occurred everywhere before WWI, and in These States from 1920 to 1933 under National Prohibition. Recent changes to the platform amount to exactly such an invitation.(link)
Spend some time with anarchists who pose as libertarians and one thing becomes clear. Defense of individual rights by objectively-defined laws is what anarchists do NOT want. Instead of Milton Friedman or Ayn Rand–whom they promptly turned against us, beginning in 1973 these miscreants follow a boring economist with a German accent and Hitler mustache and press NOW for rule by vigilante lynch mobs. They meanwhile alienate voters by loudly calling themselves “libertarians.”(link) Continue reading
While Reason magazine struggles to platform foreigners eager to import the entire population of Pakistan and the banana republics via uninspected entry, Tarl Warwick is not troubled by the wall or inspection. Neither am I. I never vote for communist or fascist kleptocrats now that I have the option of voting against coercion and aggression as policy, in exchange for more than 20 times the law-changing clout. (link)
The guy is wise beyond his years, educated, speaks well and thinks on his feet. Here is someone who lives in the real world as opposed to the looter parties’ Altruria or Fourth Reich. Check it out.
Here is the lowdown on why not one LP vote is ever wasted, and they ALL repeal bad laws.(link)
Much of the political strife of that era, and its economic consequences repeated today, are covered in Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929. Live on Amazon Kindle in two languages
Here’s how violence in America changed as the Libertarian party’s share of the vote more than tripled. Not a single one of these spoiler votes was wasted. Nor were they impotent “protest” votes of the sort bled off by the Tea-talitarian or Communist parties. In fact, the collapse of totalitarian socialism in Europe cut off a major source of inspiration and funding for infiltrating intellectuals of the looter persuasion operating in These United States. Libertarian spoiler votes are the most effective way for individuals to induce Kleptocracy political parties to give up cruel and violent laws. The leverage advantage is enormous for every libertarian vote, especially with a hockey stick substitution curve growth rate.
The shedding of anti-choice infiltrators and provocateurs whose sole occupation was to enrage and alienate voters with asinine shibboleths also wiped away excuses for sabotaging the LP. Republicans clearly see from the decline of superstition, the machine-gunning of antichoice dictator Ceausescu and wife, the recognition of women’s individual rights here, in Canada, The Netherlands, England–even in Italy and Ireland (link)–guarantee that Comstockism will lose them elections, not net them graft, boodle, power and pelf. They and the Dems must choose between copying libertarian planks and joining the Federalist, Whig, Communist and American Independent parties in the dustbin. (link)
Yet many libertarians sit still while communist anarchist infiltrators volunteer to swell the LNC, spit on voters and wreck our platform. EXAME magazine is a leading voice of Brazilian National Socialism. Its publishers and writers sweat and struggle to keep the LP as illegal in Brazil as it is in China and Cuba. Guess whose face they published (in a photo labeled Gary Johnson) as representative of the Libertarian Party in the last election? Coincidence? or was that bad apple hand-picked to make the LP look bad in the largest country in South America. (The magazine was soon afterward restrained by court order, then sold off by the publishers).
These are not novel tactics. The Republican party seduced the ku-klux Klan into its own serried ranks as Tammany’s catholic candidate Al Smith threatened to repeal national prohibition in 1928. After the American Liberal Party handed FDR the key to repeal and presidency for life, God’s Own Prohibitionists found sympathy with the German Christian and National Socialist parties Hoover had strengthened with his Standstill Agreement.(link) The attack on Pearl Harbor made pressing that strategy as suicidal as demanding a régime of Econaziism to stop imaginary global warming, or Comstockism to curry favor with “warriors for the babies.” But joining the war made These States take part in an alliance with the Soviet dictatorship that had divvied Poland with the Nazis. We have been a house divided ever since.
Much of the political strife of that era, and its economic consequences, are covered in Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929. Live on Amazon Kindle in two languages
The only thing holding back the Libertarian party is a pack of communist anarchists claiming Ayn Rand’s 1947 non-aggression principle requires the abolition of a State that protects individual rights by enforcing objectively-defined laws against theft, fraud and violence. (link) For full context, understand that a free laissez-faire government with no individual income tax that protects individual rights from theft, fraud and violence is what no-borders anarchists do NOT want. (link) It therefore follows that all anarcho-communist infiltrators laying siege to the LP since 1973 act to stop the LP from accomplishing what we set out to do in 1972.
So they infiltrate our party, drive away voters, and invite the looter media to depict THEM as champions of libertarianism. Big Tent straddlers are left scratching their heads wondering why the voters are running away. By sabotaging laissez-faire democracy these cuckoos prevent the only sort of government that would hesitate to deport or guillotine the lot of them.
To flush out the sources of this pollution, the Libertarian party set up a donations/votes auction to democratically see how popular the legalization of murder and importation of hoof-and-mouth disease is among libertarians who join, pay dues, volunteer and vote. One communist plus some sockpuppets evidently voted ANCAPISTAN as the amok berserker image of libertarians they wanted to project to the public. And why not? Look at how effectively portraying Charles Manson as representative of sixties hippie culture worked to popularize Dick Nixon and George Wallace.
That initiative was badly beaten by TANSTAAFL, from the Robert Heinlein novel published shortly before the founding of the LP (link) and endorsed by Milton Friedman–the man who pointed out to us how small party spoiler votes change the laws and amend the Constitution. This result convinced me the LP is still healthy and worth working for, even if we have to send a few undesirables back to CPUSA.
Get the complete story on collapsing economies in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages.
Jon Roland of Austin, Texas runs a blog on the Constitution. This entry explains why the LP had better restore the Migration plank to what it said in 2016, when it brought us 4 million votes–before it was disfigured into repellent absurdity.
The U.S. Constitution states:
[Congress shall] provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; Art I Sec. 8.
Section. 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;
This last clause is key. The President has authority to call up the militia, and call-ups of militia are for emergencies, not to do the job of the regular military, which is provided for elsewhere. So to call up the militia is to declare an emergency.
So can the President declare an emergency without calling up the militia? All U.S. citizens, including government employees and contractors, are militia. Directing them to reallocate funds for defense is to act within that power. No special statutory authority is needed.
So are entries into the U.S. without consent an invasion? Yes. Any such trespass is an offense against the law of nations, which Congress has the power to define and punish. They have done that, although first-time simple entry is merely a “deportable offense”, a kind of misdemeanor. However, reentry after having been deported is a felony.
It does not need to be an armed force to be an invasion. A child chasing a butterfly across the border is an invader. It also doesn’t matter whether the invaders are, or can be expected to be, criminals. Peaceful people seeking work are also invaders, if they enter without consent.
So is the situation on the southern border an emergency? If it were only a few a day, no. But thousands flooding the border, faster than they can be managed, is an emergency.
Does it matter that the thousands are seeking asylum? No. U.S. law only recognizes political asylum, not economic asylum. Most of those thousands are economic refugees. If they are fleeing criminals or corrupt officials, then they have the duty to fight in their own countries, not in ours.
What is the President’s alternative? He could station troops along the border with orders to repel invaders with deadly force. He could erect gun turrets every few hundred yards. That would be more expensive than a wall. Do opponents of a wall really want invaders to be repelled by automatic weapons? Democrats would not get many votes from those.
Jon blogs at constitutionalism.blogspot.com
The Constitution once made Beer a felony, enforcement as which collapsed the economy. Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages
Hoover speech to Chamber of Commerce conference, 12/5/1929: Much construction work had been postponed during the past few months by reason of the shortage of mortgage money due to the diversion of capital for speculative purposes. The third line of action has been to undertake through voluntary organization of industry the continuity and expansion of the construction and maintenance work of the country, so as to take up any slack in employment which arises in other directions. (…) This is a far cry from the arbitrary and dog-eat-dog attitude of the business world of some 30 or 40 years ago. (Hoover 1929 1974 454-5) (link)
Translation: making beer a 5-year prison term felony with a fine of over half a million 2019 dollars just before my inauguration backfired. Asset-forfeiture of everything from ocean liners to homes, automobiles and bank & brokerage accounts caused money to flee the banking system after former prosecutor Willebrandt blew the whistle on how we do it in 21 newspapers in August. We now imitate German and Italian fascism make-work projects to disguise the damage caused by using revenue laws to enforce religious prohibition. Religious fascism is not a bit like the laissez-faire liberalism that kept America wealthy and free back when beer and coca wine were as legal as sea salt.
This speech was made the year Ayn Rand married Frank O’Connor. Here is the relevant page from the Presidential Papers of Herbert Hoover:
Hoover (prohibition): “This is not dictation or interference by the government with business.”
Nixon (war on drugs): “I am not a crook!”
Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged): “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of production and trade …”
Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in either of two languages. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how pseudoscience, fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.
Does the Constitution allow men with guns to threaten physicians or coerce pregnant women? The Harrison Act enabled pseudoscience-addled politicians to have men with service pistols step between doctors and patients in 1914. See why missing an opportunity to vote Libertarian is tantamount to desertion under fire as mystical and collectivist reality control delegitimize individual claims to freedom of action.
Today’s guest repost is by Austin’s Constitutional Scholar Jon Roland, constitutionalism.blogspot.com.
The first issue is presented by the statement by
nominee appointee Brett Cavanaugh in his acceptance speech, that he would not find rights not explicitly recognized in the main Constitution.. This has been an issue since the nomination of Robert Bork, who considered the Ninth Amendment, which calls for the nondisparagement of rights that are not “enumerated” (made explicit) somewhere in the Constitution, as amended, to be an “ink blot”. There is strong opposition to Supreme Court judges doing that, especially from so-called “conservatives”, who don’t understand that constitutional rights are all “immunities”, restrictions on the powers of government. They are not “privileges” to receive a sufficient amount of public resources, such as for education, healthcare, elder support, or any other objects of public subsidies.
Interestingly, in the case of Roe v. Wade, the Fifth Circuit decided that a “right to an abortion” was a Ninth Amendment right of a woman “to choose whether to have children”, which by the 14th Amendment, was “incorporated” for the states. This presented the Supreme Court with an apparent problem, because there was opposition to funding unenumerated rights in the Senate. The Fifth Circuit found a Ninth Amendment “right to choose whether to have children”. So the SC tried to sustain the Fifth Circuit without embracing the Ninth Amendment. The result was an incoherent opinion. There was no way to avoid the Ninth Amendment.
It would perhaps too much to expect a nominee to venture into an extended discussion of what a “right” is, and what it is not. It is awkward to say “I will not find a ‘right’ to a sufficient amount of a public resource.” That is too complicated for most senators. So the candidate denies he will try to find any “unenumerated” rights. That is somewhat disingenuous, but the issue needs to be discussed.
When “life” begins
One of the potential nominees, Amy Barrett, has been reported to have stated that human “life” begins at conception. That is a misstatement of the issue in Roe v. Wade. which in its essence was not about “life” but about “personhood” because “Rights (immunities)” attach to “persons”, (roles in court), not to “life”, despite what the Declaration of Independence says. (That is why some activists have sought to move the commencement of “personhood” back to conception. That would be a mistake. We cannot allow each state to redefine “personhood”, because if we did, a state could define some people to be nonpersons, without rights. So there has to be a uniform definition across all states if the protections of the Constitution are not to be meaningless. That is the basis for finding the right to be incorporated under the Ninth Amendment, as the Fifth Circuit did.
So when does “life” begin?
Not at conception. Each individual is the latest in an unbroken chain of life that goes back to at least the point when the first single-celled organism became a multi-celled animal, which occurred about 650 million years ago, during the pre-Cambrian era, when the surface of the Earth was covered with ice (“snowball Earth”) and there was only one continent, Rodinia. We are all descended from that multi-celled organism. That is when “life” began.
So when does “personhood” begin?
This was declared by the jurist Edward Coke in the 15th century, and later restated by legal scholar William Blackstone, in the early 18th century, who provided most of the definitions for terms used in the U.S. Constitution. They held that “personhood” begins at natural birth, or induced natural birth (they had Cesarean sections in those days). Some of the states later found that personhood began with baptism, entry of a name in church records, or even later. Not at “conception”, the date of which could not have been defined with any precision in those days, or even now.
Consider what would happen if we defined “personhood” to begin at conception? It would make every fetus the ward of a court, with the court having power to supervise the pregnancy. It could order the woman to continue a pregnancy, and not terminate it, under penalty of law. That would be forced pregnancy. Do we want that? Every pregnant woman chained to a bed. Anyone see the play “A Handmaid’s Tale”. Good way to stop everyone from having sex.
Need for uniformity
Incorporation of a Ninth Amendment right is required by the need to have a uniform definition of “personhood” (legal role) across all jurisdiction, since constitutional rights attach to “persons” and not just to “citizens” or “life”. If states could define personhood, they could deprive anyone of rights by defining him to be a “nonperson”. Thus a state could find that Blacks are not persons as a way to deprive them of their liberty.
1. Roe v. Wade, 1221 (N.D. Tex. 1970) (“On the merits, plaintiffs argue as their principal contention that the Texas Abortion Laws must be declared unconstitutional because they deprive single women and married couple of their rights secured by the Ninth Amendment to choose whether to have children. We agree.”).
2. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).
3, A Handmaid’s Tale, Margaret Atwood.
4. Robert Bork and the Inkblot, Kurt Lash.
See also: Ayn Rand (link)
Get the complete story on other prohibitions in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in either if two languages for the price of a craft pint. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy in 1929 and 2008.