God’s Warning About Power

The early Israelites wanted a king like other nations so they can be judged. Before that they had judges but the judges were corrupt.

Samuel didn’t like the idea but prayed to God for help anyway. This is what God told Samuel:

Samuel 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

8:11 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.

8:12 And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.

8:14 And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. [my emphasis]

8:15 And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. [my emphasis]

8:17 He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants. [my emphasis]

Let me make some observations about the passage above.

First the Israelites were being influenced by peer pressure. All other nations had kings so why can’t we? I mean if its good for them won’t having a king be good for us? People are people.

Secondly, God understood human nature very well. He knew about power corrupting. Look at the phrases I emphasized. Don’t they sound like socialism or at least fascism? God said the king will take not ask for volunteers to serve him. Not ask for food contributions but take whatever he needs. After all if he is the king then God will bless any actions he does even if God doesn’t bless them. All is needed is for the king to believe his actions are blessed. Because he is anointed.

Revising Classical Economics

There are five revisions that need to be made in the body of classical economics to transform it from a source of support for the exploitation theory into a source of complete and total opposition to the exploitation theory.

The conditions of the “early and rude state of society” assumed by Adam Smith, all income is actually profit, not wages.

The second necessary revision is the recognition of the positive productive functions of businessmen and capitalists and of the fact that they are the fundamental producers of products, inasmuch as they provide the guiding and directing intelligence in production at the highest level—and of the further fact that the variation of profits and interest with the size of the capital invested in no way contradicts these incomes being attributable to the labor of businessmen and capitalists.

The third necessary revision is consistent recognition of the role of private ownership of land in raising the productivity of labor in agriculture and mining. This leads to the conclusion that private ownership of land underlies the growth of the division of labor, by making labor available for industry and commerce.

Source: Capitalism by George Reisman.

Founders vs. Progressives

1. What is freedom? The Founders argued that adult human beings possess the
   right to be free from being ruled by others by the very fact of being born human.
   Additionally, the Founders argued that nature gives no human being a right to rule
   over, or to enslave, another human being. The Progressives argued that freedom is a
   product of human making, and not a natural right. The Progressives taught that there
   are two levels of freedom—negative freedom (freedom from subjection to the will of
   others), and positive freedom (or effective freedom, which requires both the forming
   of the individual in the ethical ideal as defined by government experts and also
   providing that individual with access to all the resources he needs to that end.)
2. What is the purpose of government? The Founders argued that government
   exists to protect man’s natural rights. If it fails to do this, it is unjust. The Progressives, having rejected natural rights, believe that government exists to create rights and to ensure that human beings are made equal. 
3. What constitutes good domestic policy? The Founders conceived of domestic
   policy as those things required for the protection of natural rights in the context of
   relations among fellow citizens. This list includes the criminal law, the civil law, the
   protection of the family, and the promotion of minimal citizen morality through
   government support of education and religion. Most of this fell within the power of
   the state and local governments. The Progressives countered that domestic policy
   should focus on equality and income redistribution, along with proper formation in
   the morality preached by Progressivism, because natural rights are nonexistent and
   true freedom requires “creating” people’s characters and giving them the necessary
   resources. They tasked federal and state government bureaucracies, rather than local governments, with achieving this end.  
4. What constitutes good foreign policy? The Founders believed that foreign
   policy serves the same purpose as domestic policy: the protection of the citizens’
   natural rights. A strong national defense and the protection of borders are necessary to achieve this end; imperialism is not. The Progressives, on the other hand, saw foreign policy as a tool for spreading democracy and for improving the lives of “inferior” races through imperialism.  
5. How important is the consent of the governed? Consent of the governed,
   as the Declaration states, is the only just means by which government derives its
   power and authority. It can never be discarded or ignored without becoming unjust
   and tyrannical. The Progressives rejected this argument. Without rejecting consent
   altogether, Progressives wanted to separate the institutions of government as far from the people as possible. They favored removing political power from local communities and centering it in state and federal bureaucracies staffed by “experts.”
6. Should government be limited or unlimited? The Founders believed in a
   government limited by its primary mission of protecting the natural rights of the
   people. Government was supposed to be powerful in regard to providing a strong
   national defense and to protecting individual rights by effective law enforcement and
   free markets. Beyond that, government was expected to leave people alone and set
   up self-governing private associations (families, churches, businesses, and clubs) to
   take care of the daily affairs of life. The Progressives completely abandoned limited
   government. The private sphere was no longer to be treated as private. An unrestricted government, they claimed, could effectively solve all social and economic problems, both for private institutions and individuals.

Source: Study Guide to “Overview: Founders vs. Progressives” Hillsdale College lecture by Thomas G. West.

Mr. West also talks in his lecture about post-60’s Progressivism where there was a split between the old Left and new Left. The new Progressives believed in multiculturalism, sexual expressionism, and environmentalism. The early progressives rejected these “isms.”

Mr. West also says that universities today are churches of the Left and the professors are its priests.

Edmund Burke on Power and Other Topics

Those who have been once intoxicated with power, and have derived any kind of emolument from it, even though but for one year, never can willingly abandon it. They may be distressed in the midst of all their power; but they will never look to anything but power for their relief.

Yea, that pretty much sums it up back then in 1791 when he wrote that quote and now. Human nature hardly ever changes if at all especially when it comes to power.
Edmund Burke was the person who said “the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Which is still true. Evil will never give up.
Other interesting quotes of his are:

Manners are of more importance than laws.... Manners are what vex or soothe, corrupt or purify, exalt or debase, barbarize or refine us, by a constant, steady, uniform, insensible operation, like that of the air we breathe in.
Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot long exist.*
When the leaders choose to make themselves bidders at an auction of popularity, their talents, in the construction of the state, will be of no service. They will become flatterers instead of legislators; the instruments, not the guides, of the people.
People will not look forward to posterity, who never look backward to their ancestors.
Nothing turns out to be so oppressive and unjust as a feeble government.
Whilst shame keeps its watch, virtue is not wholly extinguished in the heart; nor will moderation be utterly exiled from the minds of tyrants.
Society is indeed a contract.... It is a partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection. As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained in many generations, it becomes a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born.
To drive men from independence to live on alms, is itself great cruelty.^
And having looked to government for bread, on the very first scarcity they will turn and bite the hand that fed them. To avoid that evil, government will redouble the causes of it; and then it will become inveterate and incurable.^
Kings will be tyrants from policy, when subjects are rebels from principle.
The science of constructing a commonwealth, or renovating it, or reforming it, is, like every other experimental science, not to be taught a priori. Nor is it a short experience that can instruct us in that practical science, because the real effects of moral causes are not always immediate. (A criticism of socialism?)
The use of force alone is but temporary. It may subdue for a moment; but it does not remove the necessity of subduing again: and a nation is not governed, which is perpetually to be conquered.
The great must submit to the dominion of prudence and of virtue, or none will long submit to the dominion of the great.

*This is what the Founding Fathers also thought. The difference between liberty and freedom: Freedom + morality = liberty.
^Gee, I wonder what he talking about here. Hmmm……

Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates

Strictly speaking, the pirates' objective was economic more than political. The Barbary ships, in the service of dictatorial strongmen, had the job of holding to ransom foreign vessels plying the Mediterranean. The techniques were those of terror: the pirates perpetrated massacres and took the passengers of some ships hostage so that others would submit and pay tribute in order to travel in peace.

As the nineteenth century began, the young United States had already been the victim of hundreds of attacks against its merchant ships, and it decided to respond, in what would be its first large- scale foreign intervention. It was at this time that Washington assembled a naval force and that the United States, spurred by Thomas Jefferson, committed all available means to ridding itself of this scourge. After several unsuccessful attempts, the U.S. Navy helped free the Mediterranean of a peril that had tormented mariners for centuries.

At the time of its Mediterranean intervention, the United States was an insignificant nation absent from a geopolitical chessboard dominated by Europe: it is no coincidence that during the same period Napoleon Bonaparte sold off territory amounting to one- third of the present lower forty-eight American states to help finance his European campaigns. For its part, the American government decided to fully commit itself to a costly military campaign, whereas the Europeans had preferred to negotiate [my emphasis] with the Barbary dictators, incident by incident. But Jefferson had already understood what his successors would take more than a century to grasp: that America's interests were not confined to its national territory.

Source: The History of Terrorism: From Antiquity to al Qaeda (2007)  by Gérard Chaliand and Arnaud Blin (editors)

--------------------------------------------------------

Negotiating with or appeasing evil (yes, I am calling these pirates evil) encourages more evil. It doesn’t ever make it go away. That’s what the Europeans back then and even before WWII never understood. Winston Churchill’s predecessor negotiated with Hitler. Hitler just laughed at the guy. Heck Hitler even broke his pact with the Soviet Union. I guess those appeasers can’t recognize evil for what it is. This is still a problem today.

I wonder what got the Muslim Barbary Pirates back then ticked off at America and the West back then. We didn’t occupy any of their lands back then. We were just minding our own business. And President George W. Bush wasn’t president back then.

One last thought. The editors makes an interest point about Jefferson. He wasn’t an isolationist. A good hypothetical question to presidential candidates: If you were Jefferson giving his situation what actions would you have take? I can take a good guess what Bush would have done.

The Concept of The “Pure-and-Perfect-Competition”

One definition of the “pure-and-perfect-competition (PPC)”:

Uniform products offered by all the sellers in the same industry, perfect knowledge, quantitative insignificance of each seller, no fear of retaliation by competitors in response to one’s actions, constant changes in price, and perfect ease of investment and disinvestment.

The “pure-and-perfect-competition” doctrine denounces capitalism because, as shown, businessmen refuse to suffer unnecessary losses.

Source: Capitalism by George Reisman

 

The PPC is just another example of a Utopia-like system. But mankind is imperfect therefore any social system will be imperfect. And since capitalism as well as socialism, communism, etc. is a social system it too will be imperfect. It is simple logic. But there are those who believe that man can evolve to be perfect by gov’t help. That gov’t can make a PPC system—hence socialism or even communism is formed as Karl Marx wanted.

In my college macroeconomics class I learned that equilibrium exists when supply equals demand. But this is just theoretical. It probably hardly ever happens. Supply and demand more than likely spirals chaotically around the equilibrium point. No gov’t I believe can ever prevent this behavior from happening. No matter how smart the economist they appoint. The free-market system is just too complex.

Socialism 101 Part 8

It follows directly from socialism’s fundamental moral and political premise, which is that the individual does not exist as an end in himself, but as a means to the ends of “Society.”

Private slave owners were motivated to treat their slaves with at least the same consideration they gave to their livestock, and to see to it that their overseers acted with the same consideration. But under socialism, the slaves are “public property”—the property of the state. Those who have charge of the slaves, therefore, have no personal economic interest in their lives or well-being. Since they are not owners of the slaves, they will not derive any personal material benefit if the slaves are alive to work in the future, nor suffer any personal material loss if the slaves are not alive to work in the future.

Government ownership does not give the alleged citizen-owner the psychological security that the possession of capital gives to a capitalist. Because, unlike the capitalist, he cannot sell his share in a government enterprise. Nor—except in the most unusual cases—does he receive dividends on his share.

The citizen’s share in government enterprises does him no good whatever. The fact that the enterprise is government owned merely means that it is operated without benefit of profit-and-loss incentives and the freedoms of individual initiative and competition. The result is almost always gross inefficiency, high costs, poor service, and low quality of products. (That’s exactly what Obamacare will be.)

Source: Capitalism by George Reisman

Capitalism and Prices

Prices have a twofold function in the planning of capitalism. First, they enable the individual planner of capitalism to perform economic calculations. That is, they enable him to compute the money cost and/or money revenue of various modes of conduct. They tell businessmen to produce the products and use the methods of production that are anticipated to be the most profitable. They tell consumers to consume in the ways that, other things being equal, occasion the lowest cost. And they tell wage earners to work at the jobs that, other things being equal, pay the highest wages.

The second, corollary function of prices is that they coordinate the plans of each individual under capitalism with the plans of all other individuals. That is, prices serve to make each individual adjust his own plans to the relevant plans of all other individuals in the economic system.

Source: Capitalism: A Treaty on Economics (1998) by George Reisman.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 26

• It is better to have an irrational free-market than an irrational government.
• If the term “illegal alien” is a racist term then what about white Canadians crossing the border illegal from the north? The term can be applied to them as well.  Right? Just wondering out loud.
• The Left only hates the wealthy if they have not donated to a leftist Democrat candidate for political office.
• It’s not wise for Americans to invest in any country that is hostile to the US, unstable, or that has a low economic (possibly political) freedom rating.
• Humor: Sometimes spirits will attach themselves to objects. Like diamond earrings, gold watches, rare paintings, 100 dollar bills. You know objects like that.
• President Obama once said: “The individual at some point, must be able to say, ‘I have enough money.’” Well, I believe gov’t at some point, must be able to say, ‘I have enough power.’ The wealthy aren’t a threat to my freedom. But a powerful gov’t can be. It makes the laws.
• If gov’t “helped” the private sector by building roads and bridges then who made the tools and materials to build the roads and bridges? Not gov’t that’s for sure. 
• The Left believes that voter photo-id laws discriminate against the poor. To see Obama speak you must have a valid photo id. So, what does that say about Obama?
• Children’s book idea: Jordan the Accordion. An unhappy accordion searches for a polka band to play in. I see the book going number one in children’s books.
• Obama wants to see Romney’s tax records. Did he want to see Secretary of Treasurer Timothy Geithner’s tax records? Or even care about them? Probably not.

The Thoughts of David Hume

Commerce and liberty; liberty and refinement; refinement and the progress of the human spirit were all interrelated.

“It is impossible for the arts and sciences to arise, at first, among any people unless that people enjoy the blessing of a free government.”

Liberty was a fine thing, but it required a counterbalancing principle—something to remind us that human beings are creatures of their passions and that, left entirely to themselves, they become their passions’ slaves.

“In all governments,” Hume wrote, “there is a perpetual intestine struggle, open or secret, between Authority and Liberty, and neither of them can ever absolutely prevail in the contest.”

Authority that is absolute and uncontrolled ends by destroying society itself;

Source: How the Scots invented the Modern World: the true story of how western Europe's poorest nation created our world & everything in it (2001) by Arthur Herman.

Declaration of Independence from ObamaCare

When America declared its independence from King George III 1/3 was for independence, 1/3 was against, and 1/3 didn’t care either way. I wonder if that three-way split describes peoples opinions about ObamaCare.

Bill O’Reilly said the republicans need to come up with an alternative to ObamaCare and not just criticize it. How about this crazy idea: Why not buy your health insurance like every other insurance? It solves the portability issue, and drops down costs by increasing competition (someone will sooner or later create a website where you can comparison shop for health insurance like you do when buy car insurance). You can even have tax breaks and keep health saving accounts (HSAs) if you want. ObamaCare puts limits on those HSAs. Oh, yea if you wish to pay for your own health insurance out of your own pocket that’s fine. After all health insurance is a service. The Left calls it a right—thus socialized medicine is created like Frankenstein’s monster. ObamaCare calls paying-out-of-pocket a “free rider.” I call that your right. It’s your money after all.

Right now your job pays for your health insurance. But why should they? It is really their responsibility? That’s a cost to them. Why not make them pay for car insurance and life insurance too? All ObamaCare does is take it out of the hands of businesses and put it in the hands of the gov’t—total power play. I say put it directly in the hands of the private citizens. Let them decide how much health insurance they want. But then again the Left will say gov’t can decide better than the private citizen.

Is The Left Narcissistic?

According to the Organized Wisdom website these are the traits of narcissism:

1. You sometimes feel like you're the most important person in the room.  Definitely. The Left always feel they are the most important in any place or time. They feel they are the smartest and rational and everyone else is subhuman.
2. You often fantasize about the inevitable success, power, beauty, and romance that will enter your life. Not sure about beauty and romance, but success and power probably. Fantasizes about power definitely.  The Left always think they should be in power and will do just about anything to get and stay in power. All politicians are like this to a certain extent. Nature of the game I suppose. But the Left is more obsessive about power.
3. You believe that you're special, and that only a certain type of person can relate to you. The Left think they are more enlightened (especially the Elite) than everyone else and therefore can only socialize with other elitist radicals.
4. You are happiest when all eyes are on you and you're receiving praise. The Left don’t like anyone criticizing their policies, but love it when you agree with their policies.
5. You feel like you deserve better treatment than others, and that you should always get your way.  Yea, they do. Because they think they are always right and they’re policies are always right. And because they say they care, you better go along with what they tell you to do. After all sheep doesn’t question the shepherd.
6. You have gotten others to help you get what you want.  Through manipulation, coercion, and deception. That’s how the Left does it.
7. You  sometimes hurt people's feelings because you're not sensitive enough to other people's problems. This is because the Left doesn’t see people as individuals but as part of a class or group. Individual feelings and thoughts don’t matter.

The Digital Citizen's Bill of Rights

From the Gardian.co.uk (June 13):

Republican Darrell Issa, who led the charge against Sopa, is back with the first draft of a bill of rights for digital citizens House oversight committee chairman and firebrand Obama administration critic Darrell Issa is touting his first draft of a Digital Bill of Rights for internet denizens, and he's asking for the public's input.

Here is the Bill of Rights first draft:

1. Freedom – digital citizens have a right to a free, uncensored internet

2. Openness – digital citizens have a right to an open, unobstructed internet

3. Equality – all digital citizens are created equal on the internet

4. Participation – digital citizens have a right to peaceably participate where and how they choose on the internet

5. Creativity – digital citizens have a right to create, grow and collaborate on the internet, and be held accountable for what they create

6. Sharing – digital citizens have a right to freely share their ideas, lawful discoveries and opinions on the internet

7. Accessibility – digital citizens have a right to access the internet equally, regardless of who they are or where they are

8. Association – digital citizens have a right to freely associate on the internet

9. Privacy – digital citizens have a right to privacy on the internet

10. Property – digital citizens have a right to benefit from what they create, and be secure in their intellectual property on the internet [read more]

Pretty good. Not sure what 3. and 7. means. “Created equal on the internet”? Is that like “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”? Which of course is in the Declaration of Independence.

“Access the internet equally,..”? Again, kind of unclear what that means. I’m sorry but whenever I hear the words “equally” or “equality” unless it is in the Declaration of Independence I get nervous. Socialists and radicals like to talk about equality as in equal sharing. Issa might mean equal rights under the Constitution or as in all men are created equal since he is a conservative. But you never know.

So, You Want To Be A Vegetarian?

Here some things to think about:

GRASS PEA. Like most legumes, it is an excellent source of protein, but it has one serious drawback: it contains a neurotoxin called beta-N-oxalyl-diamino propionic acid, or beta-ODAP. The first symptom of beta-ODAP poisoning, or lathyrism, is a weakening of the legs. Eventually, the toxin kills nerve cells and victims become paralyzed from the waist down. Without treatment, they will die. If they are soaked for a long time in water or fermented in breads or pancakes, they pose little risk. Grass peas are one of the few food crops that can survive a serious drought.

CORN. Traditional recipes called for adding slaked lime or calcium hydroxide, a naturally occurring mineral, to corn. Without it, the niacin in corn cannot be absorbed. This is not a problem unless corn is eaten by itself and makes up most of a person’s diet. When that happens—as it did with early settlers who did not understand the risks—the result is a severe niacin deficiency called pellagra.

RHUBARB. The leaves of this Asian plant contain high levels of oxalic acid, which can cause weakness, difficulty breathing, gastrointestinal problems, and even coma and death in rare circumstances.

ELDERBERRY. Most parts of the plant, including the uncooked fruit, may contain varying levels of cyanide.

CASHEW. Cashews are part of the same botanical family as poison ivy, poison oak, and poison sumac. The cashew tree produces the same irritating oil, urushiol. The nut itself is perfectly safe to consume, but if it comes into contact with any part of the shell during harvest, it will give the person who eats it a nasty rash.

RED KIDNEY BEAN. Perfectly safe and healthy, except if eaten raw or undercooked. The harmful compound in kidney beans is called phytohaemagglutinin, and it can bring on severe nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. People usually recover quickly, but it takes only four or five raw beans to bring on these extreme symptoms.

POTATO. This member of the dreaded nightshade family contains a poison called solanine, which can bring on burning and gastrointestinal symptoms and even coma and death in rare cases. Cooking a potato will kill most of the solanine in it, but if a potato has been exposed to the light long enough for its skin to turn green, that may be a sign of increased levels of solanine.

Source: Wicked Plants (2009) by Amy Stewart.

So, be careful out there and watch what you eat! (In all fairness, I like peas, corn, cashews, red kidney beans and potatoes.)

What Wisconsin Means

From the Washington Post opinion by Charles Krauthammer:

The real threat behind all  [Gov. Walker’s reforms], however, was that the new law ended automatic government collection of union dues. That was the unexpressed and politically inexpressible issue. That was the reason the unions finally decided to gamble on a high-risk recall.

Without the thumb of the state tilting the scale by coerced collection, union membership became truly voluntary. Result? Newly freed members rushed for the exits. In less than one year, AFSCME, the second-largest public-sector union in Wisconsin, has lost more than 50 percent of its membership.

It was predictable. In Indiana, where Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) instituted by executive order a similar reform seven years ago, government-worker unions have since lost 91 percent of their dues-paying membership. In Wisconsin, Democratic and union bosses (a redundancy) understood what was at stake if Walker prevailed: not benefits, not “rights,” but the very existence of the unions. [read more]

Isn’t that interesting. It’s all about power with the Left.

Hat tip: The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation newsletter.

Obama’s Third-Party History

From National Review Online (June 7):

On the evening of January 11, 1996, while Mitt Romney was in the final years of his run as the head of Bain Capital, Barack Obama formally joined the New Party, which was deeply hostile to the mainstream of the Democratic party and even to American capitalism. In 2008, candidate Obama deceived the American public about his potentially damaging tie to this third party. The issue remains as fresh as today’s headlines, as Romney argues that Obama is trying to move the United States toward European-style social democracy, which was precisely the New Party’s goal.

Recently obtained evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office. [read more]

The New Party was a political organization founded in 1992 by Daniel Cantor and Joel Rogers, with the objective of electing leftist or socialist individuals to public office in several states; the goal was to move the Democratic Party further to the left, with the ultimate objective of creating a major third party whose platform is Marxism.

Obama being a member of a radical third party is not too surprising. In his autobiography he said he hung around with radicals and Marxists. Let’s not forget that he told a private citizen when he was campaigning for POTUS that spreading the wealth around was a good idea.

Who also belonged to this far-Left party?

• Gloria Steinem
• Cornel West, current advisor to Obama's campaign

President John Adams’ Thoughts on Power, Gov’t, and Liberty

His thoughts are in bold face.

Because power corrupts, society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases.

So, true. He is basically explaining why we need moral leaders in power.

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

Fear is the foundation of most governments.

The happiness of society is the end of government.

Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak; and that it is doing God's service when it is violating all his laws.

There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.

But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.

Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom.

Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people.

Property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist.

The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.

In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.

Gotta love that one! Even back then! It’s no wonder that the Left doesn’t like the Founders with quotes like these.

US Special Ops commander: We’ve sent troops into North Korea

From Daily Caller.com (May 28):

U.S. Army Gen. Neil Tolley, commander of U.S. Special Operations Forces in South Korea, told an audience in Tampa that U.S. and South Korean forces have been sent into North Korea to spy on the communist country’s vast collection of underground tunnels and military installations.

The extraordinary admission, which went unreported by U.S. media, came on May 22 during the Special Operations Forces Industry Conference. Tolley said his command has identified 20 airfields and 180 munitions factories that are partially underground, along with thousands of subterranean artillery positions.

North Korea, he said, has dug tunnels underneath the Demilitarized Zone separating it from the South. “There were four tunnels under the DMZ,” Tolley observed, according to a Tampa Tribune blogger. “Those are the ones we know about.” [read more]

Tunnels under the DMZ, huh? Either the N. Koreans are trying to escape their country (which I don’t blame them) or the new leader of N. Korea is up to no good.  Those special ops guys really earn their pay.

The Advantages of Localism in Welfare

This extract is from Daniel Hannan’s 2010 book The New Road to Serfdom. A Letter of Warning to America:

First, large bureaucracies create unintended consequences. Where states and counties can tailor their policies to suit local needs, a uniform system that covers 300 million people is bound to contain loopholes, tempting into dependency some who were never envisaged as claimants.
Second, proximity facilitates discernment. Person A may be a deserving widow who has been unlucky, while person B is a layabout. Local caseworkers may see this clearly. But if the universal rules handed down from Washington place the two applicants in the same category, they must be treated identically.
Third, pluralism spreads best practice. The freedom to innovate means that local authorities will come up with ideas and pilot schemes that Washington  would never have dreamed of.
Fourth, non-state agents – churches, charities, businesses – are likelier to involve themselves in local projects than in national schemes, and such organizations are far better at taking people out of poverty than are government agencies.
Fifth, localism transforms attitudes. In Europe, many see benefit fraud as cheating "the system" rather than cheating their neighbors. People would take a very different attitude toward, say, the neighbor whom we knew to be claiming incapacity benefit while working as an electrician if they felt the impact in their local tax bill.
Finally, and perhaps most important, localism undergirds the notion of responsibility: our responsibility to support ourselves if we can, and our responsibility to those around us – not an abstract category of "the underprivileged", but visible neighbors – who, for whatever reason, cannot support themselves. No longer is obligation discharged when we have paid our taxes. Localism, in short, makes us better citizens.

Make good sense to me. But the arrogant elitist politicians who are addicted to power will balk at following or even considering this advice.

Touché: Enhancing Touch Interaction on Humans, Screens, Liquids, and Everyday Objects

This technology is from Disney Research Hub. I guess Disney could use this technology in their theme parks somehow. Here is what the research department say about the technology:

Touché proposes a novel Swept Frequency Capacitive Sensing technique that can not only detect a touch event, but also recognize complex configurations of the human hands and body. Such contextual information significantly enhances touch interaction in a broad range of applications, from conventional touchscreens to unique contexts and materials.

As one of the comments said, this technology could even be used for death people using sign language to communicate with the hearing community. Have the device hooked up to the death person’s hands and an audio output that corresponds to the sign language. For instance, if the death person signs “hello” then a computer-like device could say the word “hello.”

Interesting technology.

Toyota Concept Electric Car Resembles Recliner Chair

From News Max.com (May 1):

Toyota has come up with a personal concept vehicle that can hit 20 mph and resembles a souped-up Barcalounger.

The i-Real electric personal vehicle is controlled by two joysticks and was unveiled at the 2012 Beijing International Automotive Exhibition, London’s Daily Mail reported. [read more]

This vehicle is only meant for customers in China. Only 20 mph huh? I guess it is not meant for highway driving. This electric car is going to make all the environuts happy in China and over here.

Here’s something to ponder: If the demand for electric cars goes up in the future that could put stress on the electric grid just like when everyone put their air conditioners on when it gets very hot out. The only way around this is to make the cars run on solar power. Or the owner has a solar generator he can plug the car into.

And if the battery goes dead in an electric car (or even a hybrid for that matter) the car becomes a dead weight, ie it totally locks up. You can’t even it try to push it like you would with a regular gasoline car. Or in a hybrid if you run out of gas even if the battery is fully charged the car shuts down. Popular Mechanics tested this scenario. The car manufacturers do this to protect the battery because it is so expensive to make.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 25

• If the Left can destroy self-discipline, creativity, critical thought (especially about gov’t power) and individuality in people then that will make the people dependent on gov’t. The Left will then state “See the masses cannot rule themselves. We were right all along. The masses need big gov’t to keep them in control.”
• I believe NDErs are messengers for God. They should not be worshiped though. They have just had an incredible mystical experience.  For those Christian skeptics who don’t believe their message remember if God can raise Jesus from the dead, He can raise any mortal from the dead. 
• Giving more money to a gov’t program that doesn’t work is like filling the tank of a broken down car with gas. You are wasting gasoline. Either fix the car or get a new car. Whichever is less expensive.
• Gov’t can’t rush technology. Technology has to mature at its own natural rate. Businesses have to get most of the imperfections out of the product before it enters the market. Also, businesses have to research a product before manufacturing it. And that takes time too.
• The Left sees the economy as a static system (the rich get richer, etc.) because they don’t know how to grow the economy (they know how to grow gov’t though). Because of that belief they think an economy that doesn’t grow is normal.
• Humor: A team leader of a group is great. If the group screws up you can blame another member, and if the group does a great job you can take the credit.
• Humor: There should be a sequel to The Pianist called The Accordionist.  Not!
• Do you think The New York Times ever called President Obama a “white African?” They called George Zimmerman a “white Hispanic.”
• If Romney gets elected and issues an executive order to exempt everyone from Obamacare (which I hope he does) that could be called the Second Emancipation Proclamation. This is assuming the Supreme Court rules Obamacare constitutional.
• To a Leftist, a good decent job is a gov’t job. You could also call it their dream job.

The Lessons of Socialism

This interview is the last part of a three part interview series called “So, what’s wrong with Socialism?” The lady being interviewed is Zina Brodovsky.

In the first interview she talks about how she realized socialism was a lie and how the gov’t is involved in everything.

As for the second interview she talks about the Soviet Union making a hero out of a teenage boy who turned his father in for saving food for his family instead of giving it to the collective. Keep in mind in schools children are taught that the gov’t  is their true family.  She even verifies this fact.  Afterwards his father was executed by the gov’t. She also talks about people got so hungry that they started to eat their own babies.

I strongly suggest the reader not only watch the last video but the other two as well.

The Collective Bargaining System

You can read the article where this chart comes from at Western Free Press.com.

Milton Friedman on Socialized Medicine

What he says is right on the mark even way back then. Then again socialism is socialism.

America this could be your future. Let’s pray to God it’s not.

The European Fiscal Crises and Lessons for America

I originally saw this video on the Western Free Press.com website.

America’s leaders better take this student’s advice before it’s too late.

Slavery and The Free-Market System

“While it occasionally happened that a private slave owner [in the antebellum
U.S. South] killed his slave. .. socialist slavery in Eastern Europe resulted in the
murder of millions of civilians. Under private slave ownership the health and life expectancy of slaves generally increased. In the Soviet Empire healthcare standards steadily deteriorated and life expectancies actually declined in recent decades. The level of practical training and education of private slaves generally rose. That of socialist slaves fell. The rate of reproduction among privately owned slaves was positive. Among the slave populations of Eastern Europe it was generally negative.”

                       Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Democracy: The God That Failed.

The fundamental difference between free and slave labor is that freemen have an incentive to produce as much as possible. The slave, in contrast, will most likely perform the bare minimum necessary to avoid punishment. For this reason slave labor, as an institution, is inferior to an economy based on free labor---even from the point of view of the non-slaves.

But didn't it take the benevolence of the federal government to free the slaves? Yes. but only because other government ordinances had artificially maintained slavery in the antebellum South. [Another minor point: notice that it didn't take a bloody civil war anywhere outside the United States to free slaves; the institution faded away peacefully as capitalism swept the w0rld.]

Source: The PIG to Capitalism.

A Paradox of Priorities

Here is something to ponder from The PIG to Capitalism:

The very same people who remind us over and over that a person's income is no measure of his or her intrinsic worth are the ones who complain the loudest over this country's “priorities" when it comes to salaries. But if we are already agreed that a person's salary has no relation to moral worth or social importance,  then why is a teacher (or nurse, or firefighter, etc.) entitled to more money than a professional athlete?

Good question.

24 Outrageous Facts About Taxes In The United States That Will Blow Your Mind

1. The U.S. tax code is now 3.8 million words long.  If you took all of William Shakespeare's works and collected them together, the entire collection would only be about 900,000 words long.
2. According to the National Taxpayers Union, U.S. taxpayers spend more than 7.6 billion hours complying with federal tax requirements.  Imagine what our society would look like if all that time was spent on more economically profitable activities.
3. 75 years ago, the instructions for Form 1040 were two pages long.  Today, they are 189 pages long.
4. There have been 4,428 changes to the tax code over the last decade.  It is incredibly costly to change tax software, tax manuals and tax instruction booklets for all of those changes.
5. According to the National Taxpayers Union, the IRS currently has 1,999 different publications, forms, and instruction sheets that you can download from the IRS website.
6. Our tax system has become so complicated that it is almost impossible to file your taxes correctly.  For example, back in 1998 Money Magazine had 46 different tax professionals complete a tax return for a hypothetical household.  All 46 of them came up with a different result.
7. In 2009, PC World had five of the most popular tax preparation software websites prepare a tax return for a hypothetical household.  All five of them came up with a different result.
8. The IRS spends $2.45 for every $100 that it collects in taxes.
9. According to The Tax Foundation, the average American has to work until April 17th just to pay federal, state, and local taxes.  Back in 1900, "Tax Freedom Day" came on January 22nd.
10. When the U.S. government first implemented a personal income tax back in 1913, the vast majority of the population paid a rate of just 1 percent, and the highest marginal tax rate was just 7 percent.

You can read the rest of the blog entry at The Economic Collapse Blog.com.

A Twelve-step Plan for Understanding the Free Market

The following excerpt is from The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism (2007) by Robert P. Murphy:

1. Admit that government "solutions" are the problem.
2. Have faith that human beings can interact peacefully, and that economic blessings are available for all.
3. Surrender to the fact that certain social ills cannot be eradiated by force or political “will.”
4. Ask yourself. “D0 I want to advocate self-sufficiency and voluntary means,  or do I want to look to politicians every time I d0n’t like something?"
5. Survey the past record of governments when it comes to economic "planning" or other alleged improvements.
6. Learn to look for the hidden costs of government intervention rather, than the superficial benefits.
7. Understand the role of market prices. and why tampering with them interferes with the job they have to perform.
8. Study history. Examine whether governments that violated private property rights stayed out of their citizens' other affairs.
9. Before condemning a market outcome as unjust, first understand why it occurs.
10. Study other "spontaneous" social institutions. such as language and science, where no one is “in charge" and yet the outcome is quite orderly.
11. When politicians propose a new program,  remember how much they said it would cost at the outset. Compare that number to the actual amount spent.
12. Go through the newspaper and discover how government meddling causes or exacerbates the conflict in virtually every story.

Schools ban children making best friends

From the thesun.co.uk (Mar. 27):

TEACHERS are banning school kids from having best pals — so they don't get upset by fall-outs.

Instead, the primary pupils are being encouraged to play in large groups.

Educational psychologist Gaynor Sbuttoni said the policy has been used at schools in Kingston, South West London, and Surrey.

She added: "I have noticed that teachers tell children they shouldn't have a best friend and that everyone should play together.

"They are doing it because they want to save the child the pain of splitting up from their best friend. But it is natural for some children to want a best friend. If they break up, they have to feel the pain because they're learning to deal with it." [read more]

Talk about a bunch of collectivist crap. I hope this stupid policy doesn’t come to America. This self-esteem movement has gotten way out of control.

So, the teachers are afraid the kiddies will break up with their best friends. Guess what. It’s called life. They might experience break ups later on in life like divorce, etc. You can’t protect them from social upsets. The teachers could tell a kid who broke up with their best friend they will find other friends and the pain will eventually go away. Their life isn’t over because they had a fall out.

Who’s to say if friends break up they won’t get back together again? These are kids after all. They don’t hold grudges like adults do.

This is like schools not keeping score during a game because it might hurt the loser’s feelings. You know the kids are silently keeping score.

If I Were The Devil by Paul Harvey

Scopes.com said this essay was written in 1964:

If I were the Prince of Darkness I would want to engulf the whole earth in darkness.

I'd have a third of its real estate and four-fifths of its population, but I would not be happy until I had seized the ripest apple on the tree.

So I should set about however necessary, to take over the United States.

I would begin with a campaign of whispers.

With the wisdom of a serpent, I would whispers to you as I whispered to Eye, "Do as you please."

To the young I would whisper "The Bible is a myth." I would convince them that "man created God," instead of the other way around. I would confide that "what is bad is good and what is good is square."

In the ears of the young married I would whisper that work is debasing, that cocktail parties are good for you. I would caution them not to be "extreme" in religion, in patriotism, in moral conduct.

And the old I would teach to pray — to say after me — "Our father which are in Washington."

Then I'd get organized.

I'd educate authors in how to make lurid literature exciting so that anything else would appear dull, uninteresting.

I'd threaten TV with dirtier movies, and vice-versa.

I'd infiltrate unions and urge more loafing, less work. Idle hands usually work for me.

I'd peddle narcotics to whom I could, I'd sell alcohol to ladies and gentlemen of distinction, I'd tranquilize the rest with pills.

If I were the Devil, I would encourage schools to refine young intellects, but
neglect to discipline emotions; let those run wild.

I'd designate an atheist to front for me before the highest courts and I'd get
preachers to say, "She's right."

With flattery and promises of power I would get the courts to vote against
God and in favor of pornography.

Thus I would evict God from the courthouse, then from the schoolhouse,
then from the Houses of Congress.

Then in his own churches I'd substitute psychology for religion and deify science.

If I were Satan I'd make the symbol of Easter an egg

And the symbol of Christmas a bottle.

If I were the Devil I'd take from those who have and give to those who
wanted until I had killed the incentive of the ambitious. Then my police state
would force everybody back to work.*

Then I would separate families, putting children in uniform, women in coal
mines and objectors in slave-labor camps.*

If I were Satan I'd just keep doing what I'm doing and the whole world go to
hell as sure as the Devil.

CS Lewis couldn’t have said it better.

 

*This is basically what the Soviet Union did.

The Literal Genie

Or if you prefer the evil or really stupid genie.

In his book 2010 book Hacking: The Art of Exploitation, 2nd Edition, author Jon Erickson describes an analogy/joke of a genie to a computer. The genie free from his bottle offers the man who set him free three wishes:

"First," says the man, "I want a billion dollars."

The genie snaps his fingers and a briefcase full of money materializes out of thin air.

The man is wide eyed in amazement and continues, "Next, I want a Ferrari."

The genie snaps his fingers and a Ferrari appears from a puff of smoke.

The man continues, "Finally, I want to be irresistible to women."

The genie snaps his fingers and the man turns into a box of chocolates.

The analogy isn’t bad except it wasn’t a complete analogy.

First, the man said he wanted a billion dollars but not in a briefcase. Therefore if the genie was a computer program, the genie would just materialize the money by itself.

Next is the Ferrari. That’s fine except since the man did not stipulate where to put the Ferrari, the Ferrari could have landed on top of the man for all we know. So, could have the money. That could have been the default location for any wish.

Last is the “irresistible” wish. He could also been turned into a bunch of diamonds. Or even some handsome actor. The response could be random.

Then again instead of having a default for each wish the genie could ask the wisher to be more specific.

The genie is also assuming all the first two objects the man wishes for are not toys.

Quotes and Thoughts from John Adams

Quotes:

Government is nothing more than the combined force of society, or the united power of the multitude, for the peace, order, safety, good and happiness of the people.... There is no king or queen bee distinguished from all others, by size or figure or beauty and variety of colors, in the human hive. No man has yet produced any revelation from heaven in his favor, any divine communication to govern his fellow men. Nature throws us all into the world equal and alike....
The preservation of liberty depends upon the intellectual and moral character of the people. As long as knowledge and virtue are diffused generally among the body of a nation, it is impossible they should be enslaved....
There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.
….the legislative, executive and judicial power shall be placed in separate departments, to the end that it might be a government of laws, and not of men.
Wisdom and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people being necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as these depend on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in various parts of the country, and among the different orders of the people, it shall be the duty of legislators and magistrates in all future periods of this commonwealth to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries of them, especially the university at Cambridge, public schools, and grammar schools in the towns; to encourage private societies and public institutions, rewards and immunities, for the promotion of agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and a natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and frugality, honesty and punctuality in their dealings, sincerity, good humor, and all social affections, and generous sentiments among the people.
I must judge for myself, but how can I judge, how can any man judge, unless his mind has been opened and enlarged by reading.¹
If the people are as wise and honest in the choice of their rulers, as they have been in framing a government, they will be happy, and I shall die content with the prospect for my children.
[Advice to his son:] A young man should weigh well his plans. Integrity should be preserved in all events, as essential to his happiness, through every stage of his existence. His first maxim then should be to place his honor out of reach of all men. In order to do this he must make it a rule never to become dependent on public employments for subsistence.
[Talking about the French Revolution:] I know not what to make of a republic of thirty million atheists.²
Adams told another correspondent. In revolutions, he warned, “the most fiery spirits and flighty geniuses frequently obtained more influence than men of sense and judgment; and the weakest man may carry foolish measures in opposition to wise ones proposed by the ablest.”
My fundamental maxim of government is never to trust the lamb to the wolf.
Reason holds the helm [of the human mind], but passions are the gales.
The rights of one generation of men must depend, in some degree, on the paper transactions of another. The social compact and the laws must be reduced to writing. Obedience to them becomes a national habit and they cannot be changed by revolutions that are costly things. Men will be too economical of their blood and property to have recourse to them very frequently.
If [the] empire of superstition and hypocrisy should be overthrown, happy indeed will it be for the world; but if all religion and all morality should be over-thrown with it, what advantage will be gained? The doctrine of human equality is founded entirely in the Christian doctrine that we are all children of the same Father, all accountable to Him for our conduct to one another, all equally bound to respect each other's self love.

The executive, the governor, should, Adams thought, be chosen by the two houses of the legislature³, and for not more than a year at a time.
Adams was utterly opposed to slavery and the slave trade and….favored a gradual emancipation of all slaves.
Adams would call slavery a “foul contagion in the human character.”   He never owned a slave as a matter of principle, nor hired the slaves of others to work on his farm, as was sometimes done in New England.
Thirteen separate states would have thirteen equal votes, a concept Adams strongly opposed. He advocated voting in proportion to population.
It was the establishment of an independent judiciary, with judges of the Supreme Court appointed, not elected, and for life (“as long as they behave themselves well”), that Adams made one of his greatest contributions not only to Massachusetts but to the country, as time would tell.
He did not believe all men were created equal, except in the eyes of God, but that all men, for all their many obvious differences, were born to equal rights.
Adams had strong views on the matter of recompense for officeholders. He was adamantly opposed to the notion espoused by some that in the ideal republican government public officials should serve without pay. Adams had written earlier while in London, then the consequence would be that “all offices would be monopolized by the rich; the poor and the middling ranks would be excluded and an aristocratic despotism would immediately follow.” He thought public officials should not only be paid, but that their salaries should be commensurate with their responsibilities and necessary expenses.
Greatest was his worry that the country would expect too much of him [as vice president].
If Adams was concerned about making ends meet, Washington had had to arrange a loan to cover personal debts and the expense of moving to New York.
Rank and distinction were essential to any social organization, be it a family, a parish, or a ship, Adams would say. He cared intensely about the future of the republic and, as he had tried to explain in his Defense of the Constitutions, he saw men of education, ability, and wealth as “the natural aristocracy,” the great strength and blessing of society, but potentially also a great threat to liberty, if their power and energies were misdirected.
“The French Revolution,” he wrote to a Dutch friend, Francis van der Kemp, “will, I hope, produce effects in favor of liberty, equity, and humanity as extensive as this whole globe and as lasting as all time.” Yet, he could not help foresee a tragic outcome, in that a single legislative assembly, as chosen by the French, could only mean “great and lasting calamities.”
France was “in great danger.” Ahead of anyone in the government, and more clearly than any, Adams foresaw the French Revolution leading to chaos, horror, and ultimate tyranny.
Source: John Adams (2001) by David McCullough.

¹A kindred spirit.
² Like the old Soviet Union for example.
³This is the parliamentary system Great Britain and other countries have today.

President Obama signs Executive Order allowing for control over all US resources

From the Examiner.com (March 17):

On March 16th, President Obama signed a new Executive Order which expands upon a prior order issued in 1950 for Disaster Preparedness, and gives the office of the President complete control over all the resources in the United States in times of war or emergency.

The National Defense Resources Preparedness order gives the Executive Branch the power to control and allocate energy, production, transportation, food, and even water resources by decree under the auspices of national defense and national security.  The order is not limited to wartime implementation, as one of the order's functions includes the command and control of resources in peacetime determinations.

Additionally, each cabinet under the Executive Branch has been given specific powers when the order is executed, and include the absolute control over food, water, and other resource distributions. [read more]

Does this fall under “never let a crisis go to waste” I wonder?

What the heck do we need a Congress for? Not emergency management I guess. Obama to the rescue!

A Sampling of Les Shroud’s Survival Advice

Trust your guide, but don’t rely on him or her. In other words, you must be self-reliant.

Disaster often strikes in mysterious ways. And you may be separated from your travel companions at any time. Just as you shouldn’t rely completely on your guide, you shouldn’t rely completely on your partner or partners.

[Surviving] requires clear-headed, rational thinking, mental toughness, and a positive attitude. It requires a never-yielding will to live.

Survival can be harsh at the best of times. If you become one with anything or anyone while you are trying to survive out there, it is with yourself.

Survival is not about “man versus wild.” Nor, at the other extreme, is it about “becoming one” with nature. The key to survival is the middle ground of “going with the flow” of nature.

But make no mistake about it. Nature must be respected, watched, listened to, and considered constantly, if you expect to survive.

Source: Survive! Essential Skills and Tactics to Get You Out of Anywhere—Alive (2008) by Les  Stroud with Michael Vlessides

 

The moral of this “story” is that the gov’t isn’t going to save you. Just about everything he said is against the Left’s philosophy. In a survival situation not only does mankind rule himself he must be able to rule himself to survive.

Wyoming Native American tribe gets rare permit to kill bald eagles

From Fox News.com (March 14):

CHEYENNE, Wyo. –  The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has taken the unusual step of issuing a permit allowing an American Indian tribe in Wyoming to kill two bald eagles for religious purposes.

The agency's decision comes after the Northern Arapaho Tribe filed a federal lawsuit last year contending the refusal to issue such permits violates tribal members' religious freedom. Although thousands of American Indians apply for eagle feathers and carcasses from a federal repository, permits allowing the killing of bald eagles are exceedingly rare, according to both tribal and legal experts on the matter

Federal law prohibits the killing of bald eagles in almost all cases. The government keeps eagle feathers and body parts in a federal repository and tribal members can apply for them for use in religious ceremonies.

The bald eagle was removed from the federal list of threatened species in 2007, following its reclassification in 1995 from endangered to threatened. However, the species has remained protected under the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. [read more]

Maybe it is just this particular tribe but I thought Native Americans are supposed to respect the wildlife? At least that’s what the Left always says. That the Native Americans are in “tuned” with nature. You know since this tribe was allowed to kill two bald eagles what’s to stop them from wanting to kill more in the future? After all they aren’t going to stop practicing their religion. I did a little research this “religious purposes” is a Sun Dance ceremony done every year usually around the Summer Solstice. The eagle plays a large part in the Sun Dance for it is one of the Plains Indians' most sacred animal (so, they kill it? Hmm.)   That’s right other Native American tribes (over a dozen) partake in this ceremony too. So, what’s to stop them from saying “hey, you let this tribe kill bald eagles what about us?” Then the bald eagle will go back on the endangered species list. I guess being threatened is not as bad as being endangered.

Talking about religion since when has the gov’t under this regime er administration ever respected religious rights? Oh, I’m sorry I forgot. I’m bad. They just don’t respect Christian  rights is all. All the other religions rights are to be respected. 

I wonder since the bald eagle is America’s national bird and a symbol did this fact have any influence on the Wildlife Service’s decision? Just asking.

Excerpts from “Philosophy: Who Needs It”

Existentially, the rise of the welfare state broke up the country into pressure groups, each fighting for special privileges at the expense of the others—so that an individual unaffiliated with any group became fair game for tribal predators. Psychologically, Pragmatism lobotomized the country’s intellectuals: John Dewey’s theory of “Progressive” education (which has dominated the schools for close to half a century), established a method of crippling a child’s conceptual faculty and replacing cognition with “social adjustment.” It was and is a systematic attempt to manufacture tribal mentalities.

There are only two means by which men can deal with one another: guns or logic. Force or persuasion. Those who know that they cannot win by means of logic, have always resorted to guns.

The mental process underlying the egalitarians’ hope to achieve their goal consists of three steps: 1. they believe that that which they refuse to identify does not exist; 2. therefore, human ability does not exist; and 3. therefore, they are free to devise social schemes which would obliterate this nonexistent.

Defiance, not obedience, is the American’s answer to overbearing authority. The nation that ran an underground railroad to help human beings escape from slavery, or began drinking on principle in the face of Prohibition, will not say “Yes, sir,” to the enforcers of ration coupons and cereal prices. Not yet.

If America drags on in her present state for a few more generations (which is unlikely), dictatorship will become possible. A sense of life is not a permanent endowment. The characteristically American one is being eroded daily all around us. Large numbers of Americans have lost it (or have never developed it) and are collapsing to the psychological level of Europe’s worst rabble.

The academia-jet set coalition is attempting to tame the American character by the deliberate breeding of helplessness and resignation—in those incubators of lethargy known as “Progressive” schools, which are dedicated to the task of crippling a child’s mind by arresting his cognitive development.

We cannot fight against collectivism, unless we fight against its moral base: altruism. We cannot fight against altruism, unless we fight against its epistemological base: irrationalism. We cannot fight against anything, unless we fight for something—and what we must fight for is the supremacy of reason, and a view of man as a rational being.

Source: Philosophy: Who Needs It (1982) by Ayn Rand.

Socialism 101 Part 7: The Philosophy of Auguste Comte

Following the trend of the Christian development since the Renaissance, the power [the 19th century philosophers] named was: the neighbor (or society, or mankind).

The result was a new moral creed, which swept the romanticist circles of Europe from the time of the first post-Kantians, and which continues to rule Western intellectuals to the present day. The man who named the creed is the philosopher Auguste Comte. The name he coined is altruism.

The medieval adoration of God, says Comte, must now be transmuted into the adoration of a new divinity, the “goddess” Humanity. Sacrifice for the sake of the Lord is outdated; it must give way fully to sacrifice for the sake of others.

Source: Ominous Parallels.

Hitler’s War on Reason

If men uphold reason, they will be led, ultimately, to conclude that men should deal with one another as free agents, settling their disputes by an appeal to the mind, i.e., by a process of voluntary, rational persuasion. If men reject reason, they will be led, ultimately, to conclude the opposite: that men have no way to deal with one another at all—no way except physical force, wielded by an elite endowed with an allegedly superior, mystic means of cognition.

In some (usually unverbalized) form, [a dictator] knows that he cannot demand unthinking obedience from men, or gain their consent to the permanent rule of brutality, until he has first persuaded his future subjects to ditch their brains and their independent, self-assertive judgment.

What Germany needs, [the romanticists] concluded, is a new kind of institution: not cold, cognition-centered “learning-schools,” but feeling-centered “Lebensschulen” (life-schools). Encouraged by liberal progressives and conservative nationalists alike, the romanticist educators proceeded gradually to supply this need—first in the empire, then in the Republic. (Thus the schools were ready for the Nazi educators, when their time came.)

In epistemology, as a result, subjectivists hold that a man need not concern himself with the facts of reality; instead, to arrive at knowledge or truth, he need merely turn his attention inward, consulting the appropriate contents of consciousness, the ones with the power to make reality conform to their dictates.

Source: Ominous Parallels.

Socialism 101 Part 6: The Philosophy of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

Reality, declares Hegel, is inherently contradictory; it is a systematic progression of colliding contradictions organized in triads of thesis, antithesis, synthesis—and men must think accordingly.* They should not strive for old-fashioned, “static” consistency.

Hegel describes the above as a new conception of “reason,” and as a new, “dialectic” logic.

In Hegel’s version, reality is a dynamic cosmic mind or thought-process, which in various contexts is referred to as the Absolute, the Spirit, the World-Reason, God, etc. According to Hegel, it is in the essential nature of this entity to undergo a constant process of evolution or development, unfolding itself in various stages.

The ethics and politics which Hegel derives from his fundamental philosophy can be indicated by two sentences from his Philosophy of Right: “A single person, I need hardly say, is something subordinate, and as such he must dedicate himself to the ethical whole. Hence if the state claims life, the individual must surrender it.”

Since everything is ultimately one, the group, he holds, has primacy over the individual. If each man learns to suppress his identity and coalesce with his fellows, the resulting collective entity, the state, will be a truer reflection of reality, a higher manifestation of the Absolute.

It [the collective State] is itself an individual, a mystic “person” that swallows up the citizens and transcends them, an independent, self-sustaining organism, made of human beings, with a will and purpose of its own.

As a manifestation of the Absolute, it [the State] is a creature of God, and thus demands not merely obedience from its citizens but reverential worship.

Source: Ominous Parallels.

 

*Karl Marx borrowed from this in his dialectic materialism theory.

Socialism 101 Part 5: The Philosophy of Immanuel Kant

[Kant’s] method of attack is to wage a campaign against the human mind. Man’s mind, he holds, is unable to acquire any knowledge of reality.

In any process of cognition, according to Kant, whether it be sense experience or abstract thought, the mind automatically alters and distorts the evidence confronting it.

Reason is impotent to discover anything about reality; if it tries, it can only bog down in impenetrable contradictions.

Since reason, logic, and science are denied access to reality, the door is now open for men to approach reality by a different, nonrational method. The door is now open to faith.*

And no matter how powerful the rational argument against their faith, that argument can always be dismissed out-of-hand : one need merely remind its advocate that rational knowledge and rational concepts are applicable only to the world of appearances, not to reality.

Kant also found it necessary to deny happiness, in order to make room for duty. The essence of moral virtue, he says, is selflessness—selfless, lifelong obedience to duty, without any expectation of reward, and regardless of how much it might make one suffer.

Morality, according to Kant, possesses an intrinsic dignity; moral action is an end in itself, not a means to an end. As far as morality is concerned, the consequences of an action are irrelevant.

Many false ethical theories have been advanced, in Kant’s view, but “the principle of one’s own happiness is the most objectionable of all. This is not merely because it is false... Rather, it is because this principle supports morality with incentives which undermine it and destroy all its sublimity....”

Source: Ominous Parallels.

 

*Misplaced faith can be bad and sometimes hazardous to a person’s health or to the health of a country. Like for instance faith in a political leader like Hitler or Stalin. Or a leader who talks about “social or economic justice.” That’s blind faith. That’s what I believe the author is talking about. Only faith in God is the only right kind of faith.

What Kant is talking about isn’t religion so much but a delusional philosophy. Most main stream religions teach physical reality exists but there is also a spiritual reality too. Any religion where you can’t question or use reason or even to have doubts is not a religion but a cult.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 24

• The Stanford Mock Prison experiment is an example of how power corrupts.
• Any legislator or president that presents a bill that majorly affects the economic or social systems (like Obamacare) of America should be treated like an amendment to the Constitution.  None of this “we have to pass it first to find out what’s in it” crap. 
• The only knowledge gov’t wants to have is how to retain power.
• One man to another: We divorced on reconcilable differences. She was an insane progressive and I wasn’t. 
• When a business grows it has a tendency to hire more employees. When a gov’t grows, its power grows too. And so does its corruption. Which can lead to tyranny.
• Good intentions is like William Tell saying oops when he shot his son’s forehead instead of the apple. Oops doesn’t change things. The son still has an arrow stuck in his forehead.
• Audible.com is a good website for audible e-books. I especially liked the audible  version of Gray’s Anatomy. Think about it.
• Maybe what we need in America’s Congress are people that are humble, patriotic, and have a good credit score. Being brilliant is nice, but being able to think about side-effects would be better. After that’s why there is a Library of Congress in Washington. So, you can learn what you need to know.
• During the presidential campaign Obama is not only going to take off the gloves but he is going to put on brass knuckles instead. After all it is the Chicago way.
• To any girl who wants the gov’t to cover her birth control: Ever heard of self-control? Close your legs. That won’t cost you or the taxpayers a dime. You are not an animal after all.

How Gov’t Licensing Works

You have a big business or even a bunch of smaller business that form a cartel. Businesses don’t like competition. They prefer to a monopoly on a product or service or to own a big market share of the product or service (which I will call “output” for brevity for lack of a better term). So, the business(es) decide to do something about this output problem.

They contact their local gov’t official—state, city or even federal lawmaker. The lobbyist for the business(es) tell this lawmaker that their particular business is really technical or it is really complicated and that no-one else can do it unless they get a license from the gov’t.* Oh, yea of course there will be a big fee for the license plus whatever education you have to do in addition to the license.

After all the customers have to be protected right? That’s what the license is for. So, the customer knows this business is legitimate. This is what the lawmaker is being told. What the lobbyist is actually thinking is: It’s not the customer I am concerned about it’s other competitors. I want to make it hard for other competitors to start a business. To persuade the lawmaker even more the business(es) tell the lawmaker if you get this license into law they will monetarily support you in the next election.

Now, am I being cynical? Possibly. Not every business lobbies for licenses of course.  But licenses (especially the stupid one) happen for two reasons: One, the business(es) who want the license  are too stupid or too lazy to compete with other businesses. So, they have the gov’t do their work for them. Two, the lawmaker believes the argument the business is making. Since most lawmakers are not businesspeople they probably will fall for the argument. Add to this that if the lawmaker believes the business is some sort of Elite that has to be protected then the license will be introduced.

People complain that life is unfair. That’s true. But it is really unfair when gov’t starts issuing dumb licenses.

 

 

*Never mind that these business(es) didn’t have to have a license in the first place. 

Socialism 101 Part 4: The Philosophy of Plato

Plato is the father of collectivism in the West. He is the first thinker to formulate a systematic view of reality, with a collectivist politics as its culmination.

What follows in regard to human action, according to Plato, is a life of self-sacrificial service. When men gather in society, says Plato, the unit of reality, and the standard of value, is the “community as a whole.” Each man therefore must strive, as far as he can, to wipe out his individuality (his personal desires, ambitions, etc.) and merge himself into the community, becoming one with it and living only to serve its welfare.

The function and authority of the state, according to Plato, should be unlimited. The state should indoctrinate the citizens with government-approved ideas in government-run schools, censor all art and literature and philosophy, assign men their vocations as they come of age, regulate their economic—and in certain cases even their sexual—activities, etc.

The blueprint [of the totalitarian ideal] includes the view that the state should be ruled by a special elite: the philosophers. Their title to absolute power, Plato explains, is their special wisdom, a wisdom which derives from their insight into true reality, and especially into its supreme, governing principle: the so-called “Form of the Good.”

[The Form of the Good] can be grasped, after years of an ascetic preparation, only by an ineffable mystic experience—a kind of sudden, incommunicable revelation or intuition, which is reserved to the philosophical elite. The mass of men, by contrast, are entangled in the personal concerns of this life. They are enslaved to the lower world revealed to them by their senses. They are incapable of achieving mystic contact with a supernatural principle. They are fit only to obey orders.

Source: Ominous Parallels.

If you don’t believe Plato influences the socialists and the Left, there is a magazine/website called “The New Republic.” Plato wrote a book called “The Republic.” That’s where he talks about the Form of the Good. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

Yea, I know there is a conservative blog called “The Free Republic.” But it is the Left who always wants to change the structure of society and make the economic system “fair.” At least their definition of “fair.” That’s where you get the “new” in “New Republic.”

Interesting Facts about the National Socialist Party

The Nazis were not a tribe of prehistoric savages. Their crimes were the official, legal acts and policies of modern Germany—an educated, industrialized, civilized Western European nation, a nation renowned throughout the world for the luster of its Intellectual and cultural achievements.

The German university students were among the earliest groups to back Hitler. The intellectuals were among his regime’s most ardent supporters. Professors with distinguished academic credentials, eager to pronounce their benediction on the Führer’s cause, put their scholarship to work full time; they turned out a library of admiring volumes, adorned with obscure allusions and learned references.

The political implementation of “subservience to the Whole,” according to the Nazis, is subservience to the state—which requires of every German the opposite of self-assertion. Hence the ruling principle of Nazism, as defined by a group of Nazi youth leaders. The principle is: “We will.” “And, if anyone were still to ask: ‘What do we will?’—the answer is given by the basic idea of National Socialism: ‘Sacrifice!’ ”¹

[The idealism] is expressed in the slogan “Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz” (“The common good comes before private good”).

“Du bist nichts; dein Volk ist alles” (“You are nothing; your people is everything”), states another Nazi slogan, summarizing the essence of the Nazi moral viewpoint.

To liberate humanity from intelligence, Hitler counted on the doctrines of irrationalism. To rid men of conscience, he counted on the morality of altruism. To free the world of freedom, he counted on the idea of collectivism.²

These three theories together constitute the essence of the Nazi philosophy, which never changed from the start of the movement to its end.

“Do you know what I am hoping?” a girl in a Nazi breeding home told an American interviewer, her eyes shining. “I am hoping that I will have pain, much pain when my child is born. I want to feel that I am going through a real ordeal—for the Führer!”

And about the gas chambers….

“For there was light music. An orchestra of ‘young and pretty girls all dressed in white blouses and navy-blue skirts,’ as one survivor remembered, had been formed from among the inmates. While the selection was being made for the gas chambers this unique musical ensemble played gay tunes from The Merry Widow and Tales of Hoffmann. Nothing solemn and somber from Beethoven. The death marches at Auschwitz were sprightly and merry tunes, straight out of Viennese and Parisian operetta.

“To such music, recalling as it did happier and more frivolous times, the men, women and children were led into the ‘bath houses,’ where they were told to undress preparatory to taking a ‘shower.’ Sometimes they were even given towels.

Once they were inside the ‘shower-room’—and perhaps this was the first moment that they may have suspected something was amiss, for as many as two thousand of them were packed into the chamber like sardines, making it difficult to take a bath—the massive door was slid shut, locked and hermetically sealed….”

Source: Ominous Parallels. The End of Freedom in America (1982) by Leonard Peikoff,

 

¹Sort of sounds like the “Yes we can!” slogan.

²”Does this sound familiar? It should. It’s what the Left especially the far-Left is trying to accomplish today. By the way if you did not know, “Collectivism” is the same as socialism. Just like progressivism is the same as liberalism. President Reagan used the term “collectivism” a lot.

"Dr. Hussein's Uncle Sam" Poem

This poem is printed on T-shirts you can purchase from the Patriot Depot.com website:

I do not like this Uncle Sam,
I do not like his health care scam.
I do not like these dirty crooks,
or how they lie and cook the books.
I do not like when Congress steals,
I do not like their secret deals
I do not like this Speaker, Nan.
I do not like this "YES WE CAN."
I do not like this spending spree.
I'm smart, I know that nothing's free.
I do not like this kind of hope.
I do not like it, Nope, nope, nope!
I do not like your smug replies
when I complain about your lies.
So for the future make a note:
"I do intend to vote, vote, VOTE!"

My exact sentiments.