Prohibition and the Crash–guest appearance

The following post The Drug Problems Jeff Sessions Complains About Are Caused By Prohibition appeared first on A Libertarian Future at A Libertarian Future – Spreading a Libertarian message across the internet.. Many libertarians were upset with Rand Paul for voting to confirm Jeff Sessions because the Attorney General has an enormous amount of leeway…

via The Drug Problems Jeff Sessions Complains About Are Caused By Prohibition — A Libertarian Future

Advertisements

Liberal Party of America, 1931

LIBERALPARTYCOVERA proto-Libertarian Party was organized in 1930

This first approach to a Libertarian Party was organized in 1930 to repeal prohibition, the 18th Amendment and block intrusive religious laws–blue laws, Sunday closing laws, baseball bans on Sundays. It is hard for anyone today to imagine we had something like Sharia law during Prohibition in America. Once this Liberal Party published its 1931 platform, the Democratic Party had little choice but to adopt a prohibition repeal plank. Otherwise, frustrated beer drinkers would vote their conscience and those lost spoiler votes would cost the Democrats the 1932 election. The Liberal Party was non-protectionist, non-militaristic, anti-war, forgiving of war debts, opposed to communism and the dole, church/state separatist, favored normal election of senators, legal no-fault divorce, wanted removal of censorship and curbs on employment and abolition of useless federal bureaus. Its existence and positive influence, like the causal connection between Prohibition and the Depression are a well-kept secret.

So, why do the Republican, Prohibition, Consta-to-shun and Tea parties hate “liberals” as much as German National Socialists did in 1932? Here are a few tidbits…

At a meeting held in New York City on February 4, 1930, which was attended by about one hundred representative men from every section of the United States, a proposal was made to create a national political organization to be called the Liberal Party. (…) The discussion developed the general agreement that America is being held tight in a strangling grip by powerful groups of men and women, narrow and fanatical of mind, who had constituted themselves an ecclesiastical union, guided by a fatuous intention of making our people virtuous, according to the peculiar tenets and creeds of each group, by legislative enactments… 

Would people have moral courage enough to break away from the lifelong ties of political fealty? Above all, would the young men and the young women of the nation behold the light and promise of a new day, and would they give their allegiance and support to a movement which aimed to restore to them the vanished liberties which their fathers had established?

http://crablifeadoption.weebly.com/

WHAT CRUSHES NATIONAL ECONOMIES

Does that fanatical strangling grip of 85 years ago remind you of anyone?  Here we are 44 years after the Libertarian Party formed to press for many of the same policy changes, and so far only 3% of the voters have gathered the courage to cast law-changing spoiler votes. Granted, this mid-term election result is a 300% increase over the sort of totals we got before the Asset Forfeiture Crash of 2008, and in a way it makes sense.

National markets collapsed in 1929 in expectation of Herbert Hoover’s Republican Administration wrecking the economy by ramping up prohibitionist asset forfeiture. By 1932 the situation was intolerable and the nation’s honest media made it clear that prohibition and the income tax were the jaws of the pliers crushing the nation’s economy.

The Liberal Party made the historic first move and one of the entrenched looter parties followed their lead. The dactyl that made beer a felony was broken off but replaced by prohibition of other enjoyable drugs, and the income tax propodus remained to cause economic recessions in 1937-38, 1988-92, and the recent 2007-09 asset-forfeiture recession. After 1929 it took Americans three years to come to their senses and vote for repeal. In the nine years since the 2007 ramp-up in asset forfeiture several states have moved to repeal prohibition and need more libertarian spoiler votes to bolster and reinforce this sound policy. Votes for any other party send the wrong message and are wasted.

Are you surprised to learn how the repeal of prohibition began? A simultaneous interpreter has to think outside the box in order to mediate between cultures, concept and languages. Get in touch for translation or interpreting.

Reading a contract

One of the judges I worked for regularly during the Great Purge following the attacks on the Pentagon and civilian skyscrapers suggested I work for an additional company. She was referring to these bloated and top-heavy organizations governments are comfortable with exempting from competitive bidding. Court interpreters tend to focus extra attention on recommendations made by judges, so I contacted the company and received a dreary stack of forms to fill out.

Because life expectancies are limited,  it pays to read over the material before reaching for a pencil and filling in blanks. The main contract contained sentences with no object, others with no verb, and similar scars of the sort that result from inept editing. Repairing these contracts is a waste of time. This I knew from having spent dozens of hours on the thankless task over the course of several years. So I informed the employee that the contract was defective, with problems on page such-and-such, and to contact me again after corrections were made.

The reaction was the sort of gasp you’d expect were you to tell a mother to put her baby in the oven and turn on the gas. But it is the same everywhere. The people who seek these corporate timecard jobs do not think like free-range independent contractors who live by their wits or starve. I would bet money the problem was never reported back up the pecking order, and that hundreds of eager and starry-eyed young linguists hurriedly signed the mess without a why or a wherefore. When the judge eventually asked me about the company I reported that their contract was a garbled mess. She smiled, and that was the end of the matter.

With no surprise, and some schadenfreude, I notice the same company is suddenly getting a lot of free publicity. The  Department of Labor is forcing them to pay hundreds of employees and thousands of interpreters close to a million and a half dollars for letting themselves get screwed by blindly signing defective agreements.  The Home Office in what used to be England is also experiencing difficulties with its mass-herding of careless interpreters.

This is evolution in action. Folks who do not bother to put up a website and state their policies are fair game for economic exploitation by bigger fish. Signing contracts without reading and understanding the text is just plain dumb.  When someone baits you with a bad agreement, you can make a counteroffer using standard agreements from the Freelancers Union, the American Translators Association or by writing or having an attorney write you a bid form or agreement boilerplate.

This has been a continuing education presentation by www.Portugueseinterpreter.com

Job opportunities for translators

Tired of being commoditized and re-outsourced like a rented bicycle? What about competing with countless desperate bracero-serfs eagerly throwing themselves at crowdsourcing faceless corporations? Here are some opportunities many linguists overlook…

ACCESSORY TO GENOCIDE: Tired of scrubbing splatter out of your Levis after torture session interrogations at Gitmo? Why not go straight to the front lines where they capture suspected enemy combatants and be a proud Crusader and drone interpreter? The language barrier leads to all sorts of undesirable combat situations. One of the most memorable appeared in a John Wayne movie “The Longest Day”, where at Normandy beach two Germans, hands raised, stagger out of a smoking bunker, hands up, hollering “bitte, bitte…” A surprised G.I. riddles the pair with bullets and remarks to his friend “I wonder what ‘bitte bitte‘ means…”

You can download the sound byte for practice

Dilbert creator Scott Adams, sensitive as ever to the dilemmas of human frailty, writes about robot drones in combat taking kill shots ordered by a committee of joystick jockeys assisted by their trusty interpreter. This uniformed worthy will, with a sneer on the side at the jaws of danger, inform the drones hovering at his shoulder that “Lütfen, lütfen” is Turkish, or “Thov, thov” Hmong Dau, for “please don’t shoot me!” This job is the true meaning of doing well by doing good.

I am not making this up: “Another robot bonus: One translator could be on call to speak to humans through drones flying at head level. That way your translator is wherever the drones are.”
More

Or maybe you’re the more intellectual type, or  allergic to high explosives… never fear. Zealous religious conservatives in Holland are appalled that their countrymen refuse to forgive and forget their occupation by conservative National Socialists during WWII. They are even more appalled that the libertarian pushback has taken the form of legalization of prostitution. Unable to strip those houris of their self-ownership rights, the better people who know what’s good for the riffraff have done the next best thing. They appealed to a European Court more kindly disposed toward the pious strictures of Positive Christianity that still serve as window-dressing in the provinces, hence the job opp.

INTERPRETER FOR SEX WORKERS: The Court, troubled by vivid memories of girl-auction scenes in Rudolph Valentino movies, has legislated that pimp landlords must interview tenant window-undressing girls in their exotic native tongues to make sure no Sheik has sold them down the Nile. Here’s the kicker: telephonic interpreting of the sort often resorted to in U.S. District and Immigration courts is not good enough to protect their blushing innocence. Opportunity knocks now that actual wingtips-on-the-ground in-person interpreters are needed to make sure those gorgeous prostitutes understand what they are getting into.  Again, doing well by doing good.

Is this a great planet or what?

This has been a public service message from http://www.portugueseinterpreter.com

 

A Cabra Expiatória

A Crise seria por acaso outro artefato americano?

Na constituição americana o papel do presidente é de fazer obedecer as leis do congresso–um bando de senadores e deputados que podem ser reeleitos até que a morte os separe dos cofres públicos. Fora da constituição seu papel é de bode expiatório. O presidente ao sair do poder leva consigo toda a culpa e ódio que o congresso merece.
No Brasil o esquema é o mesmo, mas as crises são importadas. O governo americano fabrica suas próprias crises para que explodam na posse do outro partido.

Sobram exemplos… em 1893 Grover Cleveland seria empossado pela segunda vez (não-consecutiva) dia 4 de março (como se fazia na época). Perdeu re-eleição por ser taxado de anti-cristão, pois queria que o cidadão fosse dono incoacto do próprio nariz. Benjamin Harrison e sua Primeira Dama, atletas da ditadura seca do misticismo proibicionista, tanto desagradaram que Harrison perdeu para Cleveland na eleição de 1892. Para se vingar, o derrotado Harrison divulgou nova interpretação de regulamentos ferroviários, decretando a inspeção rígida dos vagões canadenses, que antes entravam carregados de ópio indiano sem inspeção ou cobrança da alfândega. O produto era barato a ponto de ser exportado do litoral pacífico para o Havaí, onde golpistas americanos impunham uma ditadura militar.  Com o arrocho fiscal sobre esse “enorme tráfico –um mês antes da posse de Cleveland–tudo mudou. O noroeste americano entrou em crise, magnificada nos seus efeitos sobre as ferrovias que atendiam o norte do país.

Socialistas invadiam o Rio Grande do Sul a tiroteios e a câmara debatia tal cleptocracia na Alemanha. A França proibia a corretagem ao ar livre com a bourse de Paris em queda livre sob o peso dos impostos, e a polícia de Nova York invadia o baile de carnaval do bairro francês. Animado, o presidente derrotado recomendou ao Congresso o proibicionismo “Gothemburg” popular na Escandinávia–isso três dias antes da posse de Cleveland. Este presidente herdou as ruínas da economia gorda que entregara à oposição quatro anos antes.

Um dia antes da posse de Herbert Hoover, em 3 de março de 1929, fanáticos baixaram uma lei multiplicando a pena por posse de qualquer bebida a cinco anos de reclusão e multa que equivaleria hoje a R$1,8 milhões. Hoover cobrou cumprimento dessa lei e usou a nova lei do imposto de renda, de origem comunista, para tentar cobrar a lei seca. Perdeu a eleição e ainda minou o governo do adversário, usando a inspeção estadual das declarações de IR federal das pessoas jurídicas para fechar todos os bancos do país um mês antes da posse do adversário Franklin Roosevelt.

Já em 2007 o governo de George Bush (filho…) fomentou movimentos nos governos estaduais de  “delação premiada” proibicionista para confiscar os imóveis das pessoas sem necessidade de elas serem julgadas culpadas em juízo penal. Tão rapido foi o aumento nos confiscos que o mercado de imóveis implodiu. Na mesma época esse governo Bush empurrava com a barriga vários tratados proibicionistas, ouriçados de intervenção branca e confiscos “fiscais” para os governos europeus e da América Latina enfiarem mão em cumbuca semelhante–enquanto espiões americanos gravavam as conversas telefônicas de políticos e figurões. Afinal, uma chantagemzinha de vez em quando nunca matou ninguém, correto?

Cientes do estrago que as divulgações seletas iriam desencadear, o Tesouro e Fed americano souberam investir de forma a recuperar suas perdas em cima da miséria dos iludidos governantes estrangeiros. De lambugem, apareceu oportunidade de dar nova desestabilizada em um governo re-eleito (embora por voto forçado e secreto) no Brasil. Esse governo brasileiro assinou uma lei que previa a profilaxia contra a gravidez para meninas violentadas estupradas.

Mas quem arrisca explicar tudo isso aos torcedores dos outros 31 partidos comunistas, socialistas e proibicionistas que driblam e batem panelas para que seus chefes possam descer dos helipópteros e meter a mão no erário alheio?  Le plus ça change, le plus c’est la même chose

O enorme zeppelin do PMMPBD

No país dos otários, o malandro de um só golpe é rei.

http://charges.uol.com.br/2015/08/06/cunha-e-renan-geni-e-o-zepelim/

É nisso que dá ser forçado por fanáticos a subsidiar e prestigiar 32 partidos comunistas, fascistas e proibicionistas…

Note to foreign readers: This harks back to a Chico Buarque song about the Accursed Hun (as the Utilitarian Monster) who demands the use of a vilified village girl in exchange for forbearing from using his Zeppelin to give the villagers-at-large the bombardment they so richly deserve.

A popularidade da presidenta

Versus as táticas do proibicionismo mercantilista estrangeiro…

“Ambos” os partidos que dominam os EUA são quase idênticos aos populistas que imperavam na Europa em 1939: o socialismo internacional burocrático e o socialismo nacional cristão. São idênticos exceto na questão religiosa. Para os “democratas” Deus é uma kleptocracia de burocratas coletivistas em carne e osso. Já para os “republicanos” o Nosso Senhor é uma espécie de fantasma invisível com poderes mágicos. Nos dois casos o culto ao altruísmo e compromisso com a mão armada dos soldados e meganhas perde apenas para a mão no erário na sua hierarquia de valores éticos.
Os republicanos naturalmente são mais chegados à versão proibicionista exemplificada pela Santíssima Inquisição, e baixam a tortura do Exorcismo nos colombianos, venezuelanos, ecuadorianos, brasileiros e bolivianos para pelo menos “salvar-lhes as almas” como uma espécie de benfazejo póstumo. Seus aliados políticos — marechais nas juntas e tenentes nos esquadrões da morte — são “our son-of-a-bitches” e acabou a conversa. A figura do Tinhoso no ideário deles é um cigarro de cânhamo ou um descongestionante natural. Os comunas interpretam isso corretamente como desvario sintomático da mais bruta superstição obscurantista, e não perdem tempo em rotular essa seita concorrente de “liberalismo”. Afinal, o seu profeta Marx descrevia as mais beligerantes monarquias do mercantilismo escravagista como “capitalismo”, adjetivo que persiste na fala dos energúmenos e mentecaptos da mídia popular.

Vale lembrar é que foi esse fascismo supersticioso que defende a coação proibicionista que transformou Franklin Roosevelt em presidente vitalício. Foi ele, afinal, que prometeu legalizar a cerveja e cumpriu a promessa. Mas essa foi a segunda tentativa. Quando Al Smith tentou revogar a proibição em 1928, o Ku-Klux-Klã e o Terror Branco metodista caíram de pau em cima da popularidade do candidato liberal e o fisco federal deu batidas nos seus eleitores, confiscando-lhes as contas bancárias.
O mesmo ocorreu agora com a Dilma. Apesar de ser um bando esmolambado de saqueadores asumidos, o PT tirou a economia do buraco em que Sarney, Collor e os Bush o haviam enfiado. Quem esperava um colapso socialista ficou atônito ao ver saldada a dívida escravizante com os abutres do FMI. Também sobrava coletivismo, regulamentos idiotas e parasitismo — como na Europa, nos EUA, e nos governos pemedebistas e petecista. Mas quem diria que esses saqueadores “de esquerda” (do socialismo patético da Revolução dos Bichos) seriam menos incompetentes do que os saqueadores “de direita” (do fanatismo místico mascarado de liberalismo). Essas duas alternativas foram pesadas pelos eleitores forçados a escolher. Os eleitores parecem ter optado pela sinceridade altruísta, rejeitando os polichinelos do proibicionismo gringo. (Não há como ter certeza pois o cidadão nem tem como conferir a contagem do seu próprio voto.)

Só agora, depois de Snowden revelar que os arapongas da espionagem americana grampeiam os telefones dos políticos e figurões, e a dona Dilma dar uma bronca federal nos espiões do governo gringo, as informações colhidas começaram a vazar. Sonegadores operadores de helipópteros e quadrilheiros dos monopólios-por-licitação começarem a dançar na mão dos cobradores de impostos e seus procuradores. Merecido, sim, mas inquietante por lembrar muito o que presenciamos em 1964:

Há duas diferenças importantes entre o mundo de hoje e a conjuntura de 1964:

1) a ditadura comunista soviética ruiu, e

2) surgiram partidos libertários nos países semilivres.

Em vez de subsidiar e forçar o cidadão a prestigiar 32 partidos comunistas, fascistas e proibicionistas, bastariam meia-dúzia de partidos sem subsídio nenhum, desde que uma delas defendesse os direitos da pessoa humana nos termos do programa libertário.