All persons born…

See many men among these voters?

Individuals who Voted to Enforce their Rights–and WON! Irish women won individual rights (link)

Does the Constitution allow men with guns to threaten physicians or coerce pregnant women? The Harrison Act enabled pseudoscience-addled politicians to have men with service pistols step between doctors and patients in 1914. See why missing an opportunity to vote Libertarian is tantamount to desertion under fire as mystical and collectivist reality control delegitimize individual claims to freedom of action.

Today’s guest repost is by Austin’s Constitutional Scholar Jon Roland, constitutionalism.blogspot.com.

U.S. Supreme Court: Issues with current contenders

Unenumerated rights

The first issue is presented by the statement by nominee appointee Brett  Cavanaugh in his acceptance speech, that he would not find rights not explicitly recognized in the main Constitution.. This has been an issue since the nomination of Robert Bork, who considered the Ninth Amendment, which calls for the nondisparagement of rights that are not “enumerated” (made explicit) somewhere in the Constitution, as amended, to be an “ink blot”. There is strong opposition to Supreme Court judges doing that, especially from so-called “conservatives”, who don’t understand that constitutional rights are all “immunities”, restrictions on the powers of government. They are not “privileges” to receive a sufficient amount of public resources, such as for education, healthcare, elder support, or any other objects of public subsidies.

Interestingly, in the case of Roe v. Wade, the Fifth Circuit decided that a “right to an abortion” was a Ninth Amendment right of a woman  “to choose whether to have children”, which by the 14th Amendment, was “incorporated” for the states. This presented the Supreme Court with an apparent problem,  because there was opposition to funding unenumerated rights in the Senate. The Fifth Circuit found a Ninth Amendment “right  to choose whether to have children”. So the SC tried to sustain the Fifth Circuit without embracing the Ninth Amendment. The result was an incoherent opinion. There was no way to avoid the Ninth Amendment.

It would perhaps too much to expect a nominee to venture into an extended discussion of what a “right” is, and what it is not. It is awkward to say “I will not find a ‘right’ to a sufficient amount of a public resource.” That is too complicated for most senators. So the candidate denies he will try to find any “unenumerated” rights. That is somewhat disingenuous, but the issue needs to be discussed.

1968, NO LIBERTARIAN PARTY!

Republicans, Dixiecrats, No Libertarian Party!

When “life” begins

One of the potential nominees, Amy Barrett, has been reported to have stated that human “life” begins at conception. That is a misstatement of the issue in Roe v. Wade. which in its essence was not about “life” nut about “personhood” because “Rights (immunities)” attach to “persons”, (roles in court), not to “life”, despite what the Declaration of Independence says. (That is why some activists have sought to move the commencement of “personhood” back to conception. That would be a mistake. We cannot allow each state to redefine “personhood”, because if we did, a state could define some people to be nonpersons, without rights. So there has to be a uniform definition across all states if the protections of the Constitution are not to be meaningless. That is the basis for finding the right to be incorporated under the Ninth Amendment, as the Fifth Circuit did.

So when does “life” begin?

Not at conception. Each individual is the latest in an unbroken chain of life that goes back to at least the point when the first single-celled organism became a multi-celled animal, which occurred about 650 million years ago, during the pre-Cambrian era, when the surface of the Earth was covered with ice (“snowball Earth”) and there was only one continent, Rodinia. We are all descended from that multi-celled organism. That is when “life” began.

So when does “personhood” begin?

This was declared by the jurist Edward Coke in the 15th century, and later restated by legal scholar William Blackstone, in the early 18th century, who provided most of the definitions for terms used in the U.S. Constitution. They held that “personhood” begins at natural birth, or induced natural birth (they had Cesarean sections in those days). Some of the states later found that personhood began with baptism, entry of a name in church records, or even later. Not at “conception”, the date of which could not have been defined with any precision in those days, or even now.

Consider what would happen if we defined “personhood” to begin at conception? It would make every fetus the ward of a court, with the court having power to supervise the pregnancy. It could order the woman to continue a pregnancy, and not terminate it, under penalty of law. That would be forced pregnancy. Do we want that? Every pregnant woman chained to a bed. Anyone see the play “A Handmaid’s Tale”. Good way to stop everyone from having sex.

Forcing women into involuntary servitude and labor

Sinfest.net webcomic 2 awe

Need for uniformity

Incorporation of a Ninth Amendment right is required by the need to have a uniform definition of “personhood” (legal role) across all jurisdiction, since constitutional rights attach to “persons” and not just to “citizens” or “life”.  If states could define personhood, they could deprive anyone of rights by defining him to be a “nonperson”. Thus a state could find that Blacks are not persons as a way to deprive them of their liberty.

Notes:

1. Roe v. Wade, 1221 (N.D. Tex. 1970) (“On the merits, plaintiffs argue as their principal contention that the Texas Abortion Laws must be declared unconstitutional because they deprive single women and married couple of their rights secured by the Ninth Amendment to choose whether to have children. We agree.”).

2. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

3, A Handmaid’s Tale, Margaret Atwood.

4. Robert Bork and the Inkblot, Kurt Lash.

5. Constitutional views on abortion

See also: Ayn Rand (link)

Get the complete story on other prohibitions in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in either if two languages for the price of a craft pint. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy in 1929 and 2008.

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

 

1929 State of the Union Message

Dry Killer Herbert Hoover

Branding folks felons for beer since March 1929

On December 3, God’s Own Prohibitionist, Republican President Herbert Clark Hoover delivered his State of the Union Address to Congress December 3, 1929. Here are the highlights:

…Owing to unusual circumstances, it has been extremely difficult to estimate future revenues with accuracy. (…) I recommend that the normal income tax rates applicable to the incomes of individuals for the calendar year 1929 be reduced from 5, 3 and 1½ per cent to 4, 2 and ½ per cent, and that the tax on the income of corporations for the calendar year 1929 be reduced from 12 to 11 per cent. It is estimated that this will result in a reduction of $160,000,000 in income taxes to be collected during the calendar year 1930. (p409) (…) The long upward trend of fundamental progress, however, gave rise to over-optimism as to profits, which translated itself into a wave of uncontrolled speculation in securities, resulting in the diversion of capital from business to the stock market and the inevitable crash. (p411) (…)

AGRICULTURE: The agricultural situation is improving. The gross farm income as estimated by the Department of Agriculture for the crop season 1926-27 was $12,100,000,000; for 1927-28 it was $12,300,000,000; for 1928-29 it was $12,500,000,000; and estimated on the basis of prices since the last harvest the value of the 1929-30 crop would be over $12,650,000,000. The slight decline in general commodity prices during the past few years naturally assists the farmers’ buying power. The number of farmer bankruptcies is very materially decreased below previous years. The decline in land values now seems to be arrested and rate of movement from the farm to the city has been reduced. Not all sections of agriculture, of course, have fared equally, and some areas have suffered from drought. (p413) (…)

TARIFFS: I am firmly of the opinion that their application to the pending [tariff] revision will give the country the kind of a tariff law it both needs and wants. (p415) (…)

THE BANKING SYSTEM: The development of “group” and “chain” banking presents many new problems. (…) The relinquishment of charters of national banks in great commercial centers in favor of State charters indicates that some conditions surround our national banks which render them unable to compete with State banks; and their withdrawal results in weakening our national banking system. (p423) (…)

FEDERAL PRISONS: In order to relieve the pressing evils I have directed the temporary transfer of the Army Disciplinary Barracks at Leavenworth to the Department of Justice for use as a Federal prison. (…) We need some new Federal prisons and a reorganization of our probation and parole systems; and there should be established in the Department of Justice a Bureau of Prisons with a sufficient force to deal adequately with the growing activities of our prison institutions. Authorizations for the improvements should be given speedily, with initial appropriations to allow for the construction of the new institutions to be undertaken at once. (p429) (…)

PROHIBITION: The first duty of the President under his oath of office is to secure the enforcement of the laws. The enforcement of the laws enacted to give effect to the eighteenth amendment is far from satisfactory and this is in part due to the inadequate organization of the administrative agencies of the Federal Government. (…) First, there should be an immediate concentration of responsibility and strengthening of enforcement agencies of the Federal Government by transfer to the Department of Justice of the Federal functions of detection and to a considerable degree of prosecution, which are now lodged in the Prohibition Bureau in the Treasury. (…) The District of Columbia should be the model of city law enforcement in the Nation. …there is need for legislation in the District supplementing the national prohibition act, more sharply defining and enlarging the powers of the District Commissioners and police of the District and opening the way for better cooperation in the enforcement of prohibition between the District officials and the prohibition officers of the Federal Government. It is urgent that these conditions be remedied. (p432)

LAW ENFORCEMENT: (p435) … We need to reestablish faith that the highest interests of our country are served by insistence upon the swift and even-handed administration of justice to all offenders, whether they be rich or poor. (…) I have appointed a National Commission… for an exhaustive study… including the special problems and abuses growing out of our prohibition laws. (…) the Department of Justice has been striving to weed out inefficiency… to stimulate activity on the part of its prosecuting officers… The department is seeking systematically to strengthen the law enforcement agencies… by removal of negligent officials and by encouragement and assistance to the vigilant. (…) Increases in appropriations are needed and will be asked for in order to reinforce these offices. …if the citizen… shall insist on selecting the particular laws which he will obey, he undermines his own safety and that of his country. His attitude may obscure, but it cannot conceal, the ugly truth that the lawbreaker, whoever he may be, is the enemy of society. We can no longer gloss over the unpleasant reality which should be made vital in the consciousness of every citizen, that he who condones or traffics with crime, who is indifferent to it and to the punishment of the criminal or to the lax performance of official duty, is himself the most effective agency for the breakdown of society. Our laws are made by the people themselves; theirs is the right to work for their repeal; but until repeal, it is an equal duty to observe them and demand their enforcement.

I have been gratified at the awakening sense of this responsibility in our citizens during the past few months, and grateful that many instances have occurred which refuted the cynicism which has asserted that our system could not convict those who had defied the law and possessed the means to resist its execution. These things reveal a moral awakening both in people and in officials which lies at the very foundation of the rule of law. (Hoover 1929 1974 404-436) (link)

Money was fleeing Federally chartered banks in order to not be confiscated via asset forfeiture should some officious dry killers storm the bank. Observe also that we now call the Laffer Curve was totally operative during the Coolidge and Hoover Administrations, when every cut in federal tax rates brought increased federal revenue and, in Hoover’s words, “fertilizes the soil of prosperity.” This optimistic sermon came after the Crash, with a Crash still wrecking the German economy, and banking panics already afoot in these States, thanks to use of the income tax as a club to enforce prohibition. Herbert Hoover was already proving that he himself, while enforcing prohibition, was “the most effective agency for the breakdown of society.”

Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how pseudoscience, fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.

ProhicrashAmazon

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

Open Borders, European Style

Importing Kristallnacht and National Socialism

Uninspected Entry for gentiles at Austria/Germany Border

There was a time when Europeans did not fear people crossing the border to disarm, capture and exterminate populations accused of insufficient altruistic zeal. By May of 1945 that open borders policy was no longer popular and the Austrian Government repealed the Anschluss law.

German politicians have since then adopted a sort of national flagellation movement. Rather than realize that their problems stemmed from mystical altruism, today’s Germans deliberately import racially semitic but culturally anti-Jewish fanatics, perhaps out of a sense of sacrificial atonement.

Some of our nouveau “libertarians” have been persuaded by anarchist infiltrators that “within a particular territory” ought to be removed from the objective definition of government framed by Weber and ratified by Ayn Rand and all other moral philosophers. Political change can be gradual, by vote, or bloody–take your pick. The harsh facts of recorded reality show that the closer one moves toward a state of warfare (that is, anarchy), the higher the rate of rape, murder, robbery and other unpleasant violations of individual rights.

Functionally, these data show that a shift toward anarchism/war has the same outcome as a shift toward socialism, especially in its communo-fascist variants–fewer rights, earlier death. One cannot ask for more objective evidence that anarchism and communism are the identical monstrosities newspapers have proclaimed them to be for the past 150 years. Machine-gunnings in Paris nightclubs, crushing of pedestrians and another refugee Exodus into Israel reinforce the proof with graphic explicitness only willful blindness can evade.

American voters have evidently perceived this. The vote in 2016 shifted overwhelmingly toward Libertarian candidates (up 328% to 4 million Presidential votes). A comparable shift in 1968 Comstockery empowered anti-communist Republicans of the sort that passed the Nixon Anti-Libertarian Law subsidizing entrenched looter parties out of tax revenue. The result of the Nixon law is that the IRS pays the media to ignore, dismiss and smear libertarian candidates. The only remaining way of communicating to Congress which laws we want repealed is through the mechanism of coercion-toppling, law-changing spoiler votes.

George Wallace Dixiecrats, irritated by JFK’s enforcement of judiciary rulings against segregation, netted 46 electoral votes from 5 southern states and shifted the entire Solid South into the Republican camp with 13% of the popular vote. Bryanist communism got the prohibition and income tax amendments into the Constitution after People’s Party candidates got 9% of the vote and 22 electoral votes in 1892. That’s the kind of law changing clout the LP could have with a little less sabotage from within.

Our mission has not changed:

“Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the life of the individual and seize the fruits of his labor without his consent.”

We can earn more spoiler votes, hence change more laws, by minding our own business. By levering the fratricidal parasitism of looter parties against each we are gradually but broadly rewarding policies that reduce coercion. With another 6% we can excise the remaining force Amendment out of the Constitution. Shucks, another 10% of the vote would enable us to change the colors on the election map via the same sigmoid-curve process of substitution whereby tapes replaced LPs and were themselves replaced by digital media. Recall that this writer published The Case for Voting Libertarian in February 2007, and the math was aired on Gary Johnson’s “Live and Let Live” public access TV series in Austin, Texas.

Spoiling is Winning!

The Case for Voting Libertarian published February 2007

Oddly enough, the Libertarian Party’s share of the vote has increased in a consistently steep trend since that time. What you see in these graphs could easily be a causal correlation. I personally was sad and frustrated that our candidate’s weren’t being placed in office. But since the day I realized that Libertarian candidates are the ones causing the looter kleptocracy to back away from shooting kids over plant leaves, frog-marching youngsters into wars, bombing primitive villages–in short, all the things the 1972 LP Platform was against–I’ve been a happy camper.

LPvotescurve16

Learn, baby learn how the Liberal Party–whose 1930 mid-term spoiler votes sold Dems their law-changing 1932 repeal plank and enabled 5 consecutive Democratic victories! This happened after Republican prohibitionists wrecked the economy and helped put National Socialism in power abroad. Prohibition and The Crash is LIVE on Amazon Kindle. Read it on your cellphone for the cost of a pint at a pub.

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

Brazilian blog

simultaneous interpreting

 

Prohibition and Finance

How many dollars flowed through the illegal liquor, beer & wine business in 1929? Historians assure us that liquor consumption did decrease by as much as 40% under the dry law. Supposing that to be true we could use 60% of the ASL guesstimate as a proxy for the volume of liquids. But making a thing illegal is one of the most effective ways to raise its price. Marijuana prices have fallen by roughly 2 orders of magnitude after decriminalization in some areas, but beer doesn’t grow on bushes.

My estimate after 20 years of gathering figures is that beverages became four times as expensive under prohibition. Applying that multiple to 60% of the guesstimated 1914 liquor total yields 4.2 billion gold dollars. But the U.S. population had grown dramatically between the night of January 16, 1920 and the unleashing of Herbert Hoover and the 5&10 law upon the corn sugar and yeast industry that produced at least 80% and possibly as much as 95% of all the illegal beverage consumed occurred in 1929. Adding the effect of the 14% population growth that decade gives $4.8 billion. So how does that dollar amount compare to the size of the U.S. economy of 1929? (Hint: it was more than the Federal budget–about 5% of GNP). The Wickersham Commission, appointed to downplay the total, came up with a slightly smaller figure. Clark Warburton, the economist who coined “Gross National Product,” came up with a slightly higher figure.

That’s right. Gangland trafficpreneurs had more income from liquor alone than the Federal Government got from corporate and individual income taxes, customs tariffs and the squeeze put on States. God fights on the side with the biggest budget, so of course repeal won, thanks to the Liberal Party repeal plank.

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Live on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

Brazilian blog

Prohibition Resolution 1913

T’was the Fortnight before Christmas, when all through the House;
not a preacher demurring, save Hobson, the louse.
His stalking of brewers for hangmen to snare;
with Dry Law Amendment brought widespread despair.
The children were nestled all snug in their beds;
as adults they’d hear the cry “off with their heads!”

History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.–Mark Twain

So… what caused the Crash and Depression to wait until these same fanatics had passed the Five-and-Ten law and sworn in Herbert Hoover? Isn’t it about time you found out? The same brand of pseudoscience that in 1913 brought cries for men with guns to do something about alcohol, now demands they do something about the imaginary hobgoblin of misanthropic global warming.

To understand how prohibitionist initiation of force cripples the economy, see Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929. For the cost of a pint you will understand how pseudoscience warped into cruel fanaticism destroys a fractional-reserve banking system and turns wealth into poverty. Live on Amazon Kindle.

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

Brought to you by

Words you can dance to

Clarity isn’t oversimplification

Brazilian blog…

 

 

 

Bust Beer Buyers 1929

The folly of fanaticism with guns

Shocking even to fanatics!

Ninety years ago this month Senator Morris Sheppard of fanatically dry Texas designed a law to make buying a beer a felony under the Volstead and Five and Ten laws. This is the politician who wrote the 18th amendment and pushed it with blind disregard for what criminalizing a popular commodity might again do to the U.S. economy. This p 2 Chicago Tribune clipping for October 13, 1929 saw daylight 11 days before Black Thursday.

Dr Arthur J Barton, chairman of the national executive committee of the anti-saloon league of America, tonight said he doubted the constitutionality of Senator Morris Sheppard’s proposed amendment to the prohibition law, which would make the purchaser of intoxicating liquors equally guilty with the seller.
Dr Barton said: “I do not know of any general demand among the dry organizations and leaders for such an amendment. I doubt whether such an amendment would be constitutional, and I fear that the introduction of the amendment at the present time is untimely and unfortunate.”
Dr Barton said it was his opinion that convictions under the proposed amendment would be impossible to obtain.
“A fundamental principle and a specific provision of the constitution of the United States is that no man can be forced to testify when his testimony would incriminate himself,” he said.

Asset forfeiture story same page. The U.S. Treasury gleefully confiscated and sold off automobiles found with any amount of beer or liquor, with no regard for the companies financing the sale of the cars. George Bush Jr’s faith-based fanatics did the same thing with houses in 2006 and 2007, leaving the homebuyer with no place to live and a mortgage bill to pay off. Neither Herbert Hoover nor Waffen Bush had any clue how much money their prohibitionist looting would cause to vanish from the fractional-reserve banks and brokerage firms.

Enforcement murderers protected by law, same page. Senator Millard Tydings accused the feds of covering up 51 murders committed by dry killers during violent prohibition enforcement.  This is the same sort of thing practiced today on account of enjoyable plant leaves, and the amount of money involved is likely to be a neat fraction of the Gross National Product. But just as there was a Liberal Party in 1930, there is a Libertarian Party in 2019. Our repeal plank sends a loud and unmistakable message to Washington

For more about how pseudoscience and prohibitionism cause the collapse of fractional-reserve banking systems, see Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929. For the cost of a pint you will understand how pseudoscience warped into cruel fanaticism destroys economies. Live on Amazon Kindle.

Prohibition and The Crash,
on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

Brought to you by

Words you can dance to

Brazilian blog

Dem Grrrlz anti-Nuclear?

So a female candidate running on the (get this!) Democratic/CPUSA ticket is sounding all pro-defense? Easy! Just pretend the Democratic Party’s Union of Soviet States of Amerika platform never existed, and perish the thought of Misanthropic Global Warming, Carbon Taxes, banning low-pressure freon, and uninspected entry of foreign nationals and infected cattle across U.S. borders.

Still, it is a step up from Lolita Ocasional Cortex and other looter-agenda Dems angling for a piece of the federal payroll. Here’s hoping she loses by just a few LP spoiler votes to some skanky pro-energy Republican fascist who wants Dixiecrats with guns to rewrite the first three words of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Looter politicians only learn manners when defeated by Libertarian spoiler votes. Think of it as evolution in action.

These are the same spoiler votes that cause Republican National Socialists to off-handedly refer to libertarian candidates as (bomb-throwing communist) anarchists while gorging on Nixon anti-Libertarian Law subsidies buying media hype for their campaigns. LP spoiler votes also cause Republican politicians to defect to the LP and repeal the party’s cruel and bigoted laws.

Herbert Hoover also had ku-klux and dry Sharia support in 1932, and Prohibition Party radio evangelists worshipped Dry Hope Hoover’s footprints. Find out how the Liberal Party of 1930 wrote the 1931 legalize beer plank the Dems rode to five (05) successive victories while crushing Christian National Socialism in Germany. Prohibition and The Crash is live on Amazon Kindle for the cost of a pint. Read it on a cellphone using the free Kindle app.

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

The Britannica Article labeled “Liberal Party, America” is an example of facile lying. Like the rewriting of Sumner’s “The Forgotten Man” into FDR’s paean for Soviet collectivism to blot out the original, the anonymous (I’d be ashamed too) Britannica article completely ignores reality and invents whatever fiction can be cold-decked into the game to further altruist totalitarianism. Small wonder the limey looter intelligentzia has to this day blocked realization of the July 2016 Brexit vote. If Americans were as easily hoodwinked, the current president would still be awaiting inauguration 35 months after being elected against adverse odds on Paddypower!