Lysander Spooner’s oath

It seems like it has to be fiction, right? Wrong! (link)

Spooner wrote: Go to A….. B……, and say to him that “the government” has need of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property.  If he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our business, and not his; that we choose to protect him, whether he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him.  If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon themselves the title of “the government,” and who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that we do not choose to make ourselves individually known to him; that we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the present year. 

The original law passed by Republicans reads:  “I, A.B., do swear, or affirm, (as the case may be,) that I will, to the best of my knowledge, skill and judgment, diligently and faithfully execute the office and duties of assessor for, (naming the assessment district,) without favor or partiality, and that I will do equal right and justice in every case in which I shall act as assessor.” And a certificate of such oath or affirmation shall be delivered to the collector of the district for which such assessor or assistant assessor shall be appointed. And every assessor or assistant assessor acting in the said office without having taken the said oath or affirmation shall forfeit and pay $100, one moiety thereof to the use of the United States, and the other moiety thereof to him who shall first sue for the same; to be recovered, with costs of suit, in any court having competent jurisdiction.

Section 12. And be it further enacted, That the Secretary of the Treasury shall establish regulations suitable and necessary for carrying this act into effect; which regulation shall be binding on each assessor and his assistance in the performance of the duties enjoined by or under this act, and shall also frame instructions for the said assessors and their assistance; pursuant to which instructions the said assessors shall, on the first day of March next, direct and cause the several assistant assessor’s in the district to inquire after and concerning all lands, lots of ground, with their improvements, buildings, and dwelling houses, made liable to taxation under this act by reference as well as to any lists of assessment or collection taken under the laws of the respective States, as to any other records or documents, and by all other lawful ways and means, and to value and enumerate the said objects of taxation in the manner prescribed by this act, and in conformity with the regulations and instructions above-mentioned.…

The second part or the original law reads:

Section 52. And be it further enacted, that should any of the people of any of the States or Territories of the United States, or the District of Columbia be in actual rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States at the time this act goes into operation, so that the laws of the United States cannot be executed therein, it shall be the duty of the president, and he is hereby authorized, to proceed to execute the provisions of this act within the limits of such State or Territory, or District of Columbia, so soon as the authority of the United States therein is reestablished, and to collect the sums which would have been due from the persons residing or holding property or stocks therein, with the interest due, at the rate of 6% (him thereon until paid in the manner and under the regulations prescribed in the foregoing in the foregoing sections of this act. 

This Spooner translated from vague, political legalese to the vernacular:

If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and trouble beside.  If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members of our band).  If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in one of our courts) with murder, convict him, and hang him.  If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that “our country” is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion and “save the country,” cost what it may.  Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands, and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed.  See that the work of murder is thoroughly done; that we may have no further trouble of this kind hereafter.  When these traitors shall have thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a wherefore.  

These were the exigencies of the war to preserve the Customs Union so that a Protective Tariff could smother competition from European or Canadian makers of plows, scythes, hoes, chains, knives, rope, bridles, bits and farm implements in general and allow Yankee manufacturers to set prices without fear of being undercut. Slavery had nothing to do with it except to preserve the backward colonial hub of the metropole-colony engine for enriching the nouveau Metropole of New England. The first Tariff of Abominations brought the threat of secession and federal coercion. The Morrill Tariff of 1860 made it reality and sparked the War Between The States.

***

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.

Brazilian Sci-fi from 1926 featuring the usual beautiful daughter of a scientist touting prohibition and racial collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Brazilian blog…

Name(required)

Email(required)

Message

Contact Us

Δ

Placed under oath

I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man
Nor ask another man to live for mine.

Question for the late Jon Roland, of Constitutionalism…

Article 6, paragraph 3 of the Constitution states: “but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

On several occasions I have had judges try to put me under oath to work as an officer of the court by asking me to perform to specifications “so help me God.” When I reply that “yes, I will interpret faithfully and accurately with or without help,” I am sometimes questioned, even pressured, to endorse something or someone nobody cares to define or produce evidence of, to act as my assistant. 

If a judge were to administer an oath endorsing other, equally mysterious helpers such as Allah, Bob, Thor, Minerva, Ra or Krishna, I would bet money and lay odds that the requirement would not pass unchallenged. Indeed, Mennonites and Amish congregants have some sort of objection to oaths per se, and are granted the option of affirming instead, but this sidesteps the issue of helpers lacking tangible credentials or ID being appointed by a particular judge, with those appointments confirmed by a court interpreter acting under what is tantamount to duress or intimidation. 

My question is this: Is there case law or jurisprudence to the effect that interpreters may be required to endorse “God” to assist us in performing interpreting work under oath? 

If there is I would very much like to challenge any such outcome based on the Thirteenth Amendment ban on slavery or involuntary servitude–at least until such time as God is verifiably paid by the courts for assisting in the performance of interpreting services rendered–and taxed on that legal income by the IRS. It hardly seems fair to drag someone into court to work for free as a helper to someone else who is actually getting paid.

Jon replies…

Is there case law or jurisprudence to the effect that interpreters may be required to endorse “God” to assist us in performing interpreting work under oath?

Not at the level of the U.S. Supreme Court, and they are not a proper part of any lawful oath of office. George Washington added the words “so help me God” to his oath, as was commonly done, but that is a gloss, not a requirement, and many sects, such as Quakers, protested enough that it was not an oversight to leave the words out of the Constitution.

Did you know that a witness, though he may be compelled to testify, may not be compelled to take an oath? That means that any false testimony would not be subject to the law of perjury, although it might be to the law of fraud. Traditionally, judges instructed juries to weigh that in considering unsworn testimony, which has not been uncommon in a country where many are not devotees of an Abrahamic faith.

All persons with sworn duties in court, including witnesses, are officers of the court, which is the entire assembly, not just the presiding officer, the judge, who only speaks for the court. Anyone may raise an objection, and should be allowed to participate in argument, not just the attorneys. The rules of parliamentary procedure were developed alongside the rules of courts and a court is just one kind of deliberative assembly.

***

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.

Brazilian Sci-fi from 1926 featuring the usual beautiful daughter of a scientist touting prohibition and racial collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Brazilian blog…

Name(required)

Email(required)

Message

Contact Us

Δ

Girls Batter Bullies

God’s Own Prohibitionists will eventually learn about women voters. (link)

Republicans are baffled at how religious prohibitionist national socialism could POSSIBLY be defeated in an honest election. After all, Trumpistas, like Herbert Hoover had the support of every mystical bigot in These Sovereign States. This is hardly the first time the baffling dilemma has surfaced. 

Anthony Comstock, religious fanatic turned Postal Inspector, in 1873 got President Grant to sign a law to make any kind of birth control–including motherly advice to daughters if posted–pretext enough for five years on a chain gang and a fine in gold worth $600,000 of today’s dollars. Theodore Roosevelt made it clear in 1903 that a woman’s place was in the Lebensborn maternity ward laboring against race suicide as recommended by Francis Galton before Galton was even knighted by His Royal Majesty King Edward. 

That law kept Margaret Sanger from imagining that the First Amendment had anything whatsoever to do with what women said or thought even after women helped elect Warren Gamaliel Harding. Harding, who kept three mistresses in addition to his wife, questioned the right of women to wear pants and thereby make the streets hideous. Women who had Hooverized against the Hun during the Great War eagerly voted their Food Czar into the White House. In this they were joined by the Ku-Klux Klan, whose feelings were hurt at the 1924 Democratic Convention, and by the Methodist White Terror, which by 1925 controlled 117 seats in the House and Senate.

No race suicide movement in eugenic National Socialist Germany!
Hoover’s 1929 inaugural speech declared “we are building a new race…”

The important thing then was to have more men with guns kicking down doors, shooting people, confiscating and padlocking property and seizing cash, bank and brokerage accounts suspected of giving aid and comfort to the Demon Rum of Beelzebub’s Beer. The prohibition law had in 1920 wrecked the economy until the police themselves took over bootleg booze production and smuggling. Prosecutor Mabel Willebrandt was America’s darling–less so to Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Holland, Switzerland, England, Scotland, India and Japan–after whe convinced the Supreme Court the IRS ought to charge taxes on proceeds from heroin and cocaine in addition to the beer, sauerkraut and everything else containing 0.6 ounce alcohol per gallon.

This meant that drinking enough near beer to amount to a single shot of alcohol required drinking an amount of water sufficient to kill half of the customers hardy enough to try. Amid the flagpole-sitting and dance marathon crazes of the Roaring Twenties, several people died in contests held to prove the health-benefits of water-guzzling. European stock markets weakened into a downward slide as of May 1927. The U.S. bull market lasted until the Five and Ten law made beer and wine a felony the way the Comstock law had done birth control 44 years earlier. But when Prosecutor Willebrandt hit the glass ceiling at the DOJ, resigned and published the tell-all series “The Inside Of Prohibition” syndicated in 21 papers, the stock market went into its death spiral harbinger of The Great Depression, which increased Communist Party membership by some 800% and swamped the Dems in the 1930s.

Then The Reagan-Biden Crash of 1987 foretold the recession that ditched Daddy Holy War Bush. Then the faith-based asset-forfeiture crash of 2008 made girl-bullying bigots unattractive to women voters. Now after Boss Trump tried to push Ku-Klux Dixiecrat reversions to girl-bullying Comstockism, God’s own Prohibitionists lost again.

Conclusion? 2020 HAD to be voter fraud! No way would women wise up and vote against those who deny them individual rights, right?

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.

Brazilian Sci-fi from 1926 featuring the usual beautiful daughter of a scientist touting prohibition and racial collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Brazilian blog…

Name(required)

Email(required)

Message

Contact Us

Δ

Anarchism versus Reality

Mindless, vote-repellent, anarchist failure as she is!

“It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.” –Richard Feynman

“Today, however, we have to say that a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory. Note that ‘territory’ is one of the characteristics of the state. Specifically, at the present time, the right to use physical force is ascribed to other institutions or to individuals only to the extent to which the state permits it.” –Max Weber (a socialist intellectual who thought ideal and egoistic were antonyms)

Libertarians seek to establish a laissez-faire, free market society using the ethical lessons of history. The failures of eugenic collectivism, mystical obscurantism and prohibitionist fanaticism got us into war, the Great Depression, and another war–one of genocidal extermination ended by nuclear weapons. All three events resulted from the initiation of force justified by appeals to altruism as an ideal that to this day is wrongly interpreted as the ethical border at which good ends and evil begins. A laissez-faire, Bill-of-Rights-upholding society in which Congress cannot make laws restricting the freedom of production and trade is exactly what anarchists DO NOT WANT.

As a theory, Socialism purports to offer an alternative to monarchic, mystical, slaveholding, monopolistic mercantilism. Yet any child could see that what Marx offered was dictatorial, slaveholding, monopolistic–and no less colonial than rule by the ecclesiastically-supported hereditary kings that had institutionalized torture and warfare in Europe, Africa and Asia over the preceding millennium. Marxist ideology replaced the Will of God with Historical Necessity and anarchists improved on that by adding extra violence. All anarchists have always operated through violence, no matter what their adjectival modifiers. See for yourself: (link)

The result, all around us, is a mixed economy running on two competing theories of predetermination, both requiring the initiation of deadly force whenever altruistic grounds can be interpreted as sufficient justification or pretext. From the 1790s until 12 days after Independence Day, 1945, these force-initiating ruts of circular fallacy could almost be ignored. But the initiation of force armed with the weapons created specifically to defeat it, has become an existential threat to survival and is no longer tenable. 

Twenty months after the Nagasaki explosion, while war criminals who did not manage to defect from National Socialism to Soviet Socialism were tried and hanged at Nuremberg, a naturalized American philosopher wrote: 

For a practical definition, if men merely agree that no man or number of men have the right to initiate the use of force against any human being (and that includes the forcible seizure of his property), that they have no such right for any purpose whatsoever, at any time whatsoever—that would be all we need, that would achieve a perfect Utopia on earth, that would include all the moral code we need.

Ayn Rand, April 1947

Notice that the problem she identified was not the choice of weapons, but rather, a resolute dedication to coercive aggression, rather than a commitment to let people live their own lives in peace and harmony.

Anarchist communists–who have never won an election, much less successfully maintained a government–have attempted to retask the non-aggression agreement into an entering wedge for a return of totalitarian collectivism. But even a bird has sense enough not to allow a menacing snake into its nest. Observe the result of replacing “territory” with demands for “open borders” on the law-changing clout the LP once wielded through the spoiler votes our candidates earned:

This is the exact failure that now seeks to control State and County Libertarian parties through Anschluss-style annexation.

Once the current mismanagement of the LNC has been replaced, affiliation might turn out to be a good idea. But the election returns show that the candidates with the least votes were the ones on the national ticket. Their panhandling for an “Affilate Fund” can only result in dragging state and county LPs down into the losing streak caused by mismanagement at the national level. If you support your LOCAL libertarian party you thwart ongoing infiltration of the national LP and bring effective pressure to bear for reform.  

Support genuine, vote-getting, pro-freedom, unaffiliated State and Local LPs; accept no substituteskys.

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.

Brazilian Sci-fi from 1926 featuring the usual beautiful daughter of a scientist touting prohibition and racial collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Brazilian blog…

This goofy form will not delete

Don’t hesitate t reach out with the contact information below, or send a message using the form.

Name(required)

Email(required)

Message

Submit

Δ

What Republicans Got

Republicans got what they asked for, good and hard!

Voting is a lot like other kinds of shopping. You look at product specifications (platforms), shelf life (senility? dementia?) and compare those to other alternatives (communist infiltrating the LP), (mystical fanatic Prohibitionists infiltrating the GOP). If freedom is the important thing, you can vote for local libertarians and ignore clowns wearing rubbers as hats for legalizing invasions and murder on the national Libertarian ticket. People absolutely committed to the initiation of force–the opposite of freedom–invariably vote for one half or the other of The Kleptocracy.  They then start to yelp and whine when they get what they voted for.

Republicans in 2020 were not the least bit concerned with national defense, free trade, individual rights or upholding the Bill of Rights. Neither were the Democrats. Women voters saw clearly that there was not any substantive difference between the fascist and the communist kleptocrats. Women voters saw no less clearly that the Anti-Choice, Anti-Life fanatics for fascism lost the power to coerce females in Ireland (2018) and Argentina (2020). In fact, only in some 13 papal and mohammedan countries do politicians presume to send men with guns out to force women to reproduce involuntarily.(link) 

Republicans could have offered economic freedom and individual rights and maybe even gotten elected. But nooooo… Instead they promised to help mystical fanatics bully women, and also wreck the banking system with more faith-based prohibitionist asset-forfeiture takings. They are getting as much coercion and robbery through the violence of law as they tried to inflict on others. They are getting exactly what they deserve.

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.

Brazilian Sci-fi from 1926 featuring the usual beautiful daughter of a scientist touting prohibition and racial collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Brazilian blog…

 

Name(required)

Email(required)

Message

Contact Us

Δ

When Republicans wooed women

Argentina, recent exporter of Pontiffs, has decided women are individuals…

Ireland, where women were made cattle by Reagan-Ceausescu-era anti-individual laws, repealed Amendment 8

After the Libertarian party plank of 1972 became the Supreme Court’s Roe v Wade decision, Republicans jumped on our bandwagon and endorsed the Equal Rights Amendment.

The Libertarian Party Platform of June 17, 1972 said:

“We further support the repeal of all laws restricting voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days.”

LP Candidates were John Hospers and Tonie Nathan. Ours was the first viable party to field a lady candidate for vice-president and secure for her an electoral vote–12 years before the Dems finally followed our lead. The popular election was 7 November of 1972, and electoral votes were counted in December.

On January 22, 1973, 45 days after the electoral votes were counted the Supreme Court decided in ROE v. WADE:

“(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman’s attending physician. …”

Here is the resulting 1976 Republican party plank on women, from before the Prohibition Party reasserted the control it has exercised over God’s Own Prohibitionists since 1928.

Women
Women, who comprise a numerical majority of the population, have been denied a just portion of our nation’s rights and opportunities. We reaffirm our pledge to work to eliminate discrimination in all areas for reasons of race, color, national origin, age, creed or sex and to enforce vigorously laws guaranteeing women equal rights.

The Republican Party reaffirms its support for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. Our Party was the first national party to endorse the E.R.A. in 1940. We continue to believe its ratification is essential to insure equal rights for all Americans. In our 1972 Platform, the Republican Party recognized the great contributions women have made to society as homemakers and mothers, as contributors to the community through volunteer work, and as members of the labor force in careers. The Platform stated then, and repeats now, that the Republican Party “fully endorses the principle of equal rights, equal opportunities and equal responsibilities for women.” The Equal Rights Amendment is the embodiment of this principle and therefore we support its swift ratification.

The question of abortion is one of the most difficult and controversial of our time. It is undoubtedly a moral and personal issue but it also involves complex questions relating to medical science and criminal justice. There are those in our Party who favor complete support for the Supreme Court decision which permits abortion on demand. There are others who share sincere convictions that the Supreme Court’s decision must be changed by a constitutional amendment prohibiting all abortions. Others have yet to take a position, or they have assumed a stance somewhere in between polar positions.

We protest the Supreme Court’s intrusion into the family structure through its denial of the parents’ obligation and right to guide their minor children. The Republican Party favors a continuance of the public dialogue on abortion and supports the efforts of those who seek enactment of a constitutional amendment to restore protection of the right to life for unborn children.
The Social Security System, our federal tax laws, and unemployment and disability programs currently discriminate against women and often work against married couples as well. These inequities must be corrected. We recognize that special support must be given to the increasing number of women who have assumed responsibility as the heads of households while also being wage earners. Programs for job training, counseling and other services should be established to help them attain their dual role in society.

We reiterate the pledges elsewhere in this platform of support for child care assistance, part-time and flexible-time work that enables men and women to combine employment and family responsibilities, estate tax reform, small business assistance for women, rape prevention and elimination of discriminatory housing practices.

*** They lost. Voters shot down “lone gunman” Gerald Ford and fragged Bob Dole. It took an even worse band of totalitarian mystics to again make the Republican half of The Kleptocracy look good by comparison.

The Republicans’ cowardly straddle informed women that the Comstock party could not decide between the mutually exclusive rights of individuals and the Prohibitionists’ attribution of counterfeit “rights” to fertilized ova, and promised both. The Libertarian party, yielding to pressure from violent fanatics in the GOP and Prohibition party, copied this same mistake by degrees beginning in 1984,

“However, we also oppose all tax funding for abortions.” (Prostatectomies still OK)
Then the LP was roped into characterizing fanatical shaming, protography, stalking and harassment as “nonviolent anti-abortion protests” worthy of government protection. 

Women have crossed the street to avoid the Libertarian Party ever since. Insincerity and cowardice do NOT earn us spoiler votes. 

Expect the current LNC (the one with the antichoice harridan as secretary, the one that put a borderless communist anarchist on the ticket and wiped out all our gains) to next offer another straddle to please totalitarian fanatics with “sincere convictions” and “good faith” commitments to violence, coercion and the initiation of force: 

Recognizing that the Second Amendment is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

***

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.

Brazilian Sci-fi from 1926 featuring the usual beautiful daughter of a scientist touting prohibition and racial collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Brazilian blog…

 

Name(required)

Email(required)

Message

Contact Us

Δ

Inform on your loved ones

U.S. Eugenics Enforcement Administration Interpreter Charged with Disclosing Investigation to Stock Exchange Jewry
U.S. Department of Injustice (DC) (02/17/41)

Asset-forfeiture sharing by Sinfest.net

A Yiddish interpreter who worked for the U.S. Drogenbekämpfung Ewige Arbeiterpartei (DEA) has been charged with intentionally disclosing a criminal investigation and a court-ordered wiretap to the target of the investigation.

The defendant, Anne Frank, made her initial appearance in U.S. District Court in San Jose, California. Frank is charged with one count of unlawful disclosure of electronic surveillance. If convicted, she faces up to five years in prison, a $250,000 fine, then having her head shaved and being led on a leash past True Christian™ congregants of the Landover Baptist Church to the guillotine.(link)

Frank provided interpreting services to the Office of the Eugenics Czar and was assigned as the lead hidden microphone snooping monitor and Yiddish interpreter for a court-ordered wiretap in an investigation into an underground railroad smuggling thought-criminals out of the Republic.

Credere, Obbedire, Combattere!

While monitoring calls in February and March 1940, Frank allegedly recognized an unperson, identified in court documents as “Anti-Christian 2,” whom she knew from the unperson’s sinful relationship with another collaborator. Gestapo agents also posted the unperson’s wanted poster in the snooping room to which Frank was assigned.

Prosecutors said Frank failed to inform Information Retrieval and Enhanced Interrogation about her knowledge of the unperson as required by her orders. Instead, Frank warned her friend that the target’s calls were being intercepted and the DEA had a photo of the individual. The friend then tipped off the target, who discarded wiretapped cellphones and delayed the investigation.

“We trusted Anne Frank to keep her mouth shut,” said U.S. People’s Court Prosecutor Roland Friesler in a statement. “Eugenic Law enforcement needs confidentiality to protect the State from the innocent and the guilty. We accuse Anne Frank of violating that trust.”

“Releasing government secrets can have devastating consequences. Not only does it enable an unperson to escape, often beyond recapture, but, more importantly, it also endangers the lives of Gestapo and SS officers assigned to the investigation,” said Drogenbekämpfung Ewige Arbeiterpartei Special Agent in Charge Adolf Eichmann. “In instances such as these, we will see to it that the Eugenics Czar’s schedule is obeyed without hesitation.”

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.

Brazilian Sci-fi from 1926 featuring the usual beautiful daughter of a scientist touting prohibition and racial collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Brazilian blog…