League of Looter Nations, 1929

After President Harding and the Senate said no, the League of European stupefacient warmongers limped on without us. So what happened? Here is an excerpt from Prohibition and the Crash by J Henry Phillips

Chapter 12

The League of Nations

            On the international front the State Department Division of Far Eastern Affairs had approvingly read the Geneva Opium Convention of 1925, and lent a sympathetic ear to the so-called Scheme of Stipulated Supply. The idea was to use futures trading for all legal narcotics procurements. The effect would be to greatly limit production for the illegal market.[1] The World Anti-Narcotic Union had held a gala meeting early in March and obtained verbal support from Governor Al Smith, Mayor Jimmy Walker and Italian dictator Benito Mussolini—but nothing was actually done.[2]

Since 1924 Pennsylvania Congressman Stephen G. Porter had been an influential figure in U.S. drug negotiations with the League of Nations. But the man was a mystical pedant and alienated League members (See and compare A.G. Sessions). Indeed, it was on Porter’s motion that the American delegation to the Geneva conference had petulantly withdrawn from the Convention of 1925. The truth was that delegates from India, Turkey and Persia understood perfectly well that any sudden curbs on opium production would bring on acute economic crises and political instability in their countries. Porter understood none of this and stormed out in a huff, convinced of the foreign delegates’ insincerity. Even before the Great War German chemical interests had struggled against curbs on drugs, and not without reason.[3]

 

[1] (Taylor 1969 211, 228) (Eisenlohr 1934 129)

[2] (NYT 3/8/28 8)

[3] (Taylor 1969 178-9, 184; 193, 201, 107-8, 213) (Eisenlohr 1934 227, 231, 256-7)

 

Global Warming Math

 

Individualism?

Sinfest, the webcomic to end all

Does the USA need a State of Fear?

Fact: A = A
Inference: 2A = 2A
This is the way algebra works, like the scales of justice. It you add to or subtract from both sides of the equality equally, the truth value of the equation is unchanged.

Datum: over 31000 degreed scientists signed and mailed in the PetitionProject.org petition successfully urging the US Senate NOT to ratify the unconvincing Kyoto hara-kiri “agreement”.

Father of Anti-Nazi Bomb

See the original PetitionProject.org lists.

Datum: Sierra Club president statement before the Senate, “97% of the scientists” believe the Earth is “cooking and heating up and warming.”

Programmed True Believer

President of Sierra Club before US Senate. See the video.

Assume both data are true, we can calculate the minimum number of people who earned science degrees from colleges and universities and believe the Earth is “cooking and heating up and warming.” Let’s do that.

100% minus 97% is 3%, and a percent sign % stands for 100 in the denominator or divisor.

Let x equal only those 31000-and-change scientists who do NOT believe the Earth is cooking and heating up. Those 31000 are 3% of what number?

3x/100 = 31000. Multiply both sides by 100, and
3x = 3,100,000 Right? Next we divide both sides by 3, so that
x = 3,100,000/3 Still with me? Now we simplify the fraction on the right by dividing, and
x = 1,033,333 scientists. That is five times the combined membership both the American Physical Society and American Chemical Society.

So supposing the 31000+ Petition Project American scientists alone are the entire dissenting 3%. Algebra tells us the 97% has to comprise at the very least 1,033,333 scientists. That is five times the combined membership of both the American Physical Society and American Chemical Society. Enrico Fermi would ask: Where are they?

Where is the list of these “consensus scientists” listed by name and by state? 

Q.E.D. = Quod erat demonstratum

If you ever need a technical translator with an adequate command of Junior High math, search me out.

Global Warming Great Lakes prediction

In 2011 Global Warmunists published dire prophesies of what would surely maybe perhaps happen to the Great Lakes.

Here’s an update of what they’re like now. No loss of water, ice and temperatures normal. This all reminds me of the “scientists” and “doctors” who said marijuana and LSD would surely maybe perhaps turn teenagers into zombies and axe-murderers any minute now. Forty years later at least one of these is legal in most US states and many civilized countries around the world.

I found this in the comments section at realclimatescience.com

The Petition Project alone lists by state and alphabetically 32000 scientists unconvinced by warmer pseudoscience. For them to be the 3% there would have to be at least a million and sixty-seven thousand degreed scientists listed somewhere as the 97% endorsing the conclusion that the world is fast becoming a rotisserie. But of the handful I can identify, most were claiming 30 years ago that the Earth was entering into an ice age. Yet temperature charts are flatlining like the funding figures for econazi hysterics.

But the global warming scare and Carbon Tax sure as hell defeated the Democratic Party this last election. It was the only real difference between “the two” parties. Maybe next election the Dem Platform Committee will copy a repeal plank from the Libertarian Party instead of copying more prohibition and taxes from Luddites.  They copied a plank to repeal the Prohibition Amendment from the Liberal Party in 1932, and never regretted the move.

Denazification of Brainwashees

NSDAP = CCCP

Read the original

Denazification of Christian National Socialists was a major problem for the Truman administration after Germany surrendered in May of 1945.

Those Christian socialists dismissed everything occupation forces said as a foreign or communist plot. Communist socialists just as balefully suspected Yanks were in league with plutocrats. Germany in 1945 was divided–pretty much like These American States in 2016–between Christian socialists and socialists less impressed by the Sermon on the Mount than by the equally apocryphal “Give unto Caesar“.

Religious conservatives want more censorship and laws outlawing sex, choice, herbs, cacti, mushrooms, having cash, crossing borders and speaking one’s mind. Conservatives want more mind control, fewer individual rights, but prefer prohibitionist asset-forfeiture looting to outright nationalization.

Gaian ecological nationalsocialists and yellow-dog communists pine in unison for the complete abolition of economic freedom. This false dichotomy within a universe of discourse restricted to variants of socialism was precisely the situation that allowed National Socialist ideology to completely tailor Germany while cursing “liberal” ideas as narcissistically selfish and irresponsible. Actual American Liberals, before 1932, sought voluntary solutions–especially the repeal of Blue Laws and Prohibition–not the mystically-motivated initiation of force.

People without the slightest notion of the definition of energy or the dimensions of its units are passionately committed to the banning of most electrical power plants. Others just as ignorant of physics, chemistry and economics want men with guns to arrest Planned Parenthood doctors and shoot teenagers who smell like the munchies. To fanatics of both camps the only alternative to sending men with guns to kick in doors is “to do nothing” and simply “let” the End of the World happen any minute now

The spell cast by years of altruist propaganda from teevee sets, pulpits, yellow journals and journalistic hack books has taken its toll on those susceptible to altruist seduction–mystical right-wingers and lefties alike. After the 1945 surrender, German nationalsocialists were conditioned en masse into the serried ranks of Soviet international socialists. Anyone with experience in running a slave pen or death camp could certainly find work in East Germany or Soviet Russia.

Just so in the post-Soviet USA fifth-column technocrats formerly advocating nuclear disarmament and surrender to peaceful Soviet altruism are today welcomed into the loving arms of new, improved, Ecological National Socialism. New improved nationalsocialism tolerates the existence of selfish jews and imposes prohibitionist jail sentences as a Christianizing influence to improve people of color–in 2016 as in 1857.

But what about the rest of us? What about people who understand enough physics to realize that no energy means no work, and no work  means no voluntarily-acquired income? Four million voters voted pro-choice, pro-electricity, anti-prohibition and against attacking people on the other side of the planet. Libertarians voted against the initiation of harmful and deadly force as a political tool. We did it in numbers large enough to shift the tallying of 124 electoral vote outcomes in 11 states.

The people of Germany had no libertarian choice in 1932, but they do today. France also has a functioning Parti Libertarien dutifully ignored by that kleptocracy’s media. All those countries’ voters lack is the courage, understanding and ethical values it takes to act on that choice. Come to think of it… these are exactly the same things that are in desperately short supply in These United States.

Are you interested in replacing coercive violence with a peace, prosperity and freedom?

If you are looking for a libertarian linguist check out my interpreting service.

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.

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

Letter to Democrat voters

Howdy Dem Buckaroos, Thanks for reading my material on how–a month after the Libertarian Party managed to acquire a single electoral spoiler vote–the Republican Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in favor of individual rights. In November your prohibitionist Luddite puppet lost by 77 votes. God’s Own Prohibitionists’ puppet got enough excess electoral votes to beat your half of  The Kleptocracy 77 times. Your candidates lost because of this anti-rights platform:

As we continue working to reduce carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gas emissions, we must ensure federal actions do not “significantly exacerbate” global warming.
…carbon pollution and rapidly driving down emissions of potent greenhouse gases like hydrofluorocarbons. We will support developing countries in their efforts to mitigate carbon pollution and other greenhouse gases, deploy more clean energy, and invest in climate resilience and adaptation.
…bold steps to slash carbon pollution and protect clean air at home, lead the fight against climate change around the world
To build on the success of the lifesaving Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, we will expand and strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws…

True, the Democratic platform did stand up for the individual rights of women threatened by the coercive zealotry of mystical fanatics. But clearly the higher priorities of the Democratic party were leaving These States without electricity, and  disarming citizens like Kristallnacht National Socialists in violation of the Second Amendment. You also supported continuing the prohibitionist asset-forfeiture looting George Bush used to completely wreck the economy in 2007. And you wanted to lecture others about Alexander Hamilton to panhandle electoral votes?

I suppose it never occurred to you the panhandling idea might have originated in the Republican camp? The GO-Pee and its faith-based fanatics bore the brunt of the 1972 Libertarian Electoral vote. We had the pro-choice woman candidate  (Toni Nathan) and the economic freedom platform that terrified Nixon’s Party and its Suprema Corte into legalizing individual rights. Did they learn from this? You betcha! By loudly tricking your dupes into trying to transfer electoral votes to the other looters, they goaded the Christianofascists into circling their wagons and chambering a round. They also tricked your own totalitarian sympathizers into likewise refraining from transferring electoral votes from the sinking ship Altruria to the ONLY party left standing up for the individual rights of pregnant women. Thanks for telegraphing where your loyalties lie. We’ll remember that.

butthurtsalve16Here’s a little something to make you and your Chinese environazi handlers feel a little better. It’s a salve from the political party whose fascist agenda YOU helped to further! You wanted the cops to keep shooting kids and confiscating assets? YOU GOT IT! You wanted huge pseudoscience bureaucracies to rob us at gunpoint? YOU GOT IT! That’s the prohibitionism your party and the GO-Pee both supported, and YOU GOT IT!  You wanted to force idiotic legislation on the rest of the world?  YOU GOT IT! You wanted high taxes to support genocidal policies? YOU GOT THEM!

Congratulations, Democratic, Green and Communist Party USA! My schadenfreude goes out to you: both barrels!