Category Archives: Freedom

Today We Mark The End of The World…

Posted on by

…of end-of-the-world cults.  Yes I know– wishful thinking.  End-of-the-world cults are as old as history, and they’ll just keep right on coming and going, no matter how many times they’re proven wrong (much like socialism and jihad).  Eventually of course the world will end.  All Things Must Pass.  Then one of these cults will probably be proven right after all.  That’ll show us.


This should be a course of study in high school – “Introduction to End of The World Cults.”  Students could get involved by forming into groups within the class and starting their own end of the world models and doctrines.  I’m trying not to be too flippant because this is a very serious subject.


Religious and political leaders, or leader wannabes, and most hippies, find that people desperately want to believe in something that makes them extra special.  It is easy to convince people that they are part of a special group.  A group that has super duper important information, and that the rest of us will rue the day if we don’t take heed of it and recognize that group as The One, and so on.  It’s usually all about power.  Raw power and nothing else.  Algore and the Global Cooling, I mean Warming Now/Global Cooling Now/Oh What the Hell; Climate change cult is one of thousands of examples.  Most churches practice some variant of it also, and it always works on someone.  No matter what.  Since people can’t bear the thought that they’ve been duped to such a deep level– that they’ve been so, so very foolish.  They’ll do anything to explain it away somehow, to avoid the profound sense of embarrassment and shame.


That’s when the bullied become the bullies.  The cycle repeats.


I know, I know.  Trust me.  I’ve felt The Spirit too, I know exactly what you cultists are going through.  I was young and impressionable.  I deeply wanted to believe in something that would relieve me of my doubts, confusion, self-loathing or whatever it was.  And then there was that need to “fit in”.  That’s when they get you.  It’s a form of hypnotism, and it works on you because you want it.


It’s never going away, but you don’t have to participate in it.  When you let go of that garbage– that baggage people have used to control you, and live a life guided by principles, none of it can touch you.

The entire world is a battlefield

Posted on by

This may be reading too much into a few words but it bears watching. From Salon.com, “How many Americans are targeted for assassination?”:



Dozens of Americans have joined terrorist groups and are posing a threat to the United States and its interests abroad, the president’s most senior adviser on counterterrorism and homeland security said Thursday. . . . “There are, in my mind, dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world, and they are very concerning to us,” said John O. Brennan, deputy White House national security adviser for homeland security and counterterrorism. . . .


“If a person is a U.S. citizen, and he is on the battlefield in Afghanistan or Iraq trying to attack our troops, he will face the full brunt of the U.S. military response,” Mr. Brennan said. “If an American person or citizen is in a Yemen or in a Pakistan or in Somalia or another place, and they are trying to carry out attacks against U.S. interests, they also will face the full brunt of a U.S. response. And it can take many forms.”


See also Congress Proposes Bill to Allow Worldwide War … Including INSIDE the U.S.


It’s may be important to note that exercise certain, perhaps any, rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights could cause you to be considered a “low level terrorist” and the DOJ, FBI, and JTTF will consider it justification to be watching you.


Via email from former co-worker Chet.

There is no privacy

Posted on by

I had lunch with someone today that told me they attended a “Privacy Conference” recently. One of the interesting things that came out of it was that the technologist all thought the lawyers would be the ones that would save privacy and the lawyers all thought the technologists would save it.

Other observations included:

  • Kinect has a camera, microphone, a connection to the Internet and a view of the interior of your home.
  • Many people carry a device with GPS, camera, microphone, and a connection to the Internet with them wherever they go.
  • Surveillance cameras are almost free.
  • Someone has demonstrated a system that you can take a picture of a random person on the street and ~40% of the time deliver the person’s SSN within a minute.
  • An 8-core computer processor in quantity 1 can be now be purchased for about $8.00. This has implications.
  • The UK may have millions of cameras and no improvement in their crime rate to show for it but they were trying to watch the cameras with human eyes. My fear is that we may get 100s of millions of cameras with computer eyes (Kinect technology?) and a police state to show for it.

I think I’m depressed again.

Critical Pedagogy Hits Home

Posted on by

There’s been some talk about it lately and it’s been in the news, but it’s also been in your home town school for some time.  Here is a history paper, handed out in my son’s history class, complete with syntax errors, inexplicable asterisks, bad grammar, omitted words, and miss-numbering.  The kids were told to memorize it.  Keep in mind the title of the piece – “U.S. History”  This is all American.  Everything below is what made/makes us tick;



U.S. History
Philosophies — Foreign and Domestic


“What Made/Makes Us Tick”


1. Capitalism – Pure*** vs. Regulated


An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.


OK, right there; no mention of property rights, the acknowledgement and protection of which result in capitalism.  “Corporately owned” IS privately owned, but they must make a distinction.



Pure capitalism over time results in poverty, worker abuse, environmental destruction, a two class social structure, and governmental control by the wealthy.  All economic, political and social norms were control directly ad indirectly by the wealthy.  Even the presentation of religious views were seen through the eyes of the capitalistic values.(2-


Karl Marx would be giddy with pride seeing what our public schools are teaching my kids today.  There’s so much wrong with that one paragraph I don’t know where to begin.  For one thing, “governmental control by the wealthy” defines a corrupt government.  The acknowledgement and protection of property rights, which defines capitalism, does not lead to governmental control by the wealthy.  That’s a contradiction in terms, but you’re not supposed to notice.  Corrupt politicians lead to governmental control by the wealthy, and for that they should be arrested.



Regulated Capitalism – has produced our nation.  Government regulates what industry can do within limits.  Environmental impact (air quality), worker safety, fair pay, fair trade, and business dealings are regulated by law.


The Fascisti would certainly approve of that statement, and they were committed Marxists.  Notice throughout this whole piece that there is no mention of human rights, or of America’s founding principles.  That would blow the whole thing though, wouldn’t it?



2. Expansionism


The belief that the nation must grow to acquire natural resources, new areas of trade, and living space. (Safety Value Theory – Turner Thesis)


3. Manifest Destiny (New Manifest Destiny)***


— Similar to Expansionism.  This was the belief that God had pre-determined (destined) the United States to expand.  It was an outgrowth of the Puritan ethic [God rewards those who work hard and live an exemplary life.]  The term eventually meant that the U.S. would eventually control the land from coast to coast.  This belief system motivated the “Western Movement.”  The acquisition of land and the displacement of Native Americans became justified in part by this belief system.  The Mexican War, the Southwest land, Northwest Territory, and Alaska are also acquired with belief system as the driving force for America to expand.


Nearly every country that ever existed has practiced some version of Manifest Destiny or Expansionism.  The American government did some terrible things to the Indians.  The innuendo I get from this is that there are wrongs remaining to be righted, which is actually being said elsewhere, complete with the “R” word (revolution) in the above linked video, as part of a school curriculum.



4.  Whiteman’s Burden – Anglo Saxonism***  The term is taken from a poem by Rudyard Kipling in which he states is was “the white man’s burden” to colonize the other nations for their benefit.  In practice it was the belief that:


God had chosen the Anglo-Saxon race to colonize the “less fortunate” peoples of the world.  In so doing they were to bring them education, the Christian faith, a Puritan work ethic, capitalism, health care, and the other “benefits” of our culture.


Ah, so America really IS racist!  Crap!



5.  Imperialism***


–,The control of one nation over another nation or territory for the purposes of acquiring natural resources, trade, and/or military advantage.  This is the core of U.S. expansion.  The acquisition of Hawaii, Cuba, and the Philippines are examples of imperialism.


Notice how they slipped trade in there, like trading with people in another nation amounts to Imperialism.  We bastards!  Those poor victims!



6.  Rugged Individualism


— The belief that individuals are to provide for their own needs without the help of others.  “I can do it myself.”  This was the pioneer spirit and the belief of the nation in the 1800s.  It worked against the average person during the latter part of the Industrial Revolution as corporations controlled the variables of life.  Working harder did not mean greater rewards for the worker.  It meant greater profits for the corporation.


The ideal of self sufficiency worked against the average person, eh?  So you’d be better off relying on others.  Notice too the repeated use of the word “worker”.  “Workers of the World Unite” then, I guess.  There are those evil corporations again, and the use of “profits” as an epithet.



7.  Social Darwinism


— Applying the theory of Darwinism, survival of the fittest, to political and social life.  The strong must survive to benefit the entire nation.  No sympathy for the weak, (poor, workers).  Laws and social customs were for the benefit of the fittest (rich, industrialist, upper crust of society).  When you combine the philosophies of Social Darwinism with imperialism, and Manifest Destiny., the world created was a tough one for the average person.


The Nazis were Social Darwinists, or I would say “Socialist Darwinists”.  Let’s be clear.



8.  Humanitarianism


— the belief that mankind should help others just because they can.  “Social Gospel” of the latter 1800s.


“Just because they can”, mind you.  Not because it’s the right thing to do.  Not because there are rich people who are, you know, actually human.



9.  Liberty/Freedom/Self-determination*


These fundamental beliefs began to take on a new meaning for many of society as the end of the century approached.  The empathy to “occupied countries” overseas and to the oppressed at home gains attention of a wider spectrum of society in the late 1800s.


Again no mention of rights, rights protection, or founding principles.  Instead it’s all up for grabs, depending on prevailing theories.



9. AMERICAN IMPERIALISM


It is easier to define American Imperialism by contrasting it with Imperialism.


Imperialism is centered on Social Darwinism, Manifest Destiny, and White Man’s Burden.


There were never, ever, anywhere, any non-white Imperialists then.  You racist, you.



American Imperialism tempers those beliefs with humanitarianism and the beliefs of self-determination, freedom and liberty.  Our present foreign and domestic policies are motivated by this belief.


There you have it.  We’re an Imperialist nation.  Damn us all to hell.


This history lesson is a self-contradictory and confused jumble of omissions, lies, half truths and truths.  Would Karl Marx strongly disagree with any of it?

Quote of the day—Maksim Khrapov

Posted on by

In the country where I grew up only the KGB had the guns.


Maksim Khrapov
[If you think you want to live in a place where only the police and military possess firearms you should first talk to various people who have lived under such conditions before attempting to force your beliefs upon an entire nation. Those that have lived in those countries and talked to such people may be less accepting of and more vigorous in their opposition to your plan than you anticipate.—Joe]

Quote of the day—George Orwell

Posted on by

That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.

George Orwell
[I slightly disagree. It is a symbol of the ultimate power residing in the hands of the general population rather than solely in the hands of the despot or the well connected. Those that seek and exercise power to their own advantage will always exist and will always take advantage of those that are less powerful. But the rifle on the wall creates limits such that truly epic injustice is unlikely to occur because of the fear by the powerful and their thugs that their reign of terror will be ended by a bullet. And if it does occur the rifle guarantees it will not long continue.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Kevin Lelonek

Posted on by

When we practice the privileges granted to us by our governing documents, in this case, the Bill of Rights and bearing arms, we enter into an implicit agreement with the Union to recognize and act according to the State’s rules and regulations for the use and ownership of arms. And as we agree to those rules, so does the government agree to act responsibly on behalf of our collective well-being.

In this manner, our relationship with our nation mirrors our relationship with our parents; both our parents and our nation raise us; both provide for our welfare; both teach us values and ethics; both act on our behalf for our well-being. And thus should we regard our nation; as a parental figure to be a moral example, an ideal to respect and to obey. For, if the dynamics of our relationship with our parents are mirrored functionally by the dynamics of our relationship with our country, so too should the convictions and loyalties that characterize the former persist in the latter.

Kevin Lelonek
April 12, 2011
Taking a shot at gun control
[Overall the opinion piece is benign toward the 2nd Amendment but Lelonek doesn’t even begin to get the concept of liberty.

The Bill of Rights doesn’t grant privileges. It guarantees rights. The only granting is that of certain enumerated powers to the government. The government is not a parent. The government is not an ideal. It is a necessary evil. The government is not to be obeyed by the people. The government must obey the people. The people must respect the laws which fall within the enumerated powers of the government.

Remember what Dwight Eisenhower and George Washington said about government.—Joe]

Just say no

Posted on by

This would not be acceptable to me:

The Michigan State Police have a high-tech mobile forensics device that can be used to extract information from cell phones belonging to motorists stopped for minor traffic violations.

If a cop were to ask me to allow him to connect his device to my cell phone the answer would be, “No”. If that wouldn’t be allowed I would attempt to do a hard reset of the phone (know how to do this so you can do it quickly) or attempt to call someone who could remotely wipe it for me.

Via email from retired co-worker Chet.

Quote of the day—Chris W. Cox

Posted on by

It’s been nine long years since the anti-gun leadership in the Wisconsin Senate denied state residents their basic right to carry a firearm for self-defense.

…

The days of government-mandated victims in the Badger State need to end.

Chris W. Cox
April 17, 2011
Chris W. Cox: Wisconsin should join free America
[Well… at least more free America. We still have a lot of work to do before I would declare America “free”. But certainly getting rid of government-mandated victims would be a good start.—Joe]

Atlas Shrugged: Part 1

Posted on by

This started out as a comment at Tam’s post about target marketing fail while waiting for Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 but grew to the point I figured it should be a post of my own.


Son James made a very similar “target audience” fail remark during the previews about different movies at our location as well.


James has read the book three times and I read it once then listened to the unabridged audio version once (yes, Galt’s eight hour monologue actually takes eight hours). We both liked the movie but had some minor criticisms about the movie skipping over some points too rapidly for “newcomers” to really understand the points being made.


We both really liked that the sex scene with Dagny was not the way Rand always portrayed an ideal man/woman relationship.


The scene wife Barbara liked best was where the guy wanted Rearden’s money but asked Rearden’s name not associated with the donation.


I agree with the commenters who said the casting of James Taggert was a little off.


I was uncomfortable with a train going 250 MPH on those curves with the passengers standing up. Sorry, but I don’t think they ran the numbers through the physics equations before they filmed those scenes. And the curves had better have some appropriate slope to them to keep the train from rolling over or pushing the tracks off the railway bed.

Overheard in bed last night

Posted on by

Paraphrasing just a little…



Joe: So what is the Tea Party protest sign you were talking about with James and Xenia?
Barb: Xenia is going to carry one that says, “Refresh the tree of liberty.”
Joe: That’s a little over the top. I wouldn’t carry one like that.
Barb: It was John’s idea.
Joe: Xenia’s a big girl and can make her own decisions. That she is a young woman and John is in the military helps some.
Barb: I wonder what sign they will make for me.
Joe: Probably it will be something like, “Kill them all and let God sort them out.”


Here is a picture of son James and daughter Xenia at the protest in Olympia Washington today:


JamesXeniaProtest

Lists

Posted on by

Robb and Barron have posts on government lists. For some reason the only thing I could think of to add was this quote.

I Stumbled Across This Excellent Dissertation

Posted on by

And it turns out to have been written by me, so I’m quoting myself.

In a discussion about capitalism, this was asked;

Does Need and Want enter the equation?
How does Marketing elbow it’s way in between Production and Consumption?

To which I replied;

Interesting question. I’d say that need and want are omnipresent in all interactions, but the basic equation is still the same. That production necessarily precedes consumption is obvious, whether or not the goods or services being consumed are both needed and wanted, or merely wanted. Each individual should be free to decided what he wants or needs to produce, what he wants or needs to consume, with whom he will trade, and how, in order to reach his goals. That includes the form of communication we call marketing.

Marketing is as old as humanity. Actually that’s a short sighted statement, because marketing, usually by males to potentially receptive females, has been going on for millennia in other species. Not sure where you’re going with that. I make widgets and want other people to buy them. They’ll never know I have these widgets available unless I advertize in some way. Often that advertizing is as difficult and expensive as the actual production but, just like the colorful feathers on the peacock, I can’t continue without it. If I believe my widgets are superior to widgets made by other producers, it is my want, my duty and my need to explain that superiority. That’s the communication between producer and potential consumer. That enables products of all descriptions to receive trial in the free market. The best performers will in the long run and overall, tend to win out over the lesser performers. Even products some people hate may do very well if there are enough who like them.

To the extent that the producer wants to produce and trade, and to the extent that the consumer wants and/or needs the product, marketing helps both.

If your thought is that marketing can and does steer people in directions they should not go, I would agree in many cases, though interference in that process can only have further negative consequences. Right at the start, legal interference denies the freedom that is the ideal in our society. Ultimately people are responsible for their personal choices, and reality will be the judge.

I may not like what some people spend their money on, I may not like the products some people offer, and I may not like how some people market their products. In a free society, that’s my tough luck. Everything has its costs, and the cost of liberty is that people I dislike may do things I dislike, so long as no one’s rights are being violated. Maybe instead I should find something to worry about that I can actually change. If I believe in my position passionately, I should have the freedom to get together with like-minded individuals and a) do better marketing of my own of a better product, or b) do an ad campaign of my own, warning others of the pitfalls of that other guy’s marketing. If I’m telling the truth, too bad for the other guy, and good for his unsuspecting customers. If I’m lying, he can sue me for defamation or some such, or his customers may ignore me.

The good thing about a truly free market (something no one alive has ever actually seen, by the way) is that people are free to make their own decisions. The bad thing about a free market is that people are free to make their own decisions. Our founding principles and documents acknowledge this dichotomy and uphold it as the ideal.

There are those who would put us in a situation where other people are making our decisions for us. That’s just trading retail bad decisions for wholesale bad decisions, with brute force being the operating system as opposed to free choice and rights protection. We know where that leads.

Using their own data against them

Posted on by

For those that regard facts, correlation, truth, and falsity important (i.e. people unlike MikeB302000 and other anti freedom people) this is an awesome article.

Here are some of the graphs to give you a hint of the content:

UNDataOnGuns1-6
Obviously as gun ownership increases there is more freedom.

UNDataOnGuns1-7
Gun ownership goes up when the economy of the nation is better.

UNDataOnGuns1-312
Homicide has a slight negative correlation with gun ownership. But this graph doesn’t tell the complete story because it doesn’t include the murder of citizens by their governments. Nearly 100 million people were murdered by their own governments in the 20th Century. All the major genocides were enabled by strict gun control. These numbers are not included in the above graph and if included they would give the above graph a huge negative correlation.

UNDataOnGunsCorruption
As gun ownership goes up the corruption goes down. I find this one of the most interesting graphs. I wonder about the causation. Do corrupt government restrict gun ownership out of fear or is corruption lower because people own guns? Both? Neither?

Quote of the day—Karl Marx

Posted on by

The rich will do anything for the poor but get off their backs.

Karl Marx
[In this age with both state and Federal government collapsing from the weight of “entitlements” I find the irony of this funny in a very sad, sick sort of way.—Joe]

What can I do to fight evil and live in a just society?

Posted on by

I received an email from Tom Garrett, President, Society of Libertarian Entrepreneurs with a link to this video:

Nice stuff but when the government takes everything you have and gives it to the parasites you end up living the life of a slave and any improvements you make in your inner self are of little immediate value.

I would prefer to retire in Galt’s Gulch and let the system collapse but as Roberta X has pointed out, ‘We’re a bit short of Galts and Gulches an’ Midas Mulligan’s been in a Federal pen for a good long while now, accused of “redlining.”’

Some people are more equal than others

Posted on by

As near as I can determine these people believe that if you can convince your state legislators to assert rights guaranteed to the individual states by the Tenth Amendment you are not a legitimate part of the political process. Apparently only those people that advocate for the infringement of states rights are legitimate.

They haven’t publically proposed a punishment yet but I suspect they have thought about it.

Here is a sample:

The UA researchers identified what they termed the “Commerce Battering Ram Strategy,” a legal-political apparatus that “private lawmakers” – unelected individuals who thrust themselves into the political process – have developed to harness states’ legal powers in an attempt to break open federal laws.

“Using the Tenth Amendment as its core log, a Commerce Battering Ram mobilizes states to challenge the federal government,” Orbach said, adding that legislation and litigation are key to such mobilization.

In effect, individuals within the movement attempt to propel as many state laws as possible toward weakening the government’s control of guns, the research team said. 

…

While it would appear that individuals within the movement are merely exercising their legal rights as citizens of the United States and participating in the democratic process, Orbach, Callahan and Lindemenn all argue that that use of battering rams “is not equivalent to legitimate participation in the democratic process.”

“Commerce Battering Ram”? That sounds like a phrase straight from Josh Sugarmann’s playbook like “assault weapon”.

Random thought of the day

Posted on by

Alan and others are sort of optimistic about the coming government collapse. Kevin is pessimistic.

The argument for optimism is basically that government is a parasite and that once the parasite dies the host (or new offspring of the host) will be able to flourish. I can see that.

I can also see that as the government nears the end those in power will rationalize almost any action to “Maintain order” or “To preserve the union” in the face of the riots. They will “just have to”. Your “goods, knowledge, and skills” may be required by others. And “whatever means necessary” will be utilized to implement “justice”.

As my brother Doug told me recently after I expressed some satisfaction about owning some productive farm land in our time of economic collapse, “We own land only as long as the law allows it.”

This is the difference between the Soviet Union and us. When the Soviet Union collapsed they already owned and controlled everything. There was nothing left for the government to take when the checks started bouncing.

I’m not saying the government will be successful in the acquisition process but both success and failure would be exercises of considerable unpleasantness.

Quote of the day—Steven Green

Posted on by

One year ago, U.S. newspapers and broadcasters could feel confident they controlled the news content they created.

It was understood that competing and special-interest websites couldn’t appropriate that content and post it without authorization.

When such infringements occurred, they were dealt with swiftly and effectively with a simple phone call or email.

Infringing websites typically had re-posted material out of ignorance they were violating the Copyright Act and agreed to remove the material or replace it with a link to the source newspaper or broadcaster.

Then along came Righthaven LLC of Las Vegas, the self-appointed protector of the newspaper industry from such news sharers.

Some 250 Righthaven lawsuits later, Righthaven’s startling achievement is that newspapers now have less — not more — protection from copyright infringers.

Steven Green
March 19, 2011
Righthaven lawsuits backfire, reduce protections for newspapers
[Via email from John Hardin.

Nice!—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ayn Rand

Posted on by

Government “help” to business is just as disastrous as government persecution… the only way a government can be of service to national prosperity is by keeping its hands off.

Ayn Rand
[A friend of mine once compared government aid to candy that causes cancer. It tastes sweet and is almost irresistible but eventually it will kill you.

Some lessons are taught over and over with only a few ever really grasping it.—Joe]