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.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 29coversmall.png

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)

Three dollars on Amazon Kindle

Brazilian blog

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.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 29coversmall.png

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)

Three dollars on Amazon Kindle

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.

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.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 29coversmall.png

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)

Three dollars on Amazon Kindle

Brazilian blog


When Republicans wooed women

Grrrl ballots rule!
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, 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.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 29coversmall.png

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)

Three dollars on Amazon Kindle

Brazilian blog


Many Words and Many Lies

You are getting sleepy...

The vertical axis shows the number of words (blue line). The US Constitution is 7583 words

The U.S. Constitution is the shortest on the American continents. All of the people’s states, caudillo juntas and banana republics have constitutions up to ten times as wordy as the U.S. Constitution. People face danger and expense in order to flee those countries and try to enter These United States, not each other’s countries. Is this coincidence? Is the number of words or pages in a country’s Constitution a negative indicator for individual freedom and prosperity? Continue reading

All persons born…

See many men among these voters?

Individuals who Voted to Enforce their Rights–and WON! Irish women won individual rights (link)

Does the Constitution allow men with guns to threaten physicians or coerce pregnant women? The Harrison Act enabled pseudoscience-addled politicians to have men with service pistols step between doctors and patients in 1914. See why missing an opportunity to vote Libertarian is tantamount to desertion under fire as mystical and collectivist reality control delegitimize individual claims to freedom of action.

Today’s guest repost is by Austin’s Constitutional Scholar Jon Roland,

U.S. Supreme Court: Issues with current contenders

Unenumerated rights

The first issue is presented by the statement by nominee appointee Brett  Cavanaugh in his acceptance speech, that he would not find rights not explicitly recognized in the main Constitution.. This has been an issue since the nomination of Robert Bork, who considered the Ninth Amendment, which calls for the nondisparagement of rights that are not “enumerated” (made explicit) somewhere in the Constitution, as amended, to be an “ink blot”. There is strong opposition to Supreme Court judges doing that, especially from so-called “conservatives”, who don’t understand that constitutional rights are all “immunities”, restrictions on the powers of government. They are not “privileges” to receive a sufficient amount of public resources, such as for education, healthcare, elder support, or any other objects of public subsidies.

Interestingly, in the case of Roe v. Wade, the Fifth Circuit decided that a “right to an abortion” was a Ninth Amendment right of a woman  “to choose whether to have children”, which by the 14th Amendment, was “incorporated” for the states. This presented the Supreme Court with an apparent problem,  because there was opposition to funding unenumerated rights in the Senate. The Fifth Circuit found a Ninth Amendment “right  to choose whether to have children”. So the SC tried to sustain the Fifth Circuit without embracing the Ninth Amendment. The result was an incoherent opinion. There was no way to avoid the Ninth Amendment.

It would perhaps too much to expect a nominee to venture into an extended discussion of what a “right” is, and what it is not. It is awkward to say “I will not find a ‘right’ to a sufficient amount of a public resource.” That is too complicated for most senators. So the candidate denies he will try to find any “unenumerated” rights. That is somewhat disingenuous, but the issue needs to be discussed.


Republicans, Dixiecrats, No Libertarian Party!

When “life” begins

One of the potential nominees, Amy Barrett, has been reported to have stated that human “life” begins at conception. That is a misstatement of the issue in Roe v. Wade. which in its essence was not about “life” but about “personhood” because “Rights (immunities)” attach to “persons”, (roles in court), not to “life”, despite what the Declaration of Independence says. (That is why some activists have sought to move the commencement of “personhood” back to conception. That would be a mistake. We cannot allow each state to redefine “personhood”, because if we did, a state could define some people to be nonpersons, without rights. So there has to be a uniform definition across all states if the protections of the Constitution are not to be meaningless. That is the basis for finding the right to be incorporated under the Ninth Amendment, as the Fifth Circuit did.

So when does “life” begin?

Not at conception. Each individual is the latest in an unbroken chain of life that goes back to at least the point when the first single-celled organism became a multi-celled animal, which occurred about 650 million years ago, during the pre-Cambrian era, when the surface of the Earth was covered with ice (“snowball Earth”) and there was only one continent, Rodinia. We are all descended from that multi-celled organism. That is when “life” began.

So when does “personhood” begin?

This was declared by the jurist Edward Coke in the 15th century, and later restated by legal scholar William Blackstone, in the early 18th century, who provided most of the definitions for terms used in the U.S. Constitution. They held that “personhood” begins at natural birth, or induced natural birth (they had Cesarean sections in those days). Some of the states later found that personhood began with baptism, entry of a name in church records, or even later. Not at “conception”, the date of which could not have been defined with any precision in those days, or even now.

Consider what would happen if we defined “personhood” to begin at conception? It would make every fetus the ward of a court, with the court having power to supervise the pregnancy. It could order the woman to continue a pregnancy, and not terminate it, under penalty of law. That would be forced pregnancy. Do we want that? Every pregnant woman chained to a bed. Anyone see the play “A Handmaid’s Tale”. Good way to stop everyone from having sex.

Forcing women into involuntary servitude and labor webcomic 2 awe

Need for uniformity

Incorporation of a Ninth Amendment right is required by the need to have a uniform definition of “personhood” (legal role) across all jurisdiction, since constitutional rights attach to “persons” and not just to “citizens” or “life”.  If states could define personhood, they could deprive anyone of rights by defining him to be a “nonperson”. Thus a state could find that Blacks are not persons as a way to deprive them of their liberty.


1. Roe v. Wade, 1221 (N.D. Tex. 1970) (“On the merits, plaintiffs argue as their principal contention that the Texas Abortion Laws must be declared unconstitutional because they deprive single women and married couple of their rights secured by the Ninth Amendment to choose whether to have children. We agree.”).

2. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

3, A Handmaid’s Tale, Margaret Atwood.

4. Robert Bork and the Inkblot, Kurt Lash.

5. Constitutional views on abortion

See also: Ayn Rand (link)

Get the complete story on other prohibitions in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in either if two languages for the price of a craft pint. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy in 1929 and 2008.


I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at or


Road to Crashdom

Law Bites Lawmaker!

Prohibitionist hypocrisy original article (link)

The Providence Evening Tribune also reported such amusing fare as Law Bites Lawmaker, above. This is a lot like today’s news, where a California global-warming activist politician resigns for slipping on the no-drug-orgies-with-interns rule that she herself voted in.

With eerie familiarity the same page tells of the unending reparations and war loans soap opera (link), nicknamed the League of Debtors (link), and of Syrian moslems exterminating Jews (link). Zeppelins now strike us as unusual, and 1929 constitutional debates were not over guns, which everyone freely owned, but whether the 18th Amendment could prohibit Stand-Your-Ground home brew for household consumption. Dry agents murdering motorists, homeowners and boaters were an almost daily occurrence. (link)

Our parents and grandparents couldn’t legally get beer, just as we are mostly prohibited from having plant leaves and guns. Government bureaucracies deliberately poisoned safe beverages with methanol–causing permanent blindness. As alcohol was driven underground it was quickly replaced by German heroin. As relatively safe drugs are banned today, fentanyl is replacing bulkier painkillers just as easily-concealable Everclear replaced beer in 1929, and FDR replaced Herbert Hoover in 1933.

Oddly, but not coincidentally, asset-forfeiture rampages by religious zealots with guns caused financial upheavals and banking problems in both eras.  The illegal economy and stock market dividends were untaxed before 1927. Then, as of March 2, 1929, economic instability set in, increasing in oscillations.

Fast-forward to September 15, 1986, when a similar phenomenon set in, worsening abruptly on May 5, 1987, and tilting into an accelerating stock crash on September 16, much as in 1929.

When in June 2007 the mortgage-based derivatives market reacted like a punctured balloon, nobody mentioned the Financial Action Task Force report on Money Laundering through the Real Estate Sector and Laundering the Proceeds of Illegal Narcotics Trafficking. Just as pointedly did they ignore the March 7, 2006 Bush Jr. E.O. on the WHOFBCI and the Federal Equitable Sharing Fund set up in April of 2008. This was the green light for prohibitionism as an excuse for robbing money and property without so much as an accusation, much less a conviction of the victim.

The neighborhood effects from prohibitionist asset plundering were quickly noticed when Barack Obama got 365 electoral votes in November, and when Bush Jr a week later announced:

Well, I have obviously made a decision to make sure the economy doesn’t collapse. I’ve abandoned free market principles to save the free market system. I think when people review what’s taken place in the last six months, uh, and put it all in one, in one, (sigh), you know, in one package, they’re realize how significantly we have moved. (link)

You do see the video, right? It’s not down a memory hole or anything like that, right?

Why not delve into the failure of Prohibitionism that caused the 1929 Crash? Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 does exactly that, matching newspaper accounts against stock market reactions and competing theories. It is live on Amazon Kindle for the price of a pint.

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

My other-language blog is


POLAND, 1939, Ten people executed for tearing down the German flag. Radios confiscated, censorship imposed. But that was then and over there. Besides, even though under the National Socialist Program Germany was a Christian nation, it couldn’t happen here, right?

Not so fast… In Nixon’s America it was patriotic to burn women, kids, houses and villages the Political State had listed as infested with commie atheists. But all hell broke loose when Christian America’s equivalent of “Jews”–pot-smoking hippies who thought only of themselves–dared to desecrate the symbol of the monopoly on the use of coercive and deadly force as a protest against the exact same involuntary servitude listed in the Declaration of Independence as cause for its overthrow and replacement. This was the part that says:

“[The King] constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the Executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.”

To facilitate comprehension this passage was translated by HL Mencken:

“He grabbed our own people when he found them in ships on the ocean, and shoved guns into their hands, and made them fight against us, no matter how much they didn’t want to.”

Granted, conscripts are usually ordered to kill foreigners, but even to this day involuntary servitude as executioners of individuals in other jurisdictions is legal because the Supreme Court declared it so based on the laws of such exemplary icons of freedom as China, Bulgaria, Greece, Germany, Nicaragua, Peru, Russia, Serbia, and Turkey. In practically the same breath the elderly and exempt Bench-sitters declared it a felony to hand out pamphlets on which were written the Thirteenth Amendment. That decision from a century ago, unlike the prior Dred Scott decision upholding the sanctity of slavery, is the Law of the Land today. But surely the maniacal frenzy of collectivism that spawned it is gone, right?


1917 Socialist pamphlet, complete with swastikas

Here is a quote from the President–not of National Socialist Germany–but of These United States, after failing to obtain a Constitutional Amendment to make burning a flag a felony:

The President: “I don’t view that as partisanship. I think respect for the flag transcends political party. And I think what I’ve said here is American. It isn’t Republican or Democrat; it isn’t liberal or conservative; and I just feel very, very strongly about it. And perhaps I haven’t been quite as emotional as I feel about it, but I want to take this opportunity to say protest should not extend to desecration of the unique symbol of America, and that is our flag.” This same father of another U.S. President then said: “It is an emotional issue, and I am firmly positioned in favor of overturn of Roe V Wade. And that’s my position, and I’m not going to change that position. But I don’t want to see the divisiveness that whole issue causes split this country. And yet the decision is going to be – I don’t know what they’re going to decide, but my position on it is very clear.” (GHW Bush Papers 1989 Vol. I  808)

The Republican Party, always an enemy of individual rights, wrecked the US economy through prohibitionist asset-forfeiture looting that turned its militarized police forces into roving gangs of predators. That is not fiscal conservatism, but rather, mystical vandalism of the nation’s economy and economies in all foreign countries to which such policies are exported.

The Libertarian Party platform calls for freeing the USA from the 1848 Manifesto income tax, from military conscription in violation of the Thirteenth Amendment and abolition of the venal and selective prohibitionism now crowding our prisons with individuals who have harmed no one. Every libertarian vote makes part of that platform a reality.