Government since 1908

Of cabbages and kings

Democracies were encroaching upon monarchies…

Fivescore and eleven years ago HL Mencken held forth on his interpretation of the thoughts of Friedrich Nietzsche. Mencken’s parents were German. Germans had flowed into both Texas and the USA during the build-up to the Opium Wars, and published newspapers. Henry Lewis was uniquely positioned to understand, and that he did.

The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche is an eight-dollar book not discussed much in objectivist circles. In it unfolds an examination of Christian beatitudes oddly reminiscent of Galt’s Speech–that part of Atlas Shrugged mystical conservatives scrupulously avoid reading and never attempt to refute. Yet the German’s perorations, as interpreted in American, shed light on the previous and upcoming elections.

Before individual rights were defined, as mankind wearily shrugged off God’s Own Papist monarchies, semi-log paper made a logistics curve appear as a straight line in which monarchies shrivel toward zero and “democracies” gain market share. The planet was approaching the point of inflection in the sigmoid substitution curve.

Government was just being defined and would in 1914 acquire stable meaning as a bounded monopoly on legitimate force. But rights, hence legitimacy, were undefined other than by Jefferson’s tentative and partial enumeration and “freak legislation” had the year previous transformed the Pure Food Law into machinery for destroying the U.S. economy.

Ayn Rand wrote fan mail to HL Mencken, obviously read his writings on Nietzsche, and just as obviously noticed the absence of individual rights. What passed for rights to the German were 1. things the individual is able to do despite opposition by his fellow men, and 2. things he is enabled to do by the grace and permission of his fellow men. Meh.

While Germans were swinging from the gallows in Nuremberg, Ayn Rand reformulated life, eudaimonia, as the touchstone standard of moral value whereby rights could be legitimized in terms of choices that make happiness possible. Another writer, mathematician Larry Niven, in Protector developed a race of Nietzschean alien supermen that were brave, competent, smart, but lacking in the happiness Jefferson associated with rights and even Nietzsche associated with philosophy.

 

New and happy replacing Old and senile parties

Votes for Libertarian Freedom replacing Collectivism and Sacrifice party votes

Rand’s Non-Aggression Pledge handily trashed Aldous Huxley’s “peace through inanition” policy and lay the ethical framework for a society unbowed by braying mystics, unsubmissive to the sacrificial demands of grim totalitarians, and unyielding in its commitment to progress toward happy freedom in the minimization–perhaps eventual elimination of the initiation of force–one war criminal at a time, if need be. In Rand’s Hollywood days, filming King of Kings while Calvin Coolidge restrained dangerous fanatical zeal, pledges were still a popular thing.

Can you explain whether Prohibition and The Crash were related by causation or coincidence? Amazon Kindle has the answer for the cost of a craft pint readable on any smartphone in either of two languages. Learn why by 1932 voters were pledging “I’ll never vote republican again!”

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

Advertisements

Petition Project v. Consensus impostors

Over 30,000 degreed scientists signed the Petition Project successfully urging the Senate to reject the Kyoto Protocol. Yet politicians too ignorant to integrate by parts or even differentiate a simple constant apply religious tests for office.

Arrayed against the 30,000 is the self-styled “Consensus” of unlisted looter scientists. The Consensus claim amounts to unquestionable religious belief impersonating science in the name of Ochlocracy panic. Anonymous sockpuppets haunt internet videos, heaping shrieks and abuse upon “deniers.” But just how many of these Affirmers preach the Revealed Word of the Consensus to the faithful?

centerpetitionIn Legates et al. (2013)Watts Up With That revealed that only 41, or 0.3%, of 11,944 learned papers on climate and related topics published in the journals over the 21 years 1991-2011 flatly stated that recent global warming was mostly manmade. (This was itself premised on the existence and measurability of half a degree’s difference).

Let’s assume there were three authors prophets per paper. That would give us, um,  123 is to 30,000 as x is to 100… 0.41%. So 0.41% of so-called climate scientists set up a caterwauling din over how–because of electricity–the world is a rotisserie. THAT is a Consensus?!   Furthermore, the comparison with the Petition Project is assuming the illustrious Cassandras have actually earned a Bachelor of Science degree in ANY field of science.  One half-wit for every 100 researchers producing papers is several cards shy of a full deck.

I’m gonna have to go with the Petition Project on this one. Indeed there is healthy competition springing up in this business of scientists and educated laymen petitioning Congress on behalf of empowering humanity through access to energy. The Center for Industrial Progress has its own petition to lawmakers. The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels is shaping up as a nice companion volume to Dr Petr Beckmann’s The Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear.

It was Petr Beckmann who convinced me that the Libertarian Party was a worthwhile effort, and not a collection of mad anarchists.

cause and effect

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

For more exposés of deliberate lies about disasters see Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929, live on Amazon Kindle for the cost of a cold pint of stout.  If you find an error in the book, report it here. 

Words you can dance to

Clarity isn’t oversimplification