What’s the opposite of libertarian?

The Real Deal

I oppose the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals. That means Libertarian.

So what is the antonym of Libertarian?

Anarchist means doing away with laws that secure individual rights.

Cruel means willfully causing pain or suffering to others.

Truculent means eager or quick to argue or fight; aggressively defiant.

Pugnacious means eager or quick to argue, quarrel, or fight.

Coercive means using force or threats.

Violent means using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

Dangerous means able or likely to cause harm or injury. 

Dishonest is behaving or prone to behave in an untrustworthy or fraudulent way.

Totalitarian is centralized and dictatorial, requiring complete subservience to the State.

Deadly is causing or able to cause death. Synonym: politically powerful

Menacing is threatening, especially in a malignant or hostile manner.

So… what might be some other synonyms for Socialist? 

Cowardly is carried out against a person who is unable to retaliate: a cowardly attack on a helpless victim.

Unwillingly is against one’s wishes; reluctantly. 

Examples from looter party platforms. (Guess which party…)

Example 1: We must go for 100% renewables, use our energy efficiently, phase out fossil energy and nuclear power while creating sustainable jobs in affected regions. To cut emissions fast enough to reach the 1.5°C-world we will push hard for a just transition towards a net-zero-emissions economy. An EU carbon budget and a strong carbon floor price are needed to strengthen our efforts.

Example 2: We advocate increased research on and development of non-fossil fuel resources, tax breaks for companies engaging in such, and subsidies for consumers wishing to change from fossil fuels to renewable domestic sources of energy. We believe that climatic change could be an existential threat to civilization, and we will cooperate with other nations in mitigating its possible effects. However, we will not surrender our sovereignty in this, or any other regard.

Example 3: The progress made over the last three decades against drug abuse is eroding, whether for cultural reasons or for lack of national leadership. In many jurisdictions, marijuana is virtually legalized despite its illegality under federal law. At the other end of the drug spectrum, heroin use nearly doubled from 2003 to 2013, while deaths from heroin have quadrupled. All this highlights the continuing conflicts and contradictions in public attitudes and public policy toward illegal substances.

Example 4: We will fight back against attempts to make it harder for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to revoke federal licenses from law breaking gun dealers, and ensure guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists, intimate partner abusers, other violent criminals, and those with severe mental health issues. There is insufficient research on effective gun prevention policies, which is why the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention must have the resources it needs to study gun violence as a public health issue.

Example 5: We support the right of parents to consent to medical treatment for their minor children and urge enactment of legislation that would require parental consent for their daughter to be transported across state lines for abortion. Providers should not be permitted to unilaterally withhold services because a patient’s life is deemed not worth living. American taxpayers should not be forced to fund abortion. As Democrats abandon this four decade-old bipartisan consensus, we call for codification of the Hyde Amendment and its application across the government, including Obamacare. We call for a permanent ban on federal funding and subsidies for abortion and healthcare plans that include abortion coverage.

To understand how tripartisan 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 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

Clarity isn’t oversimplification

Brazilian blog…

Advertisements

Tax Revolt Alternatives

Spoiler votes that entrenched can uproot socialism

Governments never learn. Only people learn.

Milton Friedman made it impossible ignore that there are two ways of dealing with people: voluntarily, or by force.

Tax collectors and the parties that send them out to collect more and higher taxes invariably choose the second option. Of course they paper it over with sanctimonious doublespeak. At every turn they liken their men with guns to acceptors of voluntary contributions. Media outlets are all tax-subsidized since 1971 (thanks to Nixon). This anti-libertarian subsidy doles out influence to entrenched gerontocracy election campaigns and helps sell an image of eleemosynary voluntarism through the initiation of force.

But what of the people at whom their guns are pointed? Thanks to the Nixon anti-libertarian law, many voters are completely unaware of the existence of a political party whose members seek to gradually replace coercion with voluntary cooperation wherever possible. Here’s what happens when media subsidies–designed to favor entrenched parties–interfere to produce uninformed voters.

Is taxing people at gunpoint worth it? As a Libertarian voter I just say “no” every time I cast a ballot. No, I do not expect all taxation to disappear by the time I unchain my bicycle to return home after voting. But I know for a fact that my LP vote will pack the clout of at least six votes in favor of reversing the trend toward increased taxation. In the case of individual rights for women, fewer than 4000 libertarian votes handed the Supreme Court the language they used in the Roe v. Wade decision, a relative vote clout of 10,000 for 1 if you believe it takes 50% of the total to get anything done. That’s winning!

Forcible expropriation leads to situations like the Bay District standoff. People follow good or bad examples, depending on what they can see. This guy observed the use of force and imagined two could play.

Richard Nixon and Congress changed the tax code in 1971 to keep you from finding out about the no-guns alternative. Like the snake tossed into baby Hercules’ crib, it was an attempt to kill off the Libertarian Party.

But here it is, 46 years later, and we’re still here. What’s more, four million voters–as many as voted in the entire State of Virginia–stood with us this last presidential election. Our vote share is up 328%, and we got way more of the popular vote than the difference between the two looter parties dedicated to the initiation of deadly force. Here’s the sigmoid political party substitution curve, the hockey stick Republican Dixiecrat fascists and Democrat communists do not want you to see:

So, which will it be? If you like what you see, by all means listen to what the Republicans and Democrats say about each other. If you would rather take a positive step to increase freedom by reversing the growth of coercion, read the Libertarian Party platform and vote with us.

If you need a website localized into Brazilian Portuguese, look us up at http://www.falascreve.com Falascreve is how they translated Orwell’s speech recognition neologism http://www.speakwrite.com.br in South America.

Try my Amazon Kindle explanation of Prohibition and The Crash and see how a small party wrote the plank that brought repeal.

Live on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

 

The 3 percent Energy Vote Solution

Freedom cancels climate fraud

Energy plank vote totals, 2016

It behooves politicians to look backward at the votes cast in the 2016 elections in the USA. Stripped of personalities and cancelling out the nonsense, the two parties with platforms advocating uncoerced access to energy pulled even with the four parties of Altrurian Cassandras in the much-ballyhooed popular vote, viz:

Libertarian and Republican presidential candidates: 49.4%
Green, Socialist, communist and Democrat candidates: 49.4%

The 2% 
Dem/GOP  partisan difference is more than covered by the 3.28% won by Libertarian party presidential candidates. The LP platform did not advocate a carbon tax or suicidal treaties with foreign interests. Libertarian voting stock is up over 300%. Bear in mind that a difference of only 77 electoral votes decided which party politicians took office for the Executive branch on Inauguration Day in January 2017.

Libertarian votes spanned the spoiler vote gap in States casting 89 electoral votes, 15% more than the total number of electoral votes separating the party that got the pelf and political pull from the one that chose to hobble electrical energy production instead of repealing prohibition.

Per-capita access to energy is a factor in population control. No access to energy means a Malthusian catastrophe. That is what is at stake here. Claims that CO2 (like water vapor, just another trace gas) has increased the planet’s temperature are contradicted by ordinary thermometer data. As in so many previous cases, the apocalyptic shrieking is a symptom of folks being hoodwinked by junk science. Republican insistence on Byzantine sumptuary laws, a National Socialist approach to immigration and Mohammedan-style Sharia laws interfering with the individual rights of pregnant women are what made this a dangerously close election. Your libertarian vote is a vote against all the bad planks in the Republican and Democratic platform. Whichever big party ignores our platform loses, but because we repeal bad laws, we always win.

If your business requires energy in order for you to accomplish work, bear that in mind when you need to select a translator.