With Friends Like These…

A typical email asking for money begins: Together, we’re forging ahead and navigating toward even greater accomplishments. Every step we take building party resources and infrastructure, all the hours of hard work put in by our dedicated volunteers, all the battles for ballot access and fair election procedures—(the message could end)… go down the toilet every time an infiltrator pimping for a hostile ideology penetrates the platform committee to poison our platform with nonsense! Today’s story is about a recent bit of… of what? sabotage to LP goodwill? clumsy incompetence? that could easily wipe out our 328% increase in ballot share earned in the November 2016 election.

Hearsay, apocrypha, curbside speechifying

LP News August 2018 p 5

Knapp then lays on some self-administered back-patting, flattery, apocryphal storytelling, hortative pseudo-ethics, hearsay, but no factual data. Formulated on false premises and hearsay, Knapp’s entire argument is fallacious. Candidate Trump said he likes libertarianism and was overwhelmingly elected on the promise to build the Republican platform fence.  True, Trump lost in the popular vote, but largely because the LP got four million of those votes–well over the Hillary-Trump gap.

Trump’s most popular move was the entry ban on “individuals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property,”  meaning suicide-vest terrorist ideologue brainwashees that crash planes into skyscrapers, machine-gun Paris nightclubs, run down pedestrians en masse in London, Nice and elsewhere, and today specialize in stabbing sprees much like the anarchist communists of a century ago–whose entry congress banned by law. As for borders, the first clear definition of government is an “entity which has a monopoly over the use of legitimate coercive power in a given territory.” Lack of borders typifies anarchy or war.

Knapp proceeds to assert that based on his reading of “the public mind” and his unmeasurable perception of the motion of “America’s political center of gravity” the “principles” of the LP needed “to move.” Libertarian principles in 1972 supported “laws that prohibit trespass” and urged “the maintenance of a sufficient military establishment to defend the United States against aggression” including “sufficient nuclear capacity.” The LP does not even want to recognize totalitarian governments. Nowhere in the principles or planks on which the Party was founded is there any restriction on Knapp himself buying land on the border and declaring it an entry point for jihadists and locust-swarms of refugees from unlibertarian satrapies. Knapp’s arm-waving assertions as to bedrock LP principles are fiction.

Knapp´s perceptions of principles only he sees, coupled with his public-mind-reading, his imaginary schedule of when things should happen and his sensing of massless gravity culminate in doublethink changes in the meaning of our original and recent platforms. His explanation? He “heard people.” Knapp claims he heard people “assert” that the platform plank he sought to savage might be invoked in support of a spurious and totally imaginary claim that the LP supports “collective immigration bans based on nationality, ethnicity, or religion.” Hearsay and fiction don’t get any more obvious than this.

First of all, federal laws prohibit those, but toothily demand bans on individual violent criminals. The Kleptocracy and its majority of voters have not yet changed that law, and the hearsay invoked is irrelevant even if true. Unlike Knapp, the federal government produces data its agencies claim is factual:

True? False? Exaggerated?

Enforcement and Removal Operations Report p 4. This is where el Presidente gets his figures.

This is last year’s list of what ICE claims are individual criminals they caught and turned over for prosecution or deportation. The second-largest item is Republican and Democrat sumptuary legislation banning enjoyable plant leaves, etc. Libertarian spoiler votes–to the extent we can still get any–are repealing this category of victimless “crime” even when we do not get our candidates elected. Assault, burglary, spouse-beating, robbery, rape, theft and vandalism, kidnapping, homicide and menacing are what the Republicans are mainly talking about, but Knapp never mentions. These acts are a far cry from worshipping a spaghetti monster, being brown or having a non-American passport–things Knapp imagines “some party members” associate with  a “credible threat to security, health or property.” But even Donald Trump welcomes individuals who “enrich our society and contribute to our nation.”

What has happened are visa restrictions against such People’s States as Cuba, Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea, and Sierra Leone for refusing to accept back their nationals deported from the USA. Even those are not blanket visa restrictions, but country-by-country restrictions on the more troublesome categories of visas.  These five exemplify the sort of country the 1972 LP platform urged us not to even recognize–much less reward with visas.

But as long as we’re on the topic of threats, observe in the LP News article that Knapp postures defensively at imagined menaces to nationality, ethnicity, or religion, then warns that “my fellow Libertarians will never allow” the imaginary hearsay threat to materialize. Knapp boasts that the LP “never has” supported such fictional nonsense, which is true enough. But thanks to hostile infiltrators, nobody can say that no past LP platform has ever asked voters to enshrine molestation or child prostitution.

With friends like these...

Pimp, by Tatsuya Ishida

Libertarian Party platforms and spoiler votes have overturned cruel laws banning birth control, interfered with tax hikes, and drawn the boiling wrath of fanatical looter ideologues. Naturally these ideologues will pass up no opportunity to sully our platform and make us look bad. Then again, we should expect no less–and certainly not expect honesty. Constant vigilance is due diligence.

If in need of a translator or interpreter for Latin America, look me up.
My other blog is foreign.

 

Advertisements

Ayn Rand and Sex

Conservatives of the collectivist, chaste and “celibate” persuasions, and other socialists–especially those catasterized freaks whose reading is limited to scripts–fall all over themselves at the chance to criticize Ayn Rand’s views on sex. None leap to the fore with explanations of the value of altruism, or to castigate her views on the initiation of force.

For starters, the gal was Russian, educated, and not a congregant of mystical altruist sects. She arrived in These States a Hollywood aficionada and Pola Negri fan–but also a fully functioning young woman at a time when 99 and 44/100% of such cloche-hatted creatures watched Rudolph Valentino movies with an intensity unmanifested since Argos watched Io. American women made first use of the vote to place America’s handsomest womanizer, Warren Gamaliel Harding–he of dowdy wife and three pretty mistresses–in the Executive Mansion in Washington using their 1920 election ballots.

Ayn arrived in 1926, shortly after some 10 million young men had been killed and twice as many again wounded in the Great War to forestall ratification of the Hague opium convention in the middle of an opiate glut. There was certainly no glut of eligible bachelors as Ayn Rand surveyed the pickings in Hollywood.  She literally tripped herself a man while working as a ragged extra in King of Kings, and squired by Frank doubtless took in such flickering delights as  “Son of The Sheik” (1926).

In The Sheik, the manly Saracen Ahmed, played by Valentino, captures a white girl (Agnes Ayres) complete with jodphurs, pith helmet and scarf. He tauntingly inquires whether his coy and flighty captive she is not “woman enough to know” why he brought her to his tent. There followed this priceless repartée:

“I am not accustomed to having my orders disobeyed!”

“And I am not accustomed to obeying orders!”

“You will learn!”

But the macho Ottoman ravisher plays the nice guy and fails to make his move–to the horror and disappointment of neglected American girls smoulderingly jealous of those anorexic, à la garçonne hussies lately boosting the troops’ morale “Over There!” That fault was corrected in Son of the Sheik, which hit the silver screen just as young Ayn Rand joined silent movie audiences. In it, a reformed Valentino wastes no time having his way with an (unwitting) honey-trap Mata Hari (Vilma Banky)–by engraved invitation–in a plot twist foreshadowing Kira Argonouva’s gaining of young Lev Kovalensky. There is even some foreshadowing left over for one of Mae West’s signature quips–about a gun.

Glittering o’er his faults, Valentino lustily redeems himself in the eyes of Russian and American womanhood, performing much like Francisco D’Anconia would thirty years later in Atlas Shrugged. Similarities may not have been entirely coincidence. Francisco’s full name was Francisco Domingo Carlos Andres Sebastian d’Anconia. Rudolph Valentino answered to  Rudolfo Alfonso Raffaello Pierre Filibert Guglielmi di Valentina D’Antonguolla.

Ayn Rand was no different from the millions of young American women who flocked to Valentino movies and too soon mourned his passing. Pola Negri, young Ayn’s Hollywood heroine since childhood, made a point of swooning over Valentino’s casket at every opportunity. The Fountainhead and Atlas were devoured by Robert A Heinlein, who promptly responded with another protagonist named Valentine in Stranger in a Strange Land. That very expression was first uttered by Dracula in Bram Stoker’s allegorical endorsement of Comstock Laws and the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice! Robert Rimmer novels like The Harrad Experiment, the Rebellion of Yale Marratt and Proposition 31–not to mention Grace Slick’s version of Triad, made Ayn’s unopposed and muscular dalliance with her handsome young admirer seem so tame in context that Howard Roark couldn’t help but laugh.

So 62 years after the publication of Atlas Shrugged–now selling briskly in 29 languages–Republican, Democrat, Green and Communist looters mask squirming envy with feigned shock. None dare defend altruism or the initiation of force on ethical grounds, yet Dr Tara Smith of the U. of Texas Philosophy Department has produced several alternative derivations validating Rand’s ethical and political conclusions, with likewise no response from the cognoscenti and intelligentzia. Theirs is the face of looter cowardice unmasked.

hankdotcom

If you have laws, regulations, contracts or court decisions in need of unmasking from behind a Latin American language barrier, visit my translator, interpreter or Brazilian language website.
See also my Brazilian language blog

Left and Right Phantasms

altruism, collectivism, coercion

National Socialist platform word cloud

European speech habits place altruistic Soviet communism on the “left” of a line with no dimensions, and altruistic German nationalsocialism on the “right”. The only measurable difference between the two is the relative amount of praise/contempt each has for mystical notions of gods & demons, churches, revealed faith and invisible miracles that defy physics. Both credos define altruism (the benefit of others instead of oneself) as the standard of goodness and sacrifice (betrayal of values) as commendable. None of the “left” and “right” jargon shortcuts became widespread before 1932. Why?

Small wonder, then, that Libertarians who assume none of that, regard the one-dimensional distance distinction much like a Lineland, foreign to reality. Yet the denizens of the said Lineland have completely lost sight of the crucial, so to speak, distinction between the 20th Century Left&Right and its 19th Century predecessors. Most Germans and Americans are indoctrinated from birth to believe that altruism (the common good over the individual good) is good, and that selfishness (concern primarily with one’s own life) is bad.

Here’s how German journalist Karl Marx put politics and religion in 1843:

In Germany no one is politically emancipated. We ourselves are not free. How then could we liberate you? You Jews are egoists if you demand for yourselves, as Jews, a special emancipation. … The political state, in relation to civil society, is just as spiritual as is heaven in relation to earth. On the Jewish Question, 1843.

Here is how Adolf Hitler published his view in the National Socialist Platform of 1920:

The party as such subscribes to a positive Christianity without binding itself to a specific denomination. It opposes the Jewish materialistic spirit within and around us and is convinced that a lasting recovery can only come about from within based on the principle: THE COMMON GOOD BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL GOOD.

U.S. President Herbert Hoover, Quaker enforcer of National Prohibition who referred to laissez-faire as dog-eat-dog, declared on  March 10, 1930:

The idea that the Republic was created for the benefit of the individual is a mockery that must be eradicated at the first dawn of understanding. (Hoover 1930 1976 p89)

We see then that the communist view is of government itself as god or religion. The nationalsocialist view is of a socialist nation of christians. Republicans who elected Hoover were clearly at least as opposed to egoism, individualism, ownlife, selfishness or independence as Hitler and Marx, who themselves differ mainly on whether government is god or simply god’s handmaid. Yet todays politicans and shriekers of political dogma claim that there is a straight, dimensionless line such that Marxist communism is at one far extreme, Hitlerite national socialism at another, and Herbert Hoover’s prohibitionism somewhere in between, on the yellow stripe, closer to where they say YOU belong. But if freedom were divisible into individual and economic, and mixed economy mavens could be for or against either, there would have to result four category areas–much like a Venn diagram–with only the top and bottom squares containing any integrity at all.

freedom, objectivity, reason, individuality, self-respect at top

Nolan chart compiled from the above original documents, plus Ayn Rand’s non-aggression principle

Libertarians, who regard freedom as indivisible, and individual rights as natural, do not fit anywhere on this strip. Why? Because to totalitarians any system that offers more freedom than theirs is, ipso facto anarchism, which, again, is communism, in a perfectly circular argument with no dimensions meaning, sense, values or definitions–only an imaginary, notional gradient. Nameless experts describe that as a sensible plan for comparing what politics and law are all about, with no standard of comparison included.

jhpdotcom

If you require translation or writing that makes objective sense visit Speakwrite.
My other blog is in a different language.

 

Brexit or Anschluss?

Crowds are 97% catholic and protestant

Crowds cheer as Austria is annexed by engraved invitation into Reich

Anschluss was the eagerly consummated annexation of Austria by National Socialist Germany into the Third Reich. The Reich replaced the League of Nations, whose purpose was price fixing of “chemical drugs” (mostly heroin and morphine) confiscated from Germany by way of war reparations–and the collection of cash war reparations payments. This is in Article 23 of both the Treaty of Versailles and the Covenant of the League of Nations.

(cwill entrust the League with the general supervision over the execution of agreements with regard to the traffic in women and children, and the traffic in opium and other dangerous drugs;

http://ddees.com/

Fool me twice, shame on me!

Brexit was a voted election whereby Britain decided to reclaim its sovereignty and extract itself from the Fourth Reich dominated by ecological National Socialism and taxes, fines and suffocating regulation of the very energy conversion required for the survival of an industrial society. Booty snatchers shriek “we wuz robbed” and seek to overturn the vote–just as their U.S comrades sought in December to convince State electors to vote against electric power and for carbon taxes instead. This is a repeat of 1990s propaganda urging bomber crews to surrender instead of retaliating against a Soviet nuclear attack.

In the USA, when voters rejected Democratic planks promising to make electricity generation as illegal as possible–complete with carbon taxes on everyone except the Communist Chinese dictatorship, ecological national socialists ran expensive advertisements pressuring electors. Electors were urged to vote against the pro-energy candidates–especially the party that actually won the greatest number of counties, hence states, in electoral college votes.

True, the Republicans LOST in the popular vote, because the pro-energy Libertarian Party earned 4 million votes. This is a vote total equal to the votes cast by the entire State of Virginia, and WAY more than the difference between the Democratic and Republican popular vote count totals. When was the last time you heard THAT on corporate teevee or radio?

Nobody in the Kleptocracy is eager to mention this because 1) the Democratic candidate’s husband also lost the popular vote but was elected President by the electoral college, and 2) the Libertarian Party influenced the casting of 90 electoral votes in 13 states. Last month, 27 Libertarians were elected to public office, for a total of 52 for the year. That’s a 53 percent increase over 2016! It wouldn’t do for The Great Unwashed to discover the sort of law-changing clout those spoiler votes wield. Here is the sinusoidal replacement curve fit that shows our hockey stick growth in law-changing votes. Ladies, looking for the party that values your rights more than carbon taxes? Here it is!

A fluke perhaps? The Libertarian Party fielded 827 candidates, 47 of whom were elected. That’s a 5.6% success rate at our secondary task, but still twice the candidates we elected in 2016. We are not in the business of converting people into politicians. Our main purpose is causing entrenched, subsidized looter politicians to change their votes and platforms by deleting planks that call for violation of individual rights by the initiation of force. Every time a duopoly politician loses to another, that loser will wish their platform committee had not alienated the 4% or so of voters that rallied to the Libertarian standard. We are closely tracking the Fisher-Pry logistical replacement curve, an instrument which–unlike GISS tampered-data temperature projections–has enormous predictive power, predictive power such as would do Hari Seldon proud in an Isaac Asimov trilogy.

Need a translator? Laws, lawsuits, contracts…
Seen my foreign blog?

Spoilers and voters

Remember?

Visit more Grateful Dead wallpaper

Jerry Garcia of the San Francisco Grateful Dead was opposed to choosing between evils. Garcia commented in 1984 that he was “as afraid of Mondale as… of Reagan” and lamented that “a third way” had nearly come about. Jerry Garcia only voted once in his life. But musicians, like movie actors, typically have no clear idea what government is or how elections work–it’s not their job. Very few people understand the law-changing clout delivered by spoiler votes.

Both Kleptocracy parties are run by platform committees made up entirely of lobbyists. These lobbyists are as clueless as rock musicians when it comes to the real purpose of a legitimate government. They simply peddle coercion to the highest bidder, and pump up the fear of similar coercion threatened by their collectivist competitors. Because the current Kleptocracy has evolved over the last 158 years to pander to the same pool of voters, its two factions have to be nearly identical–differing only in one or two crucial and potentially deliverable platform planks.

When an outside party forms to challenge the cartel, shills and tarbrushers attack by ignoring the competing platform. Instead, they name-call any individual candidates offering the American voter an opportunity to exercise integrity. “Spoilers!” they say. The truth, however, is that the lobbyists who got the Republican Party to betray the American people with coathanger abortion planks in partisan huffery against the Libertarian-written Roe v Wade decision, planks ordering men with guns to shoot our kids over plant leaves. The GOP’s Holy War bombing and invasion of Ottoman sheikdoms were guaranteed to bring hijackers flying into U.S. civilian buildings.  These platform lobbyists–not voters or candidates–are the spoilers. They have turned the Republican party into a machine for wholesale violation of individual rights and a land-mine for financial collapse. Spoiling–like shifting the blame for one’s own cupidityis an inside job.

The Democratic party, which relies heavily on altruist collectivism amounting to government in the role of surrogate parent or deity, lost badly in 2016 and barely held on in 2018. Their failure is primarily because of soiled platform declarations based on pseudoscience and Goracular documendacities. Doomsday weather nonsense is Soviet propaganda left over from 1960, happily demolished by a look at unvarnished (not GISS, which isn’t even internally consistent) weather data.

For translations and explanations of how prohibition causes market crashes, stay tuned.
Visit my Brazilian blog.

 

 

 

Spoilers and bolters

Google does not want you to read this

See Original The National Republican 24 NOV 1872

During Reconstruction–a euphemism for military occupation of conquered low-tariff states–a bolter was a voter who a left one duopoly party to vote for “the” other party. Continue reading

Libertarian voters in Brazil

Not voting for the communist or fascist candidate is illegal

NONE OF THE ABOVE and ABSTAINING Brazilian presidential runoff votes in 2018

When America’s prohibitionist asset-forfeiture collapse of 1987 hit South America, the situation resembled that of Germany when President Warren Harding was pronounced dead with no inquest or autopsy. Inflation went through the roof, the government collapsed and looter politicians set to work on a “new” constitution.

You can't have your cake and let your neighbor eat it too.

Paper rights inflate into worthlessness like paper money.

Droves of Brazilian voters illegally boycotted the first election under the new, book-length Constitution (14.4% abstaining and 5.82% casting blank ballots).  As collectivized “rights” inflated into worthlessness, about 2.5 million Brazilians emigrated to other countries in a massive brain-drain.

Aside from its role in writing the court decision that enforced a woman’s right to control her own reproduction, Americans hardly remembered the infiltrated and weakened Libertarian Party in 1988. But dictatorships absolutely dominated by looter ideologies recognized in the LP an existential threat to the continuity of totalitarian coercion. Borrowing from Nixon’s anti-libertarian law, politicians elsewhere began preferentially subsidizing parties that extort money at gunpoint.  With scary lessons learned from Ayn Rand’s essay on collectivized rights, male-dominated governments given to every shade of communo-fascist cleptocracy proceeded to inflate the number of looter parties empowered to suck sustenance through the government teat. And it worked!

Nationalistic socialists controlling European elections eagerly subsidize, regulate, smear and smother libertarian parties out of existence. Lateran-treaty Juntas in South America do the same, and one or two inject subsidies to inflate to over 32 the number of communist, socialist and fascist parties gobbling at the trough of Brazil’s tax revenue. That’s nearly the number of parties operated in Weimar Germany when Hitler was made Chancellor.  Since all parties are perforce tax-subsidized, the Kleptocracy says it “cannot afford” to add a non-looter party. Pretty neat, huh?

The upshot of all this is that Brazilian voting machines offer three (03) choices: communist soft machines, fascist soft machines and NONE OF THE ABOVE. These blank and spindled NO votes can realistically be counted as votes that would likely be cast in favor of Libertarian Party platform candidates, if such a thing weren’t excluded by the violence of law. The 21% turnout means 79% of eligible voters broke the mandatory voting law. In some cities, None of the Above got more votes than the winning kleptocrat. The spoiler vote fraction is what they call the taxa de alienação. Even if we ignore the no-shows, NOTA got 10% of the votes cast. That’s three times the vote percentage earned by the U.S. Libertarian Party! Here’s how they describe the national results:

O PT e TSE juntos elegeram a Junta

Green represents potential Libertarian Party votes

With the upcoming repeal of the Red Arbeiterpartei’s Kristallnacht gun laws, the suppression of libertarian voters is bound to become increasingly difficult. When coerced and subsidized election restrictions do collapse, spoiler votes will leverage the coalescing kleptocracy into repealing bad laws and deleting parasitical taxes. This, after all, is what the LP has been doing in the USA for 46 years now. Instead of electing our own politicians, we help voters defeat the worst of the opposition.

Brazilians, Colombians, Argentinos… transplants in the US can either vote or donate to the US  and Canadian Libertarian Parties, and the LP will continue to euchre politicians into repealing bad laws. How? By giving voters the opportunity to emphatically reject the socialist and nationalsocialist tendencies that have taken over the Democratic and Republican parties. These are the American parties that run the NSA and CIA that are empowered to snoop on Latin American politicians and leak damaging information to their adversaries. Many bad laws that cripple Latin American economies were exported there by America’s violent runaway Kleptocracy.

When in need of translators skilled in international contracts and court cases, look us up at Speakwrite or Falascreve.
My other blog is mostly in Portuguese.