In the dark and vulnerable…

Every voter who missed the opportunity to vote libertarian (and make a difference) should read Hillary Clinton’s econazi mein kampf. The thing is a sobbing, altruistic tell-all exposing the utter cluelessness of an ignorant collectivist dupe.**  Hillary made it clear she has never understood the function of the President, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and … Commission all the Officers of the United States.” Nor has she even read or understood the platform of her own party in its entirety.

Every sane voter is normally inclined to believe whatever the democratic and republican parties say about each other’s politicians. After all, they are all looters, ideologically committed to the initiation of force.  Yet when was the last time you saw a Democrat quote verbatim and contest a plank from God’s Own Prohibitionists’ platform or vice-versa? Only thinking people read the platforms. Clueless folks read tweets about cankles, hairdos and vague allegations of email impropriety.

Most especially, voters in mi Puerto Rico querido. Puerto Rico is dominated entirely by superstitious prohibitionist republican and cynical communist democratic politicians. The Nixon anti-libertarian law shunts tax money into the island’s fake media to advertise these charlatans as “both” alternatives. Voters are aware of only one choice in elections: force women to bear unwanted children AND/OR send men with guns to kick in your door because of plant leaf products. “Both” parties are prohibitionists, but the Dems want to ban energy and God’s Own Prohibitionists want to bring back Prohibition and then some.

Superstition made boricuas susceptible to anti-nuclear propaganda. Econazi propaganda convinced the island voters that bird-killing windmills and useless solar panels can replace a power plant. Altruism caused them to elect looter politicians willing to squander 120 million borrowed dollars. That money bought the DemoGOP enough votes to bully women, kill birds and produce blackouts. Puerto Rico today is in the dark and vulnerable.  Look at the before and after outcome:

 

Quen es Juan Galt?

Slide the Atlas Shrugged divider… Page down, VIEW IMAGE COMPARISON shows before and after view.

La Rebellión de Atlas is available in Spanish translation. There is no excuse for Puerto Rico to live in the Dark Ages anymore. A libertarian governor and economy could soon enable a boricua power company to purchase a natural uranium Canadian CANDU reactor on reasonable terms. This would make our island the searchlight beacon of the Caribbean. Houston’s nuclear reactors were hit directly by the same hurricanes and never felt a thing. Puerto Rico more closely resembles a satrapy of the Spanish Inquisition because of energy prophesies–such as this one from the 2016 Democratic platform:

We are committed to getting 50 percent of our electricity from clean energy sources within a decade, with half a billion solar panels installed within four years and enough renewable energy to power every home in the country.

The Libertarian plank looked like this:

While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. We oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production.

The Democratic Party final solution for Puerto Rico looked like this:

So if having electricity is more important than government ownership or making a pregnant girl suffer, consider voting Libertarian next election. If clear text is more important than garble, consider getting a bid from an ATA-certified Portuguese interpreter.

** I did not vote for Trump. I always vote Libertarian.

Advertisements

Federal Postal Monopoly v. Alaska

Those uppity Alaskans dared to imagine–like New Yorkers in 1923–that they could repeal their prohibition laws and still collect excise taxes? Think again!

God’s Own Prohibitionists have appointed another Harry “Sessions” Anslinger to bring the death sentence to pot peddlers as promised by George Bush in 1989! The Juneau Empire now reports that legal hemptrepreneurs eager to pay the government’s hemp tax were turned away by Post Office Gestapo. Those asset-forfeiture experts would have nothing to do with the proceeds of dope peddlers–unless maybe an opportunity for civil asset forfeiture were to present itself. God’s Own Prohibitionists aren’t about to let the grass grow under their feet. Harrumpf!

It remains to be seen which Alaska judge will sign a bench warrant for the arrest of federal meddlers interfering with State tax collection.

Don’t blame me! I’ve was suckered by both looter parties back when I was young and stupid. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me!

 

Climate Change & Nonaggression Pact

National Socialist–Soviet Socialist Pact, (August 23, 1939)–Paris “Agreement” November 4, 2016… a comparison

The National Socialist–Soviet Socialist pact is also called the Hitler-Stalin Pact, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the Nazi–Soviet Pact and the German–Soviet Non-aggression Pact and Russo-German Pact.** In much the way Global Cooling morphed into Anthropomorphic Global Warming, then (to cover all bases) Climate Change (which was everywhere long before mankind).  All of this is old hat. Externally, the socialist “non-aggression” treaty was short and flowery, with phrases like:

In any event both Governments will resolve this (Poland) question by means of a friendly agreement.”

and

“Should disputes or conflicts arise between the High Contracting Parties over problems of one kind or another, both parties shall settle these disputes or conflicts exclusively through friendly exchange of opinion or, if necessary, through the establishment of arbitration commissions.”

The treaty closed with a nondisclosure agreement that masked the existence of additional deals, but the thing was outwardly cute and fuzzy, as one might expect from neighboring altruistic People’s States. The fact remained that the preceding war had been largely a dispute over heroin markets in which to sell Papaver somniferum products grown in the Balkan States. Those markets and competition still existed in 1939.  The secret additional deals amounted to a divvying-up of the opium-producing Balkan States.

When the Democratic Party gained power after the George Waffen Bush asset-forfeiture crash and depression, it preserved existing domestic prohibition, high-taxes, asset forfeiture looting and other victimless “crime” legislation. However, stung by the Y2K election results in which the Green Party weighed in with enough spoiler votes to block Democrats from jobs, boodle and pelf, the Democratic platform committee hewed as close to the Republican line as possible–except for the part about trying to ban reliable power generation.

Bans on reliable power generation have been enacted in the People’s State of Australia (which replaced voluntary democracy with mandatory voting), and the Democratic People’s Republic of Germany. In both cases, utility bills skyrocketed and rolling blackouts and brownouts became familiar features of the environment. These provide pretexts for additional regulatory meddling. The result of curtailment of power generation anywhere is a net increase in the mortality rate in those places–in other words, a health hazard.

This latest Paris pact aimed at lowering life expectancy is couched in the most florid prose imaginable:

(c) Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development

Translation: (c) Robbing taxpayers and monopoly victims to subsidize unreliable energy experiments

Propaganda expert George Orwell commented on totalitarian persuasion:

It is important to notice that the cult of power tends to be mixed up with a love of cruelty and wickedness FOR THEIR OWN SAKES. A tyrant is all the more admired if he happens to be a bloodstained crook as well, and ‘the end justifies the means’ often becomes, in effect, ‘the means justify themselves provided they are dirty enough’. This idea colours the outlook of all sympathizers with totalitarianism, and accounts, for instance, for the positive delight with which many English intellectuals greeted the Nazi-Soviet pact. (George Orwell)

Russo-German Pact of 1939. [Note 1, below] And when news of the Pact broke, the most wildly divergent explanations were of it were given, and predictions were made which were falsified almost immediately, being based in nearly every case not on a study of probabilities but on a desire to make the U.S.S.R. seem good or bad, strong or weak. (Orwell)

-issues like Poland, the Spanish civil war, the Russo-German pact, and so forth, are debarred from serious discussion, and that if you possess information that conflicts with the prevailing orthodoxy you are expected to either distort it or keep quiet about it–(Orwell)

If this sounds like 2017, welcome to the world of alternative facts.

** [Note 1: An example is the Russo-German Pact, which is being effaced as quickly as possible from public memory. A Russian correspondent informs me that mention of the Pact is already being omitted from Russian year-books which table recent political events. (George Orwell)]

There is a genuine non-aggression principle that socialists struggle to evade:

“I hereby certify that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals.”

This is the pledge required to join or donate to the Libertarian Party.

Third party votes change laws

 

LPeagle

 

Every election year Republican Svengalis come hunting Libertarian Trilbys to convert to the Immutable Platform cast in stone  by God’s Own Prohibitionists. This is  what happened in 1887. The episode is reported in the words of John Sherman, Congressman, Senator, Secretary of both State and Treasury and brother to Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman. Eventually, it is the Major Party platform that changes because integrity wins out over equivocation.  People willing to kill you to take your money are also willing to lie–the easier to to rob you with, my voter!

transitional“The only danger he (Governor Foraker) encountered was in the active movement of the Prohibition party. This party ran a separate ticket, the votes of which, it was feared, would mainly come from the Republican party. In a speech I made at Oberlin, on the 4th of November, I made an appeal to our Prohibition friends to support the Republican ticket. I said: “There are but two great parties in this country, one or the other of which is to be put in power. You have a perfect right to vote for the smaller Prohibition party, and thus throw away your vote, but you know very well that either a Republican or a Democratic legislature will be elected, and that there will not be a single Prohibition candidate elected. Will it not be better to choose between these two parties and give your assistance to the one that has done the most for the success of your principles?”

Observe that the prohibitionists wanted the laws to change. They did not care a whit about which politician is grinning from the podium. Yet Sherman immediately offered them a false choice between a grinning Republican and a supposedly wasted vote. Sherman then dangled the real bait. 

“We think the Republican party is still entitled, as in the past, to your hearty support. Among other of its enactments there is the ‘Dow law,’ looked upon you with suspicion, yet it has done more for temperance than your ‘prohibition laws’ at present could have done. That law enables you to exclude the sale of liquor in more than 400 Ohio towns. It was passed by a Republican legislature. By it more than 3,000 saloons have been driven out of existence. “Then you have the repeated declaration of the Republican party, a party that never deceived the people with false promises, that they will do anything else that is necessary, or all that is possible by law, to check the evils that flow from intoxicating drinks.” (It took the GOP another thirty years to completely wreck the economy through prohibition enforcement in 1930. That drove plenty of people out of business, and did it again in 2007.)

“Is there not a choice between that party and the Democratic party, which has always been the slave of the liquor party, and whose opposition to the enforcement of the Dow law cost the state $2,000,000? The Democratic party, if put in power, will repeal that law and will do nothing for prohibition that you will accept.” (To frighten fanatics, threaten them with the horrors of freedom!)

“They say they want license, but they know it can never be brought about without a change in the constitution. They want the liquor traffic to go unrestrained. It does seem to me that with all the intelligence of this community it is the duty of all its candid men, who are watching the tendencies of these two parties in this country, not to throw their votes away.” (Again, the Republican platform contained what the prohibition voters did not want, yet proffer it as a future possiblity, and point to the Hobgoblin as the only alternative to surrendering their integrity.)

“It is much better to do our work by degrees, working slowly in the right direction, than to attempt to do it prematurely by wholesale, and fail. More men have been broken up by attempting too much than by ‘going slow.'” (Softlee, softlee, catchee monkey–old Chinese proverb)

“Your powerful moral influence, if kept within the Republican party, will do more good, a thousandfold, than you can do losing your vote by casting it for a ticket that cannot be elected. Next year will present one of the most interesting spectacles in our history. The Republican party will gather its hosts of progressive and patriotic citizens into one grand party at its national convention, and I trust that when that good time comes our Prohibition friends and neighbors who stand aloof from us will come back and join the old fold and rally around the old flag of our country, the stars and stripes, and help us to march on to a grand and glorious victory.”
(Sherman 1895 p. 770–of the single-volume edition) 

The prohibitionists of course did not fall for it, but other voters reelected the candidate–who was defeated the subsequent year. Prohibitionists cast their votes for what they really wanted–a change in the laws. To the Republican, his ticket meant his party’s hand in the till. The Prohibition Party did not want a hand in the till. They wanted men with guns to take to the streets and arrest people for beer and liquor. The Major Party seduction relies on the fallacy of equivocation to trick the voters into betraying their own values and sacrificing them instead to what the Major Party wants. By preferring their own misguided lust for the power to coerce others, the prohibitionists injected next to the Bill of Rights an amendment transforming the Constitution into a religious fetish for the initiation of deadly force against peaceful individuals.

 

What’s going on in Brazil?

dilminha73Brazil’s two most recent presidents have been anti-American populists of the looter persuasion, both of them chummy with the Bolivian, Cuban and Venezuelan governments. Two things stand out about these three governments. All were targets of massive United States intervention, and none of the three have anything resembling a Libertarian party. In fact, Lula and Dilma’s Workers Party is probably the most honest and (ignoring economic freedom) Libertarian party in the country. Brazil has 32 government-subsidized  political parties and voting is mandatory. All of the parties are communist, socialist or prohibitionist–-if not all of the above, and the people best situated to be able to tell the difference, Brazil’s voters themselves, have elected and reelected Lula and Dilma twice. They were practically national heroes until 2013, when something happened.

The North American colonies were of great strategic importance to England, and quickly mastered the arts of shipbuilding and weapons production. Portugal’s colonies, on the other hand, we’re deliberately kept backward and impoverished by regulation and predatory taxation. Docile Citizen is not a bad description of your average forced-to-vote voter, and Brazilian politics are pretty low key. Mussolini is greatly admired here, and whatever the Vatican utters quickly becomes law.

Right now, for instance, there is an epidemic of mosquito-borne disease that causes women to deliver pinhead babies. When the news broke, religious physicians spoke as one in first denying the reports, then casting aspersions, and finally removing nearly all mention of the public health hazard lest Brazilian women rise up and demand the right to legally terminate pregnancies. None of the 32 parties seeks to legalize abortion, and the illegal practice remains a lucrative source of tax-free cash revenue. Local telescreens likewise avoid all mention of legalization or decriminalization of hemp in Colorado, Washington, Canada, Australia or Portugal. Yet, oddly enough, two of the most loud-mouthed prohibitionist politicians–Maluf and Cunha–have just been politically neutralized by criminal charges/investigations.

bushaecioDilma’s opponent in the last election, a CIA-backed prohibitionist zealot whose name is associated with helicopters full of dope and landing strips–has also fallen glumly silent after incessant squawking since the day he lost. The whole situation reeks of superpower meddling. The Bush Dynasty régimes’ asset-forfeiture orgy destroyed the Brazilian economy–already disrupted before by similar Bush-Reagan policies of 1987-1992.  Bradley Manning’s disclosures revealed the the US was busily exporting asset-forfeiture prohibitionism throughout the world at a time when the United States economy was collapsing–possibly in hopes of shorting the suckers to recoup its losses when their economies predictably collapsed. Furthermore, it is common knowledge that the Workers’ Party is not fanatically bent on shooting youngsters over victimless nonsense like the erstwhile US-backed military junta with its death squads. Edward Snowden’s revelations of NSA spying on boodling politicians’ and magnates’ cellphones raises the question of whether recorded conversations and email intercepts might have been conveniently passed along to local authorities and opposition parties in furtherance of destabilizing indictments.

At this time it is hard to tell what is going on. All appearances indicate that some sort of Taeping Rebellion of Fifth Column infiltrators with a foreign agenda is once more afoot. I clearly remember the US intervention in 1964. That coercive meddling has done more to popularize Communism (and National Socialism) in the Southern Hemisphere than anything else. Now–with no nuclear-tipped communist empire on the map–would be an excellent time for the Republicans and Democrats to leave South America well enough alone.