Cognitive Mental Blocks

Ecological National Socialists have no trouble understanding how two logical variables yield four possibilities when it suits their agenda. The NFPA circulates the above (admittedly garbled) chart in support of violent laws against anything liable to interrupt a game of dominoes at the government-owned fire station.

Genetics offers another illustration:

But teevee, subsidized by the Nixon anti-libertarian law to ignore everything except kleptocracy, can only focus on three possibilities.

Yet those same intellectuals become one-dimensional when challenged to understand anything that lies outside the Venn Diagram circles encompassing socialism in its populist and communo-fascist variants. A blinkered looter visualizes a straight line running from Hitler/Mussolini/Franco to Stalin/Ceausescu/Mao with nothing in between but religious gradations of socialist and mystical altruism.

To the entire satisfaction of mystical prohibitionists, adding alcohol to water eventually transubstantiates the latter into a Satanic alcoholic beverage, and adding (non-mohammedan) religion to a heavily-mixed economy gradually changes it from “bad” socialism to (by their lights) “good” fascism. Nowadays fascists and socialists alike refer to their own system as “democracy” and that other one, respectively, as socialism or fascism.

In These States the Tordesillas line was drawn at an alcoholic content of 0.5% in the Prohibition Enforcement act drawn up by Andrew Volstead of Minnesota. This distinction also made sauerkraut evil, Satanic and illegal. But when this law enforcing the Prohibition Amendment flipped off the lights of freedom on the night of January 16th, 1920, the U.S. Senate, by declining to be a party to the Treaty of Versailles, kept us technically at war with Germany, or The Accursed Hun as it was known at the time. So no True American™ really cared about sauerkraut.

Among today’s fanatics–struggling to ban electric power or plant leaves instead of beer–none have even the foggiest notion or how an individual right might be defined. To them a right is something the world owes them at your expense, not a moral claim to freedom of action. Most puzzling to this mentality is confrontation with the Nolan Diagram. Even survivors of the Argentine educational system can grasp a 2-gradient chart between freedom and orders at gunpoint when broken down according to the two primary contexts (individual personhood and agency as homo economicus) from which they fish for pretexts to justify aggression at gunpoint.

Here is an Argentine version of the Nolan Chart in its version tilted so as to allow the one-dementional to superimpose upon it their own universe of discourse confined to a horizontal line extending from Hitler to Stalin.

To American National Socialists, for whom Herbert Hoover, Richard Nixon and George Wallace are plain, regular folks, this Argentine chart makes no sense whatsoever. Ever since Carnegie Institute Liberals formed an anti-Klan, pro-Beer party in 1930, then published a platform demanding the repeal of the Prohibition Amendment, the word liberal changed its meaning. Shortly before Election Day, in late October of 1932, the ruling coalition redefined liberal to mean “godless communist drunkards who hate America” in the costume of its own imaginings.

Citizens of civilized nations are utterly baffled by this coinage–minted as it were in the very heart of the Sahara of the Bozarts over which Richmond Hobson of Alabama, Morris Sheppard of Texas and Volstead shone beatifically as the very embodiment of the Holy Trinity… while voters locked the head of the Republican Party into the stocks of the guillotine and gave the lever a satisfying tug.

Pero, no, y evite Evita

Argentine Libertarian Party

Eighty-seven years later, liberal everywhere else in the world still means libertarian. Cowardly, spineless, unprincipled or gelded libertarian, true enough, but libertarian or liberal is in both cases lies at the root of the noun denoting an individual who recognizes the individual rights of fellow human beings–even in opposition to the Divine “right” (meaning sanction to murder and rob) of kings, popes, caudillos and klans. 

So all is not lost. Looter values begin and end with “we must issue the following orders at gunpoint” because (__insert rationalizing pretext__). If the pretext is “because the Bible says altruism is good,” then the speaker is fascist-prohibitionist-totalitarian in value orientation. If the pretext is “because selfishness feels like it ought to be denounced as evil,” then the speaker is a conditioned socialist-collectivist-communist-totalitarian.

Argentinos–politically separated by a papal line on a map–cannot completely let go of the one-dimensional lay/progressive v. religious/fascist differentiation. But today they at least they grasp the concept of how two related choices generate four possible outcomes. That’s progress Americans would do well to understand.

Get the complete explanation of the 1929 Crash in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages

ProhicrashAmazon

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

Ticking Turing Machines

Why did British codebreakers—Polish codebreakers, actually–call their cipher machines “bombes”?

Background: before National and International Socialism signed the pact agreeing it was OK to invade and dismember Poland, Polish mathematicians were already working on breaking Enigma machine codes. These gadgets used wired wheels inserted into a cipher machine to scramble and unscramble text. Since business and Die Ewige Staat are much the same in Germanic Altrurias, commercial Enigma machines quickly evolved into military coders to meet the exigencies of the initiation of force. The initiation encountered resistance, much as in Newton’s Second Law, and war was declared.

After actual bombs rained down on British assets, the folks at Bletchley Park hired Alan Turing to work on decryption. Alan was comfortable with mechanical approaches and improved codebreaking machines the Poles called “bombes.” Why bombes?

The explanation in several Turing books that mention the name had to do with the ticking sound they made. The writers then leapt to the conclusion of ticking time bombs, nèe (or is it née?) “bombes,” Quod Erat Demonstratum. This explanation was, for some reason, facile and unsatisfactory.

Another unsatisfactory answer to a simple question was given by a couple of Brazilian students being prodded, poked, inspected and detected by Amerika’s own imitation of Germanic Altrurian officiousness. I refer, of course, to the Transport Sozialist Arbeiterpartei, affectionately dubbed the Tea Essay at U.S. airports. The unionized government employee doing the poking, prodding, inspecting and detecting produced from their luggage a plastic box with some heft to it, a wire going in and a tube coming out, and asked “Wuz dis?”

The Brazilian students knew exactly what it was: an aquarium pump to keep tropical fish from drowning—a bomba de ar.
“Eat ease a air bomb,” they replied politely–albeit none too fluently–and were immediately surrounded by semiliterate steroid abusers First Responders™ with loaded guns, handcuffs, pepper spray, clubs, nylon straps, badges and governmental impunity.

So returning to the bombes that defeated Europe’s christianizing eugenics program:
Q: what goes tick tick tick and is familiar to Polish scientists?

A: a vacuum pump.

Ever need technical translations?

Political Contributions for Freedom

Once all the Germans, were warlike and mean, but that couldn’t happen again,
We taught them a lesson in 1918, and they’ve hardly bothered us since then…

My father kept the household well-supplied with Songs by Tom Lehrer, nurturing in his offspring an appreciation of mathematics, the arts, and the importance of keeping an eye on the brainwashees of totalitarian ideologies. This training in youth paid off handsomely when routine scrutiny of today’s econazi Germany turned up a philanthropist with a cause–Nina Rosenwald. Her foundation is reportedly a major contributor to “political parties,” but her advocacy focuses on the so-called “rights” of “religious minorities.”

Nina’s website is dedicated entirely to bashing Mohammedanism, as if all other forms of mysticism were neither coercive nor deadly. Religious minorities and majorities alike traditionally regard non-mystical individuals (and each other) as mere rightless infidels. Yet the website belongs to someone whose relatives were hunted down and murdered by Germany’s 98% Catholic and Protestant voters and government–by a party popularly elected and overwhelmingly re-elected beginning in 1928. Her Foundational prescriptions extoll “individual rights” without getting too specific about the nature of those individual rights. Her lessons on the difference between freedom from coercion and the bloodbaths brought about by the initiation of harmful, coercive and deadly force rely on examples without explicit generalization by induction. Her funding goes to German political parties, all of which embrace the exact same mystical altruism that prompted genocide as the eugenic solution for making the world safe for altruist collectivism.

Science and reason are receptive to observable and measurable reality. Superstition and mysticism absolutely reject all reason, logic and verification that conflicts with blind determination to interpret mythological fiction as Revealed Truth. One current example is the mountain of well-documented evidence showing that German National Socialism is a Christian movement. Its 25-point Program explicitly endorsed religious Christianity as faith. Its motto, “The Common Good Before the Individual Good” (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz) extolls altruist collectivism as the ethical basis for distinguishing right from wrong. Those words and God Is With Us (Gott Mitt Uns) were engraved on their coins. Its legislative “solutions” advance the initiation of naked force as the preferred method of correcting traits altruist ethicists imagine breed political incorrectness.  The outcome of all this was demonstrated in evidence presented at war crimes trials in Nuremberg and elsewhere after May 5, 1945. The True Believers’ reaction? Disbelief!

Socialist and altruist websites flatly assert that Hitler was a religious conservative, which he was. “Reds” depict that famous politician as the “right-wing” Christian he himself claimed to be. Catholic and Protestant websites, however, deny as fabrication all evidence that any German and Austrian nationalsocialists were ever Christians™ and produce tortuous argumentation to the contrary. Both of these factions of communo-fascist totalitarianism evade discussion of ethics (what distinguishes good from evil) but unanimously support altruism.

Mystical conservatives “just know” that Hitler’s followers “weren’t really” altruists. Looters less impressed by Divine Revelation are equally sure that Hitler’s followers “aren’t really” altruists, but are Christian. (NSDAP is both).  Their own lists of which communist dictators were “really” altruists vary, but ALL are in agreement that National Socialists are selfish “right wing” fascists. Just as correctly, National Socialists (and other Christian Conservatives) regard socialists of other parties as extremists. Each accuses the other of lying hypocrisy, never admitting that their ideal is the same: altruist collectivism achieved by the initiation of deadly force.

The Republican, Democratic and Green platforms are perfect examples of activated altruism indistinguishable in kind from other totalitarian faiths. In fact, Ayn Rand fired Random House for refusing to publish her essay quoting the Nazi platform alongside excerpts from Kennedy speeches.  Nina Rosenwald could avoid the errors* Ayn Rand committed in her dotage (when both Ayn and Hillary Clinton were Goldwater Republicans). Nina’s support for selected candidates running on Libertarian Party platforms in any of two dozen countries would do more to dismantle National Socialism and Islam than any volume of well-translated tu quoque.

**Supporting Nixon’s war to recapture the French opium regie of Cochin China; flying into a carpet-biting rage against the Libertarian Party that she herself designed.

hankdotcom

If you understand the importance of ethical values crossing the language barrier, support your friendly neighborhood Libertarian Party in its efforts to repeal bad laws. This public service announcement by was brought to you by www.portugueseinterpreter.com

Altruism versus logic

The initiation of force is good by the standard of altruism, but not as a generalization because generalizations are useful in logic. So what are the special cases altruists prefer?

Democratic and Communist party members agree that to send tax agents with guns to confiscate people’s homes, guns and tools is a good and necessary thing, even if the people voted libertarian and are not represented by the looter politicians declared victorious by secret ballot. This lay coalition does not, however, want men with guns to threaten doctors who safely care for pregnant individuals–even individuals who choose to not be pregnant.

God’s Own Prohibitionists (Rep, Tea, Const, Prohi parties) agree that to send drug agents with guns to confiscate people’s property, and police agents to arrest (or shoot) doctors who enable individuals to safely not be pregnant are good and necessary things.

Clearly, both agglomerations of special interests believe in altruism. Each agrees that the initiation of force is good when the deadly force threatens THE OTHER coalition. This happened in Germany when lay looters wanted to tax and nationalize everything and religious looters wanted to nationalze and tax everything EXCEPT CHURCH property. Conservative socialists wanted religious laws to force people to be christians–and disarm non-christians. Other socialists wanted tax laws to strip wealthy christians of their property through taxation and forfeiture. Adolf Hitler’s national socialists told both coalitions they were right and used he government monopoly on force to eliminate all individual rights. That is the logical altruism that so impressed Hanna Arendt, but not Ayn Rand.

A much better solution would be to agree with today’s lay and religious socialists, but let each faction initiate its own deadly and coercive force against the other, without involving the Political State at all. All each would have to do would be waive its own rights, which is what each asks of the other anyway. If they lack the courage to act on their convictions, then they are parasitical cowards who want us to do their killing for them. There is no sensible reason why we should sacrifice freedom so cowards can use us to bully each other. Instead of war, the President could proclaim a Roman Holiday and stadium owners sell tickets and cable transmission rights to the melée.

I pledge to buy a ticket, no questions asked. Until then, my libertarian spoiler votes will repeal laws rooted in altruism and superstition.

Religious conditioning v. science, by Ron

The confirmation hearings with questions from global warming zealots reminded me of Bertrand Russell’s teapot analogy. The notion of global warming/climate change resembles closely that mythical teapot. People like Lewandowsky and Oreskes psychoanalyze unbelievers. And public hearings are conducted to uncover unseemly heresy inside political appointees. At least when religion is recognized as such, and […]

via The Climate Change Teapot — Science Matters