The Anarchy Fallacy

division by zero is wrong

Approaching 0 is different from putting 0 in the denominator.

A theory popular among folks who never cracked a logic or math book was that anarchism is “the logical end-product” of communism. That changed in 1972 when under 4000 Libertarian votes for John Hospers and Toni Nathan generated one consistent and uncorrupted electoral vote and changed important laws. Nowadays, intellectuals of the looter persuasion din everyone within earshot with the amended revealed truth that anarchism is “the logical end-product” of liberalism or libertarianism. Orwell commented on this sort of flip-flop when he explained how English socialists abhorred nationalsocialism until the Hitler-Stalin pact–AFTER which they promptly granted that fascism was, after all, a form of socialism, hence not all that bad.

Before trying to axiomatize a thing, it pays to examine what the thing does and doesn’t mean to begin with. There were communist anarchists all over the map, firing shots and exploding bombs in crowded places, when Max Weber spun off an objective and useful definition of government as “a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory”.

The typically Germanic purpose Weber attributed to this “community,” however, was “the use of physical force as a means of domination”–the opposite of what libertarians want. To be legitimate, our use of force ought to be retaliatory–the response to aggression, to menacing–rather than initiated. The idea is to defend the rights of individuals, their moral claims to freedom of action, and nothing else. Weber also took pains to remind his students: “Note that ‘territory’ is one of the characteristics of the state.” Looters are apt to grasp this precisely because they are the ones bent on domination by force. Weber also makes clear that “expropriation” is part and parcel of the domination by force he described in 1919.

The Libertarian Party was founded by admirers of Ayn Rand’s ideas, in particular, her ethical approach to the use of force within the context of limited constitutional democracy. In April of 1942 she wrote the non-aggression principle, which in 1971 was distilled into a pledge required for membership in the Libertarian Party. Every libertarian partisan has signed this Non-Aggression Pledge:

I certify that I oppose the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals.

The objective definition of government, including its territoriality feature, survived, but the purpose Weber wrote down–which Hitler exploited to form the NSDAP a year later–is today discarded. After all, most German voters were convinced National Socialism was successful after 18 years, but that theory did not survive past 25 years of age.

America’s lasting success comes from the word “free.” In the First and Second Amendments, free means free from aggressive coercion in a literal sense. This also symbolizes right (as opposed to wrong) in an ethical sense. In These States, an individual life worth living is the objective standard of value. Hence, the forcible defense (enforcement) of individual rights–thwarting their forcible violation–is the sole purpose of legitimate government. The LP’s growing success stems from this demonstrably desirable standard of ethical value.

You cannot divide by zero instead of using the definition of a limit to find a derivative for the slope of a curve. On these sigmoid curves the derivative exists and changes sign at the halfway mark. Nor can you reduce to zero the territorial jurisdiction or definition of government and still enforce the rights of individuals. Rand said to ask yourself what competition in the forcible restraint of men has to mean. The answer, the monstrous answer which all communist infiltrators pretending to advocate for freedom struggle to evade, is war. War and death are what every anarchist seeks. So why else, other than hostile mimesis, would they infiltrate the LP?

If sabotage weren’t the motive, anarchists could be expected to organize the Anarchist Party of America, offer to legalize murder, robbery extortion, rape, slavery and disfigurement. Members could be encouraged to burn their voter registration cards. The party could field candidates who declare themselves opposed to the Constitution of the United States and eager to overthrow it by force rather than uphold it per an oath of office. I seriously wish more anarchists would clearly state their purpose. Their comrades could no longer infiltrate gullible parties, point to their own 5th-column provocateurs embedded within the the LP, and hiss “anarchists!”

When not infiltrating the LP, looter intellectuals wriggle to infiltrate pacifist movements. These are populated by folks who promise not to forcibly resist “domination”, nor to capture, try and punish those who aggress against them. In theory this leads to Aldous Huxley’s Island of Pala being invaded and dominated. In practice you observe it in the streets of India, Pakistan and Portland.

Our spoiler vote method of bringing pressure to bear paid off when the LP platform stopped Dixiecrats from restoring laws banning all birth control. Still, the momentum behind the population curve, though decelerating since that time, was huge. Hence the delay in reversing population growth, even though the derivative of the population curve has been negative since the late sixties.

Since 1972, socialism–especially in its communo-fascist variants–is reversing in these States because of Libertarian candidates supporting our platform and offering to support (but repair) the Constitution. Spoiler votes entrusted to these candidates cause entrenched “vocational” politicians of the kleptocracy to repeal brutal laws and lower parasitic taxes–that or be unseated by other looters quicker on the uptake. Our candidates don’t even need to be elected in order to change the laws. The Nixon law bribing the media to ignore us has slowed the process, but the replacement is going on with mathematical inexorability as the libertarian vote share increases.

See how the Liberal Party of 1930 gained enough spoiler votes to sell the Democrats on its repeal plank–after Republican fanaticism wrecked the economy. Prohibition and The Crash is live on Amazon Kindle for the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Live on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

Brought to you by…

simultaneous interpreting

Clarity isn’t oversimplification

Advertisements

People who talk about other people

same old same old

Before Women Got the Vote

A republican infiltrator at the Reasonoids meetup in Austin could only talk about who the LP should listen to and support. The bait? More people would like us (as opposed to vote for our platform and candidates).

There is nothing new about this particular dodge. The purpose, as always, is to get us to dilute our message by wasting votes on candidates fielded by looter parties.

This is the same as it was over a century ago. Men still thought in terms of personalities rather than principles, issues or freedom. Every election was a flinging match over what adjectives to apply to wannabee politicians. Fools get caught up in the excitement rather than leverage a vote so as to shape the votes and mindfully direct the policies and actions of those selfsame politicians. They don’t have to like us or agree with us. They need only fear that our spoiler votes will cause them to lose to some other, less objectionable looter candidate.

This is how the communists and prohibitionists used their tiny percentage of the vote share to rewrite the constitution, saddle us with an income tax and make beer a felony.

Le plus ça change…

See the full cartoon

If in need of financial or legal translations from South America, look me up.

Divide and Conquer

Totalitarians and Libertarians understand that freedom is indivisible. Those that value it seek to preserve it intact, and those that despise it try to extirpate it root and branch. Yet there are many who struggle to evade this realization. A single example will suffice.

16 Then came there two women, Equality and Faith, that were voters, unto the Chancellor, and stood before him, one on his Left and the other on his Right

17 And the leftmost woman, Equality said, O my lord, I and this woman Faith dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child, named Sharing, with her in the house.

18 And it came to pass the third day after that I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also: and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house.

19 And this woman’s child, named Righteousness, died in the night; because she overlaid it.

20 And she arose at midnight, and took my Sharing from beside me, while thine handmaid slept, and laid it in her bosom, and laid her dead child, Righteousness, in my bosom.

21 And when I rose in the morning to give my Sharing suck, behold, it was dead: but when I had considered it in the morning, behold, it was not my Sharing, which I did bear.

22 And the other woman said, Nay; but the living is my Righteousness, and the dead is thy Sharing. And this said, No; but the dead is thy Righteousness, and the living is my Sharing. Thus they spake before the Chancellor.

23 Then said the Chancellor, The one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living.

24 And the Chancellor said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the Chancellor.

25 And the Chancellor said, we must compromise. Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other.

26 Then spake both women and said, Let this be settled by unselfish compromise, the common good before the individual good, and divide it, for half of Sharing or Righteousness is better than none at all. Any other view is unequal and extreme

27 Then the Chancellor answered: divide the child in half.

28 But another woman, Liberty, protested this was monstrous, saying Equality had no more just power to deprive Faith of her precious child than Faith had to deprive Equality of hers. Then all three turned to Liberty. The Chancellor told her she was not invited to the debate–and the child was cut in half.

29 And all Germany heard of the judgment which theChancellor had judged; and they feared theChancellor: for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do judgment with integrity, as in the Twenty-Five Points, and that he would relentlessly seek the implementation of these points, if necessary at the cost of their lives.

Totalitarians (no rights or freedom) & Libertarians (yes rights & freedom) are consistent

Mixed economy advocates (yellow) believe freedom is divisible

I hope you understood this parable on how the mixed-economy, Left&Right socialists sacrifice all principles and integrity to take from others what they value, and the Libertarian Upper quadrant and Totalitarian Lower quadrant remain true to their values and principles. Remember that clarity next time you need a translator. Oh, and be SURE you remember what the Left-Right Socialist parties say about each other when you see LIB on the ballot.
My other blog is usually in Portuguese.

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).

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=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.

If you need translations involving statistics, energy, pollution, climate records, immigration laws or political promises in English, Spanish or Portuguese, do get in touch.

Why voting Libertarian works

Why would anyone bother to drum up votes for the Libertarian party?

Read' em and weep, looters!

Libertarian share of votes earned in national elections.

Why ask for libertarian votes? Simple. Every such vote benefits ME, not the Kleptocracy candidate, by getting rid of violent laws.  Every time Ram Johnston loses an election by 3% when the Libertarian Candidate got 2% of the vote, that–like a smack upside the head–is a learning experience. For a Texas State Legislator, the loss of pay comes to $43,000 (not counting bribes and kickbacks).  Women voters who want to keep birth control safe and legal need not help the Democrats make electricity scarce and unaffordable. The Libertarian Party platform of 1972 wrote the Roe v. Wade decision into law with fewer than 4000 votes nationwide. Comstock Law Republican and Prohibition Party organizers are painfully aware of this fact, though they struggle to evade it–but they change their platforms and laws in hopes of staying on the payroll. Your vote can count even more if it replaces a bad 19th-Century party with a good 20th-Century party that values freedom and individual rights.

Here is what a logistical substitution curve looks like. This is how the Whigs replaced the Federalists, and Red Republicans replaced the Whig Party.

Freedom replacing Left=Right coercive collectivism

The Libertarian vote share curve starts at 0 but never reaches 100% in a democracy.

Technically competent individuals who understand that electrical power generation drastically reduces the death rate are free to vote Libertarian. You need not help Republican-funded militarized police crowd prisons, shoot foreigners and confiscate property because mystical pseudoscience says to ban plant leaves. Conscientious voters change bad laws by keeping their integrity. Simple arithmetic makes voting for candidates that support the Libertarian Party Platform the most effective use of the franchise.  The only wasted vote is one that tells violent looters to keep trying to ban electricity, prohibit plants and repeal the Bill of Rights.

Energy enables eudaimonia

Interfering with energy increases the death rate

I am asking naturalized citizens to vote Libertarian and resident aliens to contribute to Libertarian campaigns.  The hardest part is helping voters understand that your vote should benefit YOU, not some force-initiating politician. I prove this with algebra showing 1.4% of the vote in 11 campaigns brought the 18th Amendment which caused the Great Depression. Earlier, 9% of the 1892 vote brought an income tax law, so if 9% has the law-changing clout of 51%, then each People’s Party vote counted for six Republican or Democrat votes in terms of its effectiveness in forcing at least one of the soft machine factions to change its platform. These are examples of spoiler vote leverage.

Solving the 1892 equation for x yields 6. This shows us that every populist vote had six times the law-changing power of a vote wasted on a machine politician. In the Prohibition case, 1.4% of the vote made beer a felony as if it were the same as 51%. So set 1.4x=51, x=36 means every such vote packed 36 times more law-changing clout. This is the mechanism whereby the entire Socialist platform of 1920 became law by 1980, even with the candidates all losing.

The libertarian party is simply reversing that process. Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Lenin, Mussolini, Ceaușescu and Pol Pot have demonstrated the legal and economic results of socialism via historical events not on record in 1913. That was the year American voters believed the Communist Manifesto income tax was a good idea.

Do you have a good idea that needs translation for a larger audience?

BTdotcomc

Can you explain whether Prohibition and The Crash were a coincidence? Were they perhaps causally related via by the Five and Ten law of March 2, 1929–the making beer a chain-gang felony with a fine worth 30 pounds of gold? For the cost of a pint you can discover the answers, LIVE on Amazon Kindle in a format you cell can read using the free app.

ProhicrashAmazon

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

Libertarian hockey stick

A little money riding on the Maple Leafs

Speak Softly, and carry a Hockey Stick! Special thanks to Online Curve Fitting

Organized coercion is fond of graphs that indicate growing popularity of a pretext for forcing folks. The hockey stick analogy is by now so overused as to have become an embarrassment to pseudoscientists of the looter persuasion–mainly because it has made no impression whatsoever on thermometers. 

Voters, on the other hand, are deciding–in accelerating numbers–that the initiation of force has had its opportunity to produce results worth having. Entrenched, subsidized Kleptocracy parties are stalled. Unable to attract voters, they successfully depict each other as repellent, dangerous, socially evil. Both such parties depict the Communist Manifesto income tax and the subsidies their electioneering receives from the IRS as necessary and good.

The Libertarian party, as you see, has been growing as in the graph showing the vote shares earned since the Y2k panic and New Millerite Climate Armageddon prophesying craze set in. Based on the last 5 elections, the above amateur sigmoid replacement curve fit suggests a Libertarian majority by 2074. Leveraged spoiler vote clout will meanwhile repeal and pacify much of the violence of law you see whenever the initiation of force is the preferred modus operandi.

No violence needed, and we don’ need no steenkin revolution. Simply cast your vote for the peace and freedom platform and opportunistic politicians will make change happen or be replaced trying to keep pushing aggression and coercion. A small donation couldn’t hurt, and will definitely bear dividends. Increasing freedom is winning!

Should the need arise for translations involving actual data obtained by measurement, think of it as an opportunity to seek out a libertarian translator.

hankdotcom

pidotcom