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–a government 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 to 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.

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

Advertisements

Libertarian Party Jurisprudence

Voters who have never read a party platform are told that to cast a vote on principle is to “waste your vote.” The verifiable fact is: your spoiler votes for Libertarian Party candidates repeal bad laws. Today’s example is a woman’s right to undo her unwanted pregnancy. How was that right asserted and made law? 

The LP legalized abortion

Read the original

The Libertarian Party Platform of June 17, 1972 said:

“We further support the repeal of all laws restricting voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days.”

LP Candidates were John Hospers and Tonie Nathan. Ours was the first viable party to field a lady candidate for vice-president and secure for her an electoral vote–12 years before the Dems finally followed our lead. The popular election was 7 November of 1972, and electoral votes were counted in December.

On January 22, 1973, 45 days after the electoral votes were counted the Supreme Court decided in ROE v. WADE:

“(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman’s attending physician. …”

That most important part of the Supreme Court decision was a perfect logical paraphrasis of the Libertarian plank on abortion. Much effort was expended to distance the decision from the first three words of the 14th Amendment: “All persons born…” These three words speak to the rights of individuals, but were NOT the reason the court struck down coathanger abortion laws in states notorious for mystical bigotry. The Supreme court was manned by five Republicans and three Democrats, and had been mulling this case since the first baby steps toward organizing a Libertarian Party.

Already the LP.org was against military conscription–which had just coerced 58,000 Americans to their deaths in Vietnam, formerly a French opium regie. But the Supreme Court had already committed to that version of slavery and involuntary servitude for WWI. Republicans–white and Christian like the Germans who voted for National Socialism–were terrified. Republicans feared not communism, essentially the same thing as nationalsocialism, but the “activated atheism” they associated with the Communist faith. Republicans had reason to fear that the widows and girlfriends of the boys they’d sacrificed were ready for bloody vengeance at the polls. Democrats had ditched the Klan and voted Wet in the 1932 economic collapse, and made out very well. So Democratic Justices again betrayed Southern mystical bigotry by copying the Libertarian plank, as Dems had copied the Liberal party repeal plank to defeat Herbert Hoover and elect FDR.

Nixon had tried to crush the LP within 24 hours of its formation by using the IRS to bribe the media with tax money. That politician took office, gingerly stepping over the scorched relics of the usual looter opposition–Socialist, Socialist Labor, People’s, Prohibition and Communist party–but fearing the 3674 Libertarian votes. Those votes have since grown a thousand times and now total 4 million.

21x the Clout!

Winning is changing the laws. See original

Since 1971 the Libertarian Party has been the prime mover for deregulation, repeal of censorship, defense of individual rights, non-entanglement in foreign affairs and the general increase in freedom. We are the reason God’s Own Prohibitionists finally backed away from coercing gay voters before the recent election–and the appeal to laissez-faire has also spread to more than 20 countries. The only brutal dictatorships left on earth are governments that block libertarians from organizing into political parties. Think about that next time someone is tortured or beheaded.

If you understand that maybe libertarianism isn’t all that weird, you might want to help out with a small donation at www.LP.org
If you were pleased with the clarity of this expository writing, consider www.portugueseinterpreter.com to help you get ideas across the language barrier in three directions.

“Show me a movement that doesn’t hate somebody and I will join it at once.” Robert Anton Wilson

 

Denier is the new Juden

Eight parties unmentioned

From the socialist Wikipedia

Ecological National Socialist candidate Albert Goracle, lost to G. Waffen Bush by three electoral votes in the Y2k election. Had voters in his home state of Tennessee backed his platform–ban electricity, continue asset forfeiture looting, jail hippies and blacks for plants–Gore’s party would have won by 16 electoral votes. The Dems could have had their hands in the till and hacks on the government payroll. Neither the Green nor Libertarian party commanded enough Tennessee spoiler votes to reverse the outcome. Still, Gore blamed Florida for his defeat.

Something similar happened to Germany and Austria back before ballots replaced bullets, Germany and its allies (Austria-Hungary, The Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria) lost WWI and blamed Jewish politicians. Thanks to the Jo Nova blog, the pattern of collectivist self deception can be seen in this example, in which I replace a single word with its conceptual equivalent. The context is journalist Ross Clark asked The Goracle a technical question about sea level rising versus land mass sinking.

When I put all this to Al Gore and ask him whether his film would be stronger if it acknowledged the complexities of sea level rise — why it is rising in some places and not in others — I am expecting him to bat it away, saying that it doesn’t counter his central point and that there is a limit to what you can put into a film pitched at a mass audience, but his reaction surprises me. As soon as I mention Professor Wdowinski’s name, he counters: ‘Never heard of him — is he a Jew?’ Then, as I continue to make the point, he starts to answer before directing it at me: ‘Are you a Jew?’ When I say I am sure that climate change is a problem, but how big a one I don’t know, he jumps in: ‘You are a Jew.’

That is a strange interpretation of the word ‘deny’, I try to say. But his PR team moves in and declares ‘Time’s up’, and I am left feeling like the guy in Monty Python who paid for a five-minute argument and was allowed only 30 seconds. On the way out, a frosty PR woman says to me: ‘Can I have a word with you?’ I wasn’t supposed to ask difficult questions, she says, because ‘this is a film junket, to promote the film’.

If Clark had tried that at an Oswald Mosley rally, he would have been beaten by goons. But the point is that the Econazi mindset is concerned not with facts, but bogeymen and strawmen. This last election had similar planks and a similar outcome. If the Dems had not copied the Green party anti-electricity agenda, and had instead copied the Libertarian party re-legalization plank, they might have beaten God’s Own Prohibitionists.

Get in touch for translations of political party platforms, nuclear reactor specifications, energy-related bills before various government assemblies or financial and economic impact of prohibition laws on national economies.

Political planks on legalization, 1932

Liberal Repeal party

Repeal party threatens to earn spoiler votes

In 1932, platform debates were aired nationwide and reported in newpapers everywhere. Here are the Democratic, Republican, Prohibition and Liberal Party planks on legalization of alcoholic beverages:

Prohibition party plank: [Invokes Almighty God and the Prince of Peace…] We unequivocally oppose the repeal or weakening of the Eighteenth Amendment or of the laws enacted thereunder, and insist upon the strengthening of those laws. …can and will coordinate all the powers of government, Federal, State and local, strictly to enforce, by adequate and unescapable punishment of all violators, this wise and beneficent law. (…) We indict and condemn the Republican and Democratic parties for the continued nullification of the Eighteenth Amendment and their present determination to repeal the amendment on the excuse that it cannot be enforced… (Johnson and Porter 1975 337-338)

Republican prohibition plank: We do not favor a submission limited to the issue of retention or repeal, for the American nation never in its history has gone backward, and in this case the progress which has been thus far made must be preserved, while the evils must be eliminated.
We therefore believe that the people should have an opportunity to pass upon a proposed amendment the provision of which, while retaining in the Federal Government power to preserve the gains already made in dealing with the evils inherent in the liquor traffic, shall allow the States to deal with the problem as their citizens may determine, but subject always to the power of the Federal Government to protect those States where prohibition may exist and safeguard our citizens everywhere from the return of the saloon and attendant abuses.
Such an amendment should be promptly submitted to the States by Congress, to be acted upon by State conventions called for that sole purpose in accordance with the provisions of Article V of the Constitution and adequately safeguarded so as to be truly representative. (Johnson and Porter 1975 348-349)

Liberal Party prohibition plank: We demand the immediate repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment. We demand that, without modification or compromise of any kind, the entire question of liquor control shall be returned to the States, where the use of beverages can be regulated by local option in each State, county, city, or otherwise, or prohibited, according to the wishes of the people therein. With this local option, or other control established, the sale of beverages, except that saloons are permanently abolished, should be freely permitted by law. (…)
To those who say that the system should be modified so as to permit the sale of wine and beer, we answer that you cannot modify anything that is essentially wrong. You have not thought the matter through. Besides, any modification of any kind would fail to correct the central evil. The bootlegger would still rule the situation, and the traffic in hard liquors, now so universally effective, would still make it necessary to preserve the whole system of futile enforcement, together with the violence and corruption which now disgrace it. Therefore, the Eighteenth Amendment must go out of the Constitution, root and branch. (The Liberal Party in America, 1931 pp 106-7)

Democratic prohibition repeal plank: We advocate the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment. To effect such repeal we demand that Congress immediately propose a Constitutional Amendment to truly represent the conventions in the states to act solely on that proposal; we urge the enactment of such measures by the several States as will actually promote temperance, effectively prevent the return of the saloon, and bring the liquor traffic into the open under complete supervision and control by the states.
We demand that the Federal Government effectively exercise its power to enable the states to protect themselves against importation of intoxicating liquors in violation of their laws.
Pending repeal, we favor immediate modification of the Volstead Act; to legalize the manufacture and sale of beer and other beverages of such alcoholic content as is permissible under the Constitution and to provide therefrom a proper and needed revenue.
We condemn the improper and excessive use of money in political activities. (Johnson and Porter 1975 332)

Observe that the Republicans copied the Prohibition Party platform (in 1928) and the Democrats copied the 1931 Liberal Party wet plank (calling for repeal of the Prohibition amendment). In both cases, small parties casting less than 1.4% of the vote caused the major parties to adopt or reject important changes in the laws. This is the spoiler vote leverage effect.

Choosing a legal translator or court interpreter is also easier when you check their credentials to see what they offer.

Florida Voters (not looters) Win Election!

Originally posted on THE LIBERTARIAN IDENTITY: BY BRIAN MCLAUGHLIN PUBLISHER – TLI One of the big pushes within the Libertarian movement is to be active on a hyper-local level – and there’s no better way to be active than to face that challenge head on and run for office on behalf of your friends and…

via Registered Libertarians Now Comprise 40% Of One Florida Town’s City Council — Libertarian Hippie

Libertarians cost GOP Popular vote win: Prohibition Repeal Introduced!

The following post GOP Rep Rohrabacher Introduces Bill To End Federal Marijuana Prohibition appeared first on A Libertarian Future at A Libertarian Future – Spreading a Libertarian message across the internet.. When at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. That’s definitely the motto of California Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher. Over the past four years…

via GOP Rep Rohrabacher Introduces Bill To End Federal Marijuana Prohibition — A Libertarian Future

Why Dems lost election and pseudoscientists get fired…

Zeke Hausfather has provided the latest excuse for trying to erase the hiatus, so let’s have a look at his work. He claims my US temperature adjustment graph is flawed because of changes in average station latitude and altitude over time. Zeke’s graph below also shows huge amounts of data tampering by NOAA, but shows 1940 cooler than…

via Zeke Debunks Himself – Twice — The Deplorable Climate Science Blog