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

 

 

Germ warfare and China

Germ War Genocide prophet

Socialist lecturer 1907

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

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

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

Jack London prediction realized

1932 cartoon matches Jack London’s 1904 predictions

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

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog

Doomsday Books and survivalism

No Third Party, Watch Big Brother!

The real Coronavirus… government-controlled teevee

Now that the communist dictatorship on mainland China has polluted the planet with yet another plague, people huddled in shelters have time for reading–as opposed to the screechings of kleptocracy teevee. One of the most apropos and entertaining novels for the times is The Doomsday Book by Connie Willis.(link) In it you will learn the intimate details of the bubonic plague the Far East exported to Europe and the British Isles back in the good old days before global warming hysteria replaced burning at the stake. The books downloads to any cellphone, tablet or Kindle device without your having to open the door. Due perhaps to this diabolical form of miraculous delivery, the novel lacks the Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat of the Vatican, but it could nevertheless save your life. Herbal Antivirals by Stephen Buhner is also practically relevant to the current crisis.(link)

A scientist-publisher I worked for back in 1982 had me ship out boxloads of Nuclear War Survival Skills by Cresson Kearny.(link) Saboteurs stole the heavy boxes of Golem Press books from the postal system, so I had to fill out insurance claim forms for replacement shipments.(link) Cresson Kearny developed his survival skills during war, famine and pestilence in China, and except for blast waves and fallout, many of the survival skills needed to shelter without the added aggravation of starvation, disease or vitamin deficiency are clearly explained with pictures and arrows. 

Pat Frank was the pen name of Harry Hart Frank, author of Alas Babylon, a tale of Eisenhower-Nixon-era nuclear war, when cities were the smallest things bombers could reliably target.(link) Yet much of the aftermath is complicated less by fallout than to the very anarchy communist infiltrators assure us is desirable–just not for them. The rebuilding of civilization without hindrance by a central government is the backdrop for this most interesting and topically relevant story. 

A mathematician and an engineer joined forces to write Lucifer’s Hammer, by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle.(link) Here the same natural disaster that has befallen Earth many times in the past returns in the form of a comet impact unleashing all four of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Survival without supermarkets amid cannibalistic collectivism is a test of human ingenuity that rewards preparedness and familiarity with the facts of scientific reality. 

Most of these books were written in an age in which altruist collectivism in its communo-fascist variants–complete with known slavery, famine, death camps, institutionalized torture and disappearance and the initiation of deadly force–was considered preferable to the prevailing mercantilist mixed economy by many organizations and individuals. Among these we still see the Union of Concerned “Scientists,” Physicians for Social “Responsibility” and International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War through Preemptive Surrender to totalitarianism. These vectors, now joined by real-life versions of the State Science Institute in Atlas Shrugged, remain a stench in the nostrils of humankind.(link)

Fallen Angels by Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle, and Michael Flynn is a book about these myrmidons of messianic martyrdom who even today still seek to ban electricity and appease the gods of Carbon Tax Collectivism by demanding that “we” grovel at the altar of parasitical Pseudoscience.(link) Most of these books are also available in audiobook format. Last but not least…

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

Dry Killers, 2020

PERP NOT SHOWN, REDACTED

FEDERAL Prosecutor initiates deadly force against wife, self. (link)

Dry Killers was the term The Chicago Tribune used to describe government agents and their hangers-on who routinely killed unarmed boys and men in the 1920s and 30s. Anyone who thinks this is a prohibition phenomenon that’s over and done with might care to explain today’s news–or news of the past century.

Federal Prohibition and Second Amendment Kristallnacht infringement mouthpiece Timothy Delgado turned up dead just north of Folsom Prison in California, where police say he apparently killed his wife, then himself. Whether the reporting is accurate or not, it is typical of fanatical prohibitionism–which after the complete economic collapse of 1929-1933 shifted from beer, wine and Demon Rum to coercion over plant leaves and their extracts. The other big change is that big shots at the Chicago Tribune had a lot invested in alcohol precursor chemicals during national prohibition. They evidently have no such stake in Post-Nixon avatars of Satan. Fanatics infiltrating federal agencies, on the other hand, most certainly have a serious stake in the initiation of deadly force.(link)

Tribune reporters back then tracked down and reported on every storeowner, housewife and boat operator murdered in cold blood by prohibition agents. Nowadays such events are typically reported only by Reason Magazine writers. Prohibition killings are masked as “resisting arrest” and other such euphemistic camouflage, and a way is in every case found to minimize their impact on public perception. But America was not always so like a Christian National Socialist Democracy.(link)

Chicago was then and is now home to the largest glucose corn sugar plant on planet Earth. Yeast and sugar companies bankrolled bootleggers who installed refinery-grade continuous stills in bankrupt three-story mansions after The Crash. These outfits could afford to repay the political State in its own coin. This actually happened twice. In 1921-22 civilian posse comitatus‘ hunted down killers with badges as the economy collapsed, then a truce was established. The economic effect can be seen in this graph for hops, a precursor plant used to brew Beelzebub’s beer.(link

Nullification of felony beer prohibition laws

The 1923 Gentleman’s Agreement shifted enforcement away from beer until March 2, 1929, after which the economy lasted another 6 months

The truce broke down when the Klan defected from the Dems in 1928 and helped elect Herbert Clark Hoover. Prohibition related murders–including the killing of federal agents–immediately filled all the papers, and books appeared right after the Crash–itself caused by withdrawals of money from banks to avoid federal asset-forfeiture confiscation. That is a little-appreciated aspect of a fractional-reserve banking system after a looter takeover. Here is an excerpt from Before and After Prohibition, a 1930 compendium by Maryland Senator Millard Tydings:

ONE of the most shocking results of the ten years of effort to enforce national prohibition is the long record of killings by prohibition and other Federal law enforcement agents. Even among some of the strongest advocates of the “noble experiment,” there have been widespread expressions of revolt at this bloody spectacle. Information regarding many of these killings has occupied much space in the public press, and editorial comment upon them has been most denunciatory. Yet they continue—apparently an almost inevitable accompaniment of the enforcement of this law.

Senator Tydings managed to uncover some 1300 suppressed killings committed by prohibition agents that were kept out of the papers and seldom discussed–including cases of federal gangs gunning down each other! Here’s a fratricidal example from Tydings’ collection: 

George Ball and William Porter, State agents, killed in battle with Federal Revenue officers at Camp Creek, West Virginia, June 20, 1925. (Each band of dry raiders thought the others were bootleggers, and they opened fire simultaneously.)

So this pattern of superstition, pseudoscience and political asset-forfeiture looting requires the initiation of force. This in turn requires killing people so that the law is taken seriously. Who advocates these murders? The answer is politicians who, like Germany’s NSDAP, represent Christian altruism–except for the part about how “thou shalt not kill.”(link

Thus, mystical collectivist cheapening of gratuitous murder stimulates demand for revenge and counterexamples, and the sort of agents and prosecutors attracted to this line of work do not even value their own lives, much less those of others. Remember this when next you hear one of God’s Own Prohibitionists seeking to pervert the Constitution and coerce women for “the unborn.” Just as Republican and Democrat prohibition fanatics cannot see “thou shalt not kill” in a book that does not condemn enjoyable substances, just so they cannot grasp “All Persons born” in the U.S. Constitution, or the absence, nay, denial of any federal authority for enactment of sumptuary laws.(link)

Incidentally, Millard Tydings was reelected over and over and served 44 years in the Senate.

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.

Live on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

Brazilian blog

Pro-life or Anti-life?

Speaking in tongues

Yes, many, many languages…

Anti-Life is a chapter in Ayn Rand’s 1957 best-seller Atlas Shrugged, in fact, it’s the chapter that follows Anti-Greed.

Anti-Greed is foreshadowed as part of a newspaper item so distorted as to upset Hank Rearden’s secretary, but

He laughed aloud. “I can see where such a distortion of the English language would make you furious”

It turns out that Anti-Greed is a chapter about Project X, a weapon that broadcasts death.

PRO-LIFE COP-KILLER

Colorado Clinic Shooter

Conservative altruists still advocate sending men with guns to threaten doctors and coerce pregnant women into back-alley surgery. Impressed by that good example set by elected officials, some superstitious characters did indeed march out and murder unarmed doctors by shooting them in the back, or from outside their windows. This trend began shortly after the LP platform of 1972 demanded and got enforcement of individual rights for women. The latest in the long list or religious conservative assassins was Robert Dear, who is now under indictment on federal counts, several of which invoke capital punishment by a just society.(link) The most recent amendments to infiltrate the LP platform call for letting religious terrorists enter the U.S. uninspected, (a Democratic Party idea) then protecting them from the death sentence (a Republican idea) with taxpayers billed for room and board for life. Those planks are an example of how hostile ideologies are again boring in to make Libertarians look like fools to voters.

These are the people Ayn Rand preferred when she declared voting for the Tonie Nathan-John Hospers LP ticket “immoral.”(link) So what? We all make mistakes–and Tricky Dick wouldn’t wreck the economy for another year yet. At age 67, few of us are at the top of our game, but the ability to learn from mistakes is a valuable skill at which Ayn Rand did not excel. Unlike Nixon’s party, she did advocate individual rights for women. The LP did write the boilerplate the Supreme Court used as its Roe v. Wade decision, blocking race-suicide Dixiecrats from sending men with guns out to cause women bleed to death. When was the last time you heard about that in a Republican publication?

Why not delve into what sort of voting 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.

My other-language blog, Expatriotas.blogspot is amigra.us

 

 

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

Ayn Rand v. Spoiler Votes

Luckily the LP is not a religion, and has no doctrine of infallibility. What it does is put into practice a suggestion made by Ayn Rand in 1947:

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. (LOAR 366)

Did Ayn Rand understand how spoiler votes change laws? Apparently not. Never has she explained how the income tax moved from the Communist Manifesto to the 16th Amendment. In The Fountainhead Dominique clearly opposes Prohibition, but how did it move from the Prohibition Party platform to the 18th Amendment? When asked in 1972 about the Libertarian Party she replied:

I’d rather vote for Bob Hope, the Marx Brothers, or Jerry Lewis—they’re not as funny as John Hospers and the Libertarian Party. If Hospers takes ten votes away from Nixon (which I doubt he’ll do), it would be a moral crime. … (George Wallace is no great thinker—he’s a demagogue, though with some courage—but even he had the sense to stay home this time.) If you want to spread your ideas, do it through education. But don’t run for president—or even dogcatcher—if you’re going to help McGovern. [FHF 72]

Rand’s vote-count error is reminiscent of the socialist “fixed pie” error Peikoff pointed out in a debate. Looters imagine there is only so much wealth, and that if you gain some, it is taken from someone else. Hospers and Nathan’s LP took nearly 4000 votes from parasitical competitors. The result was that the LP platform’s plank on overpopulation was copied almost verbatim into the Roe v Wade decision by the Supreme Court. This stopped Texas and Wallace Dixiecrat states from reviving Comstock laws to again ban all birth control, including abortion. This individual right Ayn Rand defended in keeping with the 14th Amendment.

Nixon’s party, on the other hand, got the “message” that George Wallace’s racial collectivist supporters sent to Washington with their 1968 votes (46 of them electoral votes). The Republicans imported some of Wallace’s planks and rhetoric and again scooped up the Klan vote–as they had in 1928. At 67, Ayn can’t be blamed for not realizing on October 22 that Wallace–in 1972 the leading Democratic contender–“had the sense to stay home” because he was shot May 15. Ayn hardly noticed that Bobby Kennedy (whom she doubtless saw as another heir of the Nazi Papacy) was fatally shot June 6th. When the GOP allowed Goldwater to lose to LBJ, that was NOT the republican endorsement of Jewish values or repudiation of christian naziism the author of “The Fascist New Frontier” had struggled to imagine.

Ayn Rand, born in an autocratic empire turned communist dictatorship, lacked experience with democracy. Like teevee personalities, she saw votes as vectors for hiring politicians, NOT as policy instruments with which individuals directly change laws. The idea of spoiler votes moving policy–as the U.S. Liberal Party votes did when she was 25, or as communist votes changed the U.S. Constitution when she was 8, never occurred to her then, or to most libertarians today.  But the religious Prohibition Amendment and communist Income Tax Amendment were championed by parties that averaged under 3% of the vote.

So when a brilliant ethicist opines that “taking ten votes away” from a lying, superstitious, girl-bullying fascist looter the likes of Richard Nixon is “a moral crime”, one has to wonder if philosophy, like science, “advances one funeral at a time.”

Words you can dance to

Clarity isn’t oversimplification

Ayn Rand’s description of the Crash and Depression in Atlas Shrugged more closely resembles the historical record than prior theories. Republicans have managed to efface Clark Warburton’s “The Economic Results of Prohibition”.  Prohibition and the Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929, takes Warburton’s work one step further. Live on Amazon Kindle for the price of a pint.

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

 

Republicans Fear LP Spoiler votes

Lose the looter planks or lose the election

Law-changing spoiler votes

Nixon’s Republican Party changed the tax code to pay the media to ignore the Libertarian Party in 1971, the year we were founded. Yet with its first published platform the LP parlayed fewer than 4000 votes into a win for women in the US and Canada.

The LP platform language:

“We further support the repeal of all laws restricting voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days.”

was translated by Austin attorney Libby Linebarger into the Roe v. Wade decision

“(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. …”

The next election, 1972, both the Republican Party and its spoiler vote controllers demanded a Constitutional Amendment to overturn that Libertarian Party platform plank copied by the Supreme Court. The Prohibitionists have finally given up and are pushing the Global Warming Apocalypso. But Republican partisans are still in a rut as of their 2016 platform:

We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth.

The 14th Amendment, by the way, starts by protecting “All persons born”, not all ova fertilized.

God’s Own Prohibitionists have since 2013 had mystical shills penning tear-jerker insinuations at Forbes. After carpetbiting for an Amendment to undo the Libertarian Party’s 1972 plank for 46 years, Republicans now understand that the collectivism of race suicide paranoia is the anvil that is drowning their party. Global Warmunism is the even bigger anvil drowning the Democratic and Econazi parties. Good riddance!

Yet in our battleground states, where Libertarian vote counts are larger than the difference between the Nationalsocialist warriors-for-the-babies and the Soviet socialist energy slave abolitionists, we handed the election to the least coercive candidate, and the looter parties lost those about evenly. Our pro-choice candidate may win the NM senate race, and not just in the usual sense of WINNING by forcing the looters to repeal bad laws (or getting the Supreme Court to strike them down).

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

Whenever the need arises for a clear translation of what politicians and judges are saying in Spanish or Portuguese, ask me for a bid.

U.S. Elections, 1928 or 2018

May 28, 1928, H.L. Mencken on the election: “This show is good at all times, but it is best when some great combat is in progress, and I can think of no combat more likely to be violent and hence thrilling than one in which religious zealots are engaged. However trivial its actual issues, it is bound to show all the savagery of a dog fight.”

Religious zealot Herbert Clark Hoover was favored for the Republican nomination after Calvin Coolidge, convinced a crash and depression were imminent, eschewed the Republican Party nomination. The ku-klux klan was outraged at the thought of Whiskey Al Smith, a catholic, getting the Democratic Party nomination, and threatened to defect to the Republican camp.

“Both” parties wanted to use the income tax, libel and forfeiture laws to keep beer, birth control and many plant leaves illegal.  Citizens and foreigners were gunned down daily by Customs, Coast Guard, Internal Revenue, prohibition agents, municipal police and county sheriffs’ departments. European nations that had begged for and gotten war loans from the US now struggled to welch on those loans without the sort of overt repudiation that might give their colonial subjects inconvenient ideas.  Communism had earnestly begun to decimate Russia and its Soviet colonies through starvation, forced labor and firing squads, while socialists in America shrilly denied that any such thing was occurring. There was no Libertarian Party then, only socialists, communists and fascists here and in Europe.

Today both looter parties seek to use the income tax, censorship, libel and forfeiture laws to keep plant leaves illegal and cripple insurgent parties. Democrats ignore thermometer records and imagine the world is a rotisserie in an effort to close power plants, keep freon illegal, subsidize political ads for looter parties, send men with guns to kill people abroad and put a tax on carbon dioxide (not methane or water vapor). Republicans struggle to bring back the Comstock laws of 1872-3 banning birth control, keep all enjoyable drugs (except ethanol) illegal, subsidize political ads for looter parties and send men with guns to kill people abroad, prop up mystical prohibitionist régimes, and keep refugees and foreign survivors from coming to America to exact revenge.

Both want your vote to go to one or the other, either-or.

But the entrenched looter kleptocracy is faced with a hockey-stick increase in votes cast for the Libertarian Party. The LP seeks to repeal the communist manifesto income tax Amendment and stop the Nixon subsidies to looter party campaigns. The LP does not want men with guns to kill anyone over plant leaves, freon or carbon dioxide, and is certainly opposed to endangering military personnel by ordering occupation, kidnapping or murders in foreign jurisdictions.

Here is the voting trend hockey stick showing Libertarian Party growth since the campaign of 2000:

Why be a part of the undignified faecepuke-flinging match that so excites the basically identical force-initiating parties? Every libertarian vote lowers taxes and repeals onerous laws by forcing the looters to deliver on those promises or lose that hand in the till and lard on the leather upholstery. All you have to do is vote outside the line and inside the upper square of the 2-dimensional Nolan Chart box. You vote will pack at least six times the clout. Never forget that, 3674 libertarian votes cast in 1972 promptly persuaded the Supreme Court to protect the individual rights of women with its Roe v. Wade ruling.

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