Comparison Voting

Zippy Pinhead for Vice President

Today Dems and fake Libertarian Delegates favor communist anarchism

Remember comparison shopping? You look at different product features and compare before choosing? Here is a table for voters:

 

 

Libertarian

Democrat

Republican

Aggression

No

Yes

Yes

Prohibitionism

No

Yes

Yes

Bombings abroad

No

Yes

Yes

Capitation tax

No

Yes

Yes

Race Collectivism

No

Yes

Yes

Asset Forfeiture

No

Yes

Yes

Communism

No

Yes

No

Fascism

No

No

Yes

Ballot access

Yes

No

No

Censorship

No

Yes

Yes

Anarchism

?

No

Yes

Free markets

Yes

No

No

If you are shocked to see the Kleptocracy’s own media feigning surprise at the initiation of force, aggression and violence sweeping the nation, ask yourself if the aggression you see is not what you voted for. ***

Read pro-American compulsory racial-eugenics appeals touting prohibition and collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Three dollars on Amazon Kindle

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 blog

Hyphenated parasitism

Jesus freak christianofascism

Christian Vegan depicted as extreme-right in Germany (link)

Anarchism is the same thing as communism. If in doubt, see in their own garbled renderings how indistinguishable they are. (link

Back in the 1890s, when communism, anarchism and socialism were the same collectivist thing, with no gulags, death camps, killing fields or cyanide Kool-Aid suicide tests, few hyphens were needed. Bellamy’s strikers, Howells’ Altrurians and Jack London’s proletarians were proud of their altruistic belief in the initiation of force–provided only that the altruistic aggression were dictated by the historical necessity that made the triumph of socialism over monarchic industrial colonial mercantilism inevitable. There was nothing even remotely resembling laissez-faire agorism under Comstock laws and the Society for the Suppression of Vice.

Bryanism

Crucify Mankind on a Cross of Altruism

To add palatability, majority rule advocates and expropriation enthusiasts added “social” or “people’s” and “republican” (often meaning Red) as descriptive modifiers considered attractive at the time. Instead of communist parties pushing Karl and Friedrich’s progressive income tax, they were called Greenback, Anti-Monopoly and People’s. Under the big umbrella of racial eugenics, prohibitionists and communists, christians and other collectivists, often made common cause. (link)

Communism eats Dems

Anarchism now tries to Swallow LP

But no sooner had Russia’s NKVD and OGPU gone KGB and Germany’s Staatspolizei gone Gestapo, SS and Stasi than people began fleeing and killing themselves rather than submit to those paradises of worker altruism. Jew jokes making fun of selfishness disappeared when National Socialism came to power in February of 1933. The Soviet Socialist noble experiment was by then known to have resorted to genocidal extermination to loot grain crops to sell for hard currency. (link)

With the moral stature of altruism thus revealed as no less deadly than other forms of parasitism, mimesis became more and more important as a stalking-horse for depredation. Mercantilism was renamed capitalism and all communo-fascist variants of socialism mislabeled themselves with hyphenated imitations of “something else.” (link)

Anti-Libertarian Society

Creeping Fabian Socialism

Just as ants, mice, fish, birds and mammals are exploited through mimicry by social parasites, so mimesis plays a role in converting government from defender of individual rights to parasitical aggressor by camouflage, imitation, misdirection and impersonation. Shorn of the sheepswool of altruism as a proxy for “good” intentions, looter ideologies have no choice but to resort to hyphenation in order to mask themselves as something less noxious. (link

Locust

Now you see it…

Look around you and you see democratic, progressive, liberal, as modifiers masking and disguising socialism the better to take its target hosts unawares. As libertarian political ideology matures into a peace and freedom party increasing its vote share at 80% per annum by dislodging the parties of aggression, it is no surprise that aggressors of the looter persuasion suddenly describe themselves as “pro-life,” “pro-freedom,” “democratic-socialist” and “anarco-capitalist.” (link)

Destructive parasitism

Anarcho-parasitism preserves bad laws

The one practical lesson these hives have handed down to Libertarians is that very few spoiler votes for a consistent platform are needed to cause the scissioned and fratricidal Kleptocracy change its laws, planks and Constitution in hopes of keeping its withering hand in the till.(link) Libertarian politicians need to make voters aware that a wasted vote is a vote appeasing any part of the initiation of force–whether for Gott und fascismus or Historical necessity and communism in their various masks, disguises and euphemistic aliases. (link) (link)

Libertarian vote growth

LP vote growth since 2000, percentage

Every vote cast for an actual LP candidate threatens looters with financial and coercive power losses unless they back away from cruel laws. The spoiler vote strategy worked when fanatical prohibitionists and socialist looter parties joined forces to pass the 16th, 17th and 18th Amendments. Now that voters have seen the outcome of Christian fascism in Germany’s death camps and added mass death in Soviet gulags and grain famines, that ancient strategy now works to repeal cruel and coercive legislation enacted in those ignorant times. (link

Read pro-American compulsory racial-eugenics appeals touting prohibition and collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Three dollars on Amazon Kindle

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 blog

Libertarian Party nominates communist anarchist

With friends like communist anarchists...

Anarchists infiltrate and sabotage the LP.org

With the LP increasing its vote share by an additional 80% per year, it would be silly to expect the trillionaire looter kleptocracy to sit back and let that continue. Last election’s finalists included an overt Republican warmonger explicitly rejecting the Non Aggression Pledge required for party membership, several non-entities and Gary Johnson. Gary’s pro-choice nomination netted us 4 million votes, which multiplied his previous anti-choice outcome by 328%.

WINNING!

Pro-choice LP candidate on a good platform


Delegates had the presence of mind to pick the first female presidential candidate backed by a party. Hopefully Jo is not a stealth Phyllis Schaffly. So far so good.

Among the losers were Vermin Boothead, the image of a skid row infiltrator, and his for-veep sidekick, a communist anarchist answering to Spike Cohen.(link) Cohen’s candidate statement is:

I understand that the Platform is an attempt to compromise between different positions and I completely respect that, but as an individual candidate my policy is anarchy.

Anarchy, like socialism is a synonym for communism and vice-versa, and has been for the past century. As soon as the Libertarian Party formed, conservatives promptly tarbrushed libertarians as anarchists. Democrats recalled the 1932 campaign, in which Republicans intimated that liberals favoring relegalization of beer were communist sympathisers.(link) Democrats were at the time being engulfed by the 700% increase in communist membership brought on by the Hoover Crash and Depression.(link) Today’s anarchist message is unilateral disarmament and surrender in violation of the Second Amendment.(link) The Second Amendment definitely applies to nuclear weapons and antimissile systems. (link)

Anti-defense street people non-voter lobby

What Republicans and other Socialists want voters to associate with the Libertarian Party

No surprise then that the Bernie bro does NOT support any version of the Libertarian Party platform. His albatrossing of Jo smells a lot like a sore loser caucus attempt to tarbrush the campaign with communist associations–in the middle of a germ war pandemic. After all, their footwear-headwear Wavy Gravy impersonator failed to associate us with inmates of the State Home for the Bewildered and repeal of the Second Amendment.(link)

The delegate selection process needs to be examined as sternly as the screening of saboteurs injecting nonsense into the platform. Spike is vote repellent just as girl-bullying antichoice mystics foisted on us by Republicans are vote repellent. The fewer spoiler votes the LP earns, the faster the Kleptocracy will sentence people to thousands of years in prison–the ones it does not kill outright in no-knock raids against plant leaves. (link

Platformista for life?

Is this what writes your platform now?

Infiltrating whack jobs into the LP.org costs us law-changing spoiler votes. This literally helps the looters rob, imprison and murder people. We have the Mises Caucus to thank for this. Remember that name when our vote count drops to under one percent again.

Send money to your state and local LP and support their candidates. Let the communist party support the sold-out national LP and replace its staff with Bank of China bureaucrats until national party saboteurs can be rooted out. 

Monteiro Lobato wrote a pro-American book bristling with eugenics and endorsements of Prohibition in 1926. Here is the science fiction story of the U.S. presidential election of the year 2228, translated into English by J Henry Phillips. (link)

For more on how Republican prohibitionism crushed the U.S. economy and brought on the Great Depression, why not download Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929? The book is live on Amazon Kindle and you can read it on a cellphone for the cost of a craft pint at a pub.

cause and effect

Brazilian blog (link)

 

Anarchism, Spain, 1933

bomb-throwing commies

Socialist laborite malcontents (link)

EVERY time the word Anarchist appeared in newspapers before 1971 it meant “violent communist.” Thanks in part to Republican Party manipulation of the press, America’s illiterati suddenly decided to believe “anarchist” meant Libertarian, that is, voters who signed the non-aggression principle. But before you consider this the height of criminal stupidity, recall that the same thing happened before, in 1932.(link

Before 1932, right wing and left wing were subjective terms used to describe troop movements, and had nothing to do with mercantilism or socialism. But when the Liberal Party published its 1931 anti-Klan platform calling for relegalization of beer, prohibitionists ignored it.(link)  They struggled to ignore it until the Liberals donated the plank to the Democrats.(link) Eugenics-minded prohibitionists then adopted Hitler’s use of “liberal” which roughly meant disloyal selfish Jewish communist backstabbers.(link) Then again, in the same newspaper we see Democrats trying to redefine some of their own tarnished hero-images in the funny pages. 

Republican-Nationalsocialist redefining of “liberal” was received by repeal forces with whoops of joy as a badge of pride, and has gradually been sculpted to mean Fabian socialist by its defenders and fifth-column communist by Republicans. Teenagers look up the real meaning (libertarian-leaning) in dictionaries and decide it’s a good thing. I certainly did. The thing about generalizations is that any counterexample seriously weakens them–much the way a single dissenter drastically weakens the opinion-shaping power of majority social pressure.(link

But the dictionary and newspapers in several languages make it equally clear anarchism is a synonym for warfare in general, and communist guerrilla warfare in particular. I have been republishing news clippings like these for years. So when was the last time you saw a pre-1971 article equivocating Ancap or Antifa goons with Libertarians, objectivists or capitalists?

communist stabbers and bombers

Anarchists, violent socialists, labor goons, communists (continued)

When seventies antichoice Republicans screeched “liberal!” they meant anti-prohibition Libertarians who wrote the platform plank that became the Roe v Wade decision enforcing individual rights. In the 1980s the Republican version of the meaning shifted to include pederasts, tax-and-spend looters and all manner of godless socialists and communists. 

At about that time sabotage planks appeared in the LP platform, lending substance to those smears, while unemployed socialists, labor goons, antichoice mystics, communists, malcontents and looters in general “joined” the LP to explain that anarcho-communism is the real “ancap” libertarianism. This lot infiltrates the platform committee to twist the verbiage into something John Hospers–indeed any thinking person–could recognize as sabotage by agents-provocateur. 

Democrats today honestly identify Republicans as fascist while Republicans just as honestly identify Democrats as communist-socialists. Yet both parties hotly deny that either label applies to themselves. Impersonation and mimesis have replaced definitions and identification among parasites.

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 blog

Clear libertarian principles

The 1972 Libertarian Party Statement of Principles is far and away the best such presentation anywhere today. But the clearer we make it the less chance there is for regrettable misinterpretation. The fallacy of equivocation is the assignment of different meanings to a term, usually by accident or oversight. The word in question, however, is the noun form of “right” or “rights” the thing we seek to defend. Here is the correct usage, in which a right is an ethical claim to freedom of action: 


We hold that each individual has the right to exercise sole dominion over his own life, and has the right to live his life in whatever manner he chooses, so long as he does not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live their lives in whatever manner they choose.

Compare that with Thomas Jefferson’s phrasing: 

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Jefferson makes a clear distinction between rights and powers. Here is an LP rendering Jefferson could improve by editing: 

Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle, that the State has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labor. Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the life of the individual and seize the fruits of his labor without his consent.

Clearly, this version of a “right” is at best a legitimized power or a deontological arrogation of coercive privilege, and conservatives, fascists, socialists and communists delight in misattributing those meanings to “rights,” just as gleefully as they blur the distinctions between freedom and coercion.

A right is a moral claim to freedom of action was drummed into our UTEXAS Ethics classes by tenured Prof Tara Smith, who dared us to refute it. The definition is consistent with most of our criminal code, Constitution and Declaration. If a right is a claim to freedom (absence of coercion) it can hardly be retasked into a political provision for the execution of convicts, belligerent criminals or enemy combatants, all of which mean the exercise of political power. Even in classical terms, political power in social sciences is the capacity to see to the physical restraint of men, hopefully men who have abdicated their claim to freedom by aggressing against others.

Physics according to the Hog of Steel

Prof. W. Warthog, PhilbertD.


By analogy with freshman physics, where force times distance is work, and the rate at which work is done is power, political power is the same, with the caveat that since the exercise of physical restraint typically involves harmful and often deadly force, the rate at which that sort of work can be done is people incapacitated/killed per unit of time. Look at comparisons of military force and they are measured and expressed in those terms. So if we want to keep clear the distinction between the exercise of individual rights and exercise of the physical restraint States are tasked with using to secure those rights, we ought to resist blurring the distinction.

On the practical side, the change ought not to cost us any votes. I expect that the added clarity will better attract the support of anyone we could ever hope to attract. Even if the suggestion undergoes defenestration, I would then turn to attempting to replace the equivocated “right” with “legal standing”, “authorized authority” or some other, more appropriate construction. Even the “right” to kill in self defense is only a sloppy expression of the special, often regrettable, unintended and unfortunate case of the freedom or right to act in self defense in situations so fluid and dangerous that a jury might agree that the fatal outcome could be justified in a court of law or court-martial. Nicholas Sarwark is more qualified to expound on that collocation.

Suppose the original idea was to deliberately misuse “right” as a venomous barb on what amounts to a criticism of (imputed) wrongs we hope to right. Then I beg leave to suggest the barb was way too subtle for the opening statements intended to enlist support for us. As a joke it does not translate well. Right this minute there are 20 other countries looking to us as exemplars for the drafting of platforms for advancement of rights and minimization of coercion—even if less than instantaneous. Examining just a few of the “constitutions” those people have to work under makes one appreciate the advantage of a Constitution smaller than 8000 words.

This language is in the original platform, which I cherish and defend, yet would not hesitate to rescue from error. I have always admired Hospers and Nolan and would argue the same point to them. This is something no later platform committee can be blamed for, yet its importance is so fundamental (especially when you contemplate expressing it in other languages), that I feel obligated to advance this suggestion. I of course welcome the most vigorous attacks on its supporting logic and rhetorical usefulness.

I move that the expression be reexamined and incorrect iterations of the word “right” be replaced with “political power” something more appropriate for the description of even the most salutary government coercion. If that motion fails, I would move that the incorrect specimens be placed in quotes. 

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 blog

Germ warfare and China

Germ War Genocide prophet

Socialist lecturer 1907

The current viral pandemic looks a little like the bacteriological war designed by an American communist. The story dates back to the battered, bowed and bloodied Quing Dynasty, a few years before the 1911 revolution.(link) It was written before the Celestials were invaded by Japan, then later degenerated into a socialist dictatorship. The American communist was Jack London, author of Alaskan Wolf and Dog stories of the gold rush days, stories our parents were pleased to see us devour in childhood. London was an admirer of all variants of “the German philosophy” and bore bitter hatred for merciless, remorseless laissez faire. Nothing less than the initiation of deadly force made any sense to that socialist orator and author.

Comrade Jack London revealed to a surprised America that “The Japanese is not an individualist.” This in The Yellow Peril, written back when racial collectivism was completely fashionable–at least among the pukka sahib.(link) Our eugenicist Republican President had opined that American women were duty-bound to reproduce. To think otherwise, according to Theodore Roosevelt, was “race suicide.” (link)  

The Unparalleled Invasion was written shortly after The Yellow Peril. In it “all countries” attack a relatively peaceful China with germ warfare agents. The story was written as sci-fi predicting the distant future year 1976. So if the Chinese controlled the World Health Organization and took over FATF to wreck the banking system as a bioweapons attack kicked in, they got the idea from America’s own Wild Dog looter.(link) Go to gutenberg.org and find Jack London’s The Strength of The Strong, where the story starts on page 60.(link)

Jack London prediction realized

1932 cartoon matches Jack London’s 1904 predictions

Jack London was one with the prohibitionist communists urging passage of the income tax, prohibition and proletarian Senate election Amendments. Objectivists may feel a sense of schadenfreude to learn that the author of “Love of Life,” supposedly committed suicide in 1916; his half-brother Louis London was said by police to have shot himself in suicide in January of 1965. (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.

Brazilian blog

Is Freedom Prime?

What brand of socialism for you today?

Three of the four categories are Socialist, hence normal and mainstream by looter standards

The Nolan chart made visible the thing that separates Fabian Socialists from doi-disant “conservatives.” But for good measure it also underscored a crucial point on which Libertarians and Totalitarians agree. I refer to the divisibility of freedom.

Biblical mythology tells of an unelected monarch surrounded by concubines and other women and called upon to settle disputes–such as who a child belongs to. By applying the standard of simplistic egalitarian fairness and offering to sever the kid asunder, he prompted the real mother to realize her child could not be divided and live. Her child was prime, indivisible. Its individual life was to her a value, and in acting on those premises she inadvertently identified herself as the true mother.

The pansy “left” and religious “right” reproach each other for hypocrisy or conflicting premises. But listen closely and you discover they are simply quibbling over how best to chop freedom to pieces. “Both” agree on lack of value, vagueness, equivocation, indecision and cowardice as virtues. Both value altruism, albeit distorted by meaningless modifiers. Both seek to send others (tax gougers, doctor killers, thugs with guns) to threaten, coerce and kill if victims need sacrificing.(link)

Both the lay and mystical looters understand that to impress onlookers with the benefits of yielding to social pressure and intimidation, some must be killed as examples. All in the three squares defining those who seek to divide or destroy freedom are willfully blind to any possible alternative to the initiation of force. They also struggle to evade the fact that there is a third choice. Only by casting a libertarian spoiler vote can you confront them with their own self-deception.(link)

Totalitarian communists and fascists cling tenaciously to the revealed faith that coercion is indivisible–so much so that any talk of watering it down with effete compromise is to them not simply heresy, but actual criminal menacing. To them it goes without saying that the very suggestion that there is something wrong with the initiation of force justifies the initiation of deadly force.(link)

Fascism or socialist communism? What'll it be?

1939: Religious Fascism and Socialist Communism, either-or, no 3rd choice, it CAN happen here


Actual libertarians (not Anarcho-communist infiltrators) are no less convinced that freedom is indivisible. They at best pity the conflicted, indecisive looters-mislabeled-as-liberals and mystical bigots unable to settle on whom to sacrifice first for the common “good.” The fundamental conviction–the one that makes a difference–is what to protect from division: life, reward and freedom? or coercion–which requires aggressive killing in order to be taken seriously enough to intimidate the survivors?

Libertarians (in the top square) seek to protect freedom from division. The bottom square is cluttered with communo-fascist socialists–all of them committed to making coercion total, indivisible, all-encompassing–while they pretend to be in the left and right squares. Inability to decide on divisibility is what clutters the sidewalks with the indecisive left-and-right whose votes elect looter parties to rob us. Please listen closely to what the so-called “left,” “right” and totalitarian looters say about each other, then decide whether to participate in their blood feuds or vote Libertarian.

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 blog