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)

 

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

Libertarian Party Universe of Discourse

Visual illusion

The mirror is real, the photo unaltered (link)

Every child is sooner or later faced with the God conundrum: If God is all-powerful, can he make a rock so heavy that even He Himself is unable to lift it? The puzzle is a tiny intelligence test with consequences. Children who cannot solve it–the ones eugenicists used to refer to as feeble-minded–conclude that religious superstition makes no sense and are easily enlisted into some Communist Youth Movement–believing that to be the only existing alternative. (link)

Others, equally unprepared for abstract thinking, undergo a moment of epiphany from which they emerge convinced that God obviously can produce a rock to nonsensical specifications, and are thankful for having had the Faith with which to resist the Devil’s attempt to inveigle them into the Sin of Denial. They then back political efforts to jail or kill all who disbelieve. Two wrongs make zero rights. (link)

None of these children ever grow up. At best they metamorphose into communist anarchists, democrats, republicans or fascists permanently confounded by false contradictions and unable to mature into rational thinkers. The idea of individual rights as an ethical claim to freedom of action stumps them completely. (link)

The results assume various forms: 

  • The Non-Aggression Principle says not to initiate the use of force against anyone. Therefore “we” should replace government with a state of war. 
  • “We” must abolish all government because laws against murder require prior restraint!
  • “We” must send armed agents of the Political State coercively reaching inside of women like Joe Biden because pregnant women aren’t individuals!
  • Invading armies, plague carriers and drovers of herds of infected cattle must be welcomed, because border inspection implies coercion to prevent invasion!
  • The tariff that funds Navy and Coast Guard inspections is a restraint on free trade (and hobbles entry of hostile biological, chemical and nuclear weapons) so “we” must abolish all tariffs (and instead keep the Communist Manifesto income tax).
  • “We” need shoot-first prohibitionism because pseudoscience says grass is addictive and mescalin messes up your chromiums, so Creation Science predicts we’d mutate into apes!
  • “We” need eugenics to wipe out the joos and make the world safe for altruism because eugenics says selfishness is an innate birth defect, like club-foot or feeble-mindedness!
  • “We” must rob someone else to feed the halt and lame because coercion is freedom!

Smart children, on the other hand, instantly recognize a toy–possibly even a weapon–with which to confound grownups. Brightness in a child is the belief in the ignorance of grownups–a concept physicist Richard Feynman reworked into a definition: “science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts.” This approach pays off. Artless fathers respond to God’s heavy rock conundrum with “go ask your mother.” Less-neglected parents explain how universes of discourse(link) are subject to rules of engagement that do not admit such artless dodges as equivocation, division by zero or doublethink. (link

So if you include an irresistible force in your premises, that excludes any immovable objects from that particular universe of discourse. If you include elections, that excludes anarchism. (link)

If you include a Libertarian political party in your plans, that precludes a platform to abolish the government, violate the Bill of Rights, or enshrine communist activities like bomb-throwing anarchism as some sort of protected “right” to invade, menace or otherwise initiate force or presume to retaliate. It does not preclude writing an intelligent platform calling for reversal of past mistaken amendments. The Prohibition of trade and production of alcoholic beverages was repealed by vote, and the Communist Manifesto income tax and illiterate election of senators can also be repealed. But candidates and planks that promise to violate the oath of office or Bill or Rights are a liability.

Fat Freddy and Gilbert Shelton say

Rights will get you through times of no anarchists better than communism will get you through times of no rights!

Communist anarchists, Comancheria war party raiders, warriors against individual rights of women, of blacks or semites, people who think devils are real and borders imaginary, believers in Rapture, televangelists of Apocalypse or race suicide are all just as welcome to register and vote for Libertarian candidates as engineers, scientists, actuaries, statisticians, physicians, nurses, writers, loggers, roofers, carpenters, busboys, waitresses, entrepreneurs, inventors and even attorneys. But we do not need people incapable of understanding the simplest definitions writing our political party platforms. It is tough enough to keep changing the laws through the unrelenting pressure of spoiler votes without incompetent bungling or deliberate sabotage. Fair enough? 

As you read this, infiltrators are adding planks to nullify biology inviting child molesters into both children’s bathrooms, declaring girl-bulliers act “in good faith,” package-dealing “free trade” and “migration” to again invite uninspected entry of infected cattle, foreign agents and biological weapons into These States, abolishing your copyrights, elevating “desire” over the constitutional provisions for defense, replacing the functions of government plank with an endorsement of communist anarchism (a state of war), removing national defense from international affairs, (infiltrators with no passport or second language) meddling in the territories plank, and converting the self-determination plank into a Dixiecrat endorsement of secession. 

I move that every participant who voted to approve these frauds resign or face a straight-up vote of no confidence by all dues-paying members registered to vote. I am also searching for candidates to replace certain table officers and entrenched moles. (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

 

 

A Mess of Dotage

Thanks to Gilbert Shelton of Texas

1971 Gerontocracy Politics versus the LP.org

The Don is 73, Biden (Harry Anslinger 2.0) is now the 77 Trump will attain if he makes it another four years. Bernie (Edward Bellamy 2.0) at age 78 has only one ideological peer, and that is AOC (Lolita Lebrón 2.0)–49 years younger.(link) Ronald Reagan was a mere child of 70 summers when elected, but was already having dotage problems before leaving office. 

All the Libertarian party need do is find another pro-choice nominee with a life expectancy greater than zero who has read and agreed with the platform. With that we would for the first time ever have a chance at what suckers and vidiots refer to as “winning.”(link). Robert Dear is not that nominee, and neither is Ron Paul, little Randall or Justin Amash; all are sworn enemies of individual rights for women like Ceausescu and legacy Old World mullahs, pontiffs and Ottoman kings. We want someone more like John Hospers and Toni Nathan.(link)

Communists and fascists try to infiltrate

3 out of 4 Libertarians AREN’T WOMEN thanks to race suicide collectivist infiltrators tarbrushing our party from within!

To the looter gerontocracy, “winning” means getting your candidate to dodder past the electoral college finish line so your party gets a gun in one hand and a hand in the till. To a libertarian activist, winning is using spoiler votes to cause looter antagonists to–in desperation–repeal cruel laws and lower taxes. The kleptocrats do these things in hopes of surviving a race in which Libertarian voters cover the gap between two wheezing, senile liars. Your libertarian vote is highly-leveraged currency with which you may buy back freedom or repeal coercion. Either way you look at it, you win. (link)

The Antichoice communist with Vatican

What Irish Voters Repealed by 2/3 majority

There is precedent for the noble experiment of gerontocracy. When Herbert Hoover was elected President, one of his “Good Neighbor” prohibitionist wet-your-whistle stops was the People’s State of Argentina. On April Fool’s Day of 1928 those idealistic voters elected Hipólito Irigoyen to a second non-consecutive term, per the example of Grover Cleveland. But Cleveland was only 56 at his second Inauguration in 1893. Argentina since 1928 or 2020 is hardly an example of freedom or economic success.(link)

By December of 1929 Herb Hoover was anxiously congratulating Argentina’s First Senior Citizen for surviving an assassination attempt at age 77. Irigoyen was inaugurated almost six months after the election, and actually held office until deposed in a caudillo-style military coup. His term in office lasted nearly two years. Nobody remembers him or the junta caudillo who took his place. Argentina has but small reputation as a hotbed of intellectual libertarianism.(link) Libertarian parties only exist in the freest countries, like the USA. (link)  

Never has there been a more opportune time for U.S. voters to grow some backbone and vote for the future of freedom, rather than throw away law changing spoiler votes for a mess of dotage.(link) Judge Rehnquist was the Nixon appointee who followed George Wallace’s spoiler votes to the point of voting against Roe v. Wade. He dropped in the traces at 81, way more confused than today’s Joe Biden. John F. Kennedy, coke-sniffing, joint-smoking, peace-loving acidhead bent on “a world of law and free choice, banishing the world of war and coercion,” was elected president at age 43. 

JFK was shot in the throat from ahead

JFK was shot from ground level ahead; Connally from 6 floors up

Kennedy’s murder, performed by three gunmen orchestrated by Republican and Dixiecrat nurturers of a world of war and coercion, passed that torch to a new generation. Eight years after that coup, the Libertarian Party was formed as Nixon signed into law government subsidies for entrenched, decrepit and violent soft machines.  Our first candidates, John Hospers–born one year later than JFK–and Toni Nathan, moved our women’s rights plank into the Roe v Wade decision. It took the communist party another eight years to copy the LP and offer Angela Davis as veep on a platform to abolish individual rights. The Dems copied them four years later.

WINNING is repealing cruel laws!

LP choice vote increasing 80% per year after Bush Crash!

This is an opportunity not to be missed. But it is better not to have a candidate than to let another religious fanatic infiltrator announce to women everywhere that the LP seeks to bully and coerce them. Leave that to the Republicans, Dixiecrats, Tea-totalitarians Middle-Eastern monarchies and Old World fascism. Even in Ireland 2/3 of voters decided women, not the papacy, are the individuals with rights. (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

Germ lab virus

bio-warfare goes way back

German Influenza dispenser from 1918 Brazilian paper

Remember Soviet Afghanistan? During that fight over locally grown opiates, demobilized Soviet and U.S. personnel turned up with an African monkey virus. Outbreaks in the U.S. closely followed the hepatitis outbreaks in cities that in 1969 had banned clean needles. Even the Soviets admitted to some slight contagion. Governments blamed gays in order to not admit their policies caused the epidemic. In Africa the outbreaks fanned outward from former German colonies–dumping grounds for injectable narcotics since 1912, when the China market closed.

The current Communivirus flap has been stirred–like global warming pseudoscience when smacked upside by Ivar Giaever–by a Nobel laureate in his own field, Luc Montagnier. What does he say? Pretty much what the Indian geneticists said before being declared unpersons:(link

With my colleague, bio-mathematician Jean-Claude Perez, we carefully analyzed the description of the genome of this RNA virus,” explains Luc Montagnier, interviewed by Dr Jean-François Lemoine for the daily podcast at Pourquoi Docteur, adding that others have already explored this avenue: Indian researchers have already tried to publish the results of the analyses that showed that this coronavirus genome contained sequences of another virus, … the HIV virus (AIDS virus), but they were forced to withdraw their findings as the pressure from the mainstream was too great.

Delightful, huh? Remember all this when the Dems and Gee-Oh-Pee wheedle you not to cast your law-changing Libertarian spoiler votes in November.(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

ANcapitulation versus Libertarian Party

Nazi beavers from a Canadian publication

An Austin Cartoonist suggested Beaver for LP mascot and anarchism as policy!

Collectivist infiltrators exploit primitive literalism to weaponize the NAP against the party that consistently cuts taxes and repeals bad laws. Could a communist anarchist Fifth Column destroy the LP from within? It is doing it now by exploiting three errors in thinking.

Ayn Rand formulated the non-aggression agreement in April of 1947, as National Socialist war criminals fled into Soviet Russia and South America to avoid trial and execution. In the same letter Rand explained that any definition which is not specific, not objective, is dangerous. The LP platform of 1972 advocates minimizing coercion–including coercion through menacing by government or criminals acting against individual rights–within the electoral system under the U.S. Constitution. Its goal is limitation of political power to the defense of individual rights through objectively defined laws against initiation of force, fraud and violence. This goal is what communists posing as libertarians are AGAINST

To defeat our purposes communist infiltrators claim that “no true libertarian” can collaborate with the world’s shortest Constitution because it includes the power “to lay taxes” (which meant inspection of imports funded by a tariff for revenue). This call to armed treason never mentions a better constitution and instead rejects the existence of national boundaries in favor of eternal warfare in the form of guerilla bands competing in forcible restraint, as in the Middle East.

Fascist infiltrators greet these efforts with whoops of joy, for they need only point to soi disant communist infiltrators and holler “murdering anarchists.” That tarbrush colors voter perceptions as they approach the ballot box to choose between endorsing our platform or the Kleptocracy. Anarchists infiltrating the platform committee after the Roe v Wade decision incorporated our 1972 platform plank ruined that victory for women’s rights by adding mandatory pederasty planks.(link) Just this year saboteurs declared checking passports and denying entry to herds of infected cattle aggression!(link) We’re lucky to be rid of that idiot plank, but the saboteurs who swatted us with it are still on the platform committee and need to resign or be fired so we may continue to replace the cleptocracy. 

WINNING!

Increasing is WINNING

Spoiler votes amended the Constitution to include a communist income tax and a prohibition amendment, both pointing loaded weapons at Americans. But Libertarian spoiler votes are reversing those types of laws by the same process. So every LP candidate who gets any votes at all wins by changing the laws. Spoiler means making kleptocracy looting difficult. 

spoiling for a fight

Increasing is WINNING!

Winning is what our voters get. They might not put someone on a payroll, but there is no way to ignore the platform demands of a party that gets 4.5 million votes in the Presidential race, and another 7 million votes in down-ballot races. In order to keep from losing to the other kleptocrats, republicans have to let go of girl-bullying and prohibition, and democrats have to let go of tax hikes and packing government jobs with officious meddlers. 

So 1. The NAP does not imply admitting barbarian invaders, 2. our spoiler votes are leveraged demands cannot be ignored and shift over 100 electoral votes, and 3. winning is what happens when the fascists and communists back away and repeal coercive legislation. 

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