What Is The Public Trust?

 There exists a notion which is almost utterly disregarded by people on the whole.  It is ignored by teachers, college professors, politicians, parents, and the so-called "media".  And yet, it is one of the most singularly significant ideas of civilized living, along with those of inherent human rights and the freedoms that they unavoidably imply with raw, implacable, and invincible force. 

Ultimately, it is the idea central to that of proper governance without which almost any horror imaginable may arise in the name of "government".

The concept to which I refer here is that of the Public Trust.  However, here my intention is not to make reference to the traditional notion of Public Trust, which speaks to the proper management of natural and other common resources such as navigable waterways, for instance.  

Rather, I am addressing a more fundamental, far broader, and very literal sense of "trust", which relevantly denotes the faith placed by one into the presumed good character of another such that the former expects the latter to speak and act in ways pursuant to the former's best interests.  I speak of the duty of those in positions of governance† to act in the best interest of those to whom they swore oaths of good faith and competent service (OOGFACS), and to whom they are thereby bound in a fiduciary capacity.  

This alternate notion of the Public Trust constitutes a Special Trust that I refer to as being fully and unbreakably owed by those who take upon themselves that mantle of obligation, to those whom their oaths have been sworn.  Here we refer to something far broader, deeper, and crucial to the interests of liberty than the usual reference.  Public Trust is a Special Trust, the terms being effectively interchangeable for all practical purposes.  I will add that a Special Trust, which is to say the Public Trust, is one the violation of which constitutes a felony of the most grave and unforgivable nature.

It is my objective now to define the term such that it serves the purposes of freedom, that all violations upon the liberties of men taken in the context of this definition cannot be validly justified or excused.

To wit:

Public Trust, noun: 

The trust implicitly invested and afforded by The People in those individuals who occupy positions of governance or other Public Service, and who have sworn oaths of good faith and competent service to The People. Having so sworn, they then bear upon themselves a duty to act in the best interests of those to whom their oaths have been solemnly promised and perfected. This promise includes, most crucially, that of refraining from, and the explicit refusal of, the commission of violations against the inherent rights of any man by act or other deed, intended or mistaken. Furthermore, if such violations occur, the violators are obliged to make all possible restitutions to those against whom they have trespassed, lest they otherwise explicitly confess themselves guilty through such failure as having intentionally committed the crime, which shall serve as a severe aggravating factor in the matter of their guilt, of which at that point there shall exist no reasonable doubt.

Special Trust, noun:

The solemn, sacred, but conditional confidence, belief, certitude, and credence of The People in those who have sworn to them oaths of good faith and competent service, the unamended and/or unrepentant violation of which constitutes a High Felony of the most grievous, egregious, and unforgivable sort and which must be punished with grim measure.

With these definitions in hand, the position of "government" is altered in significant quantum.  It becomes clear that those in positions of governance, from President to village dog catcher and mailman, are by no means the masters of the rest, but mere servants whose obligations to do no harm far outstrip any purport to authority such people might claim, real or imagined††.  That obligation stands as the first and foremost duty of all who occupy such positions of Special Trust, of the Public Trust, and when they violate and made no admission of their guilt nor effort to restore those whom they have harmed, no less than the full weight of justice is to fall upon them in all its might and fury.

The time for tolerance of the intolerable must now come to an end.  "Government" and all who occupy its halls as denizens much be put in their proper places with the clear and unmistakable understanding of what can be expected when the rights of The People are crossed.  This is the only just and proper response to the wrongs committed by such individuals in the name of "government" and "the state".  Such grave intolerance must be taken up by all men and never again neglected in even the least instance where rights have so much as been bumped against ever so gently without consent. Let it be clear that there exists no such thing as implied consent where such trespass is concerned.  This is a lie that those in "government" have foisted upon The People to further streamline their capacities for ever growing violation such that they now believe themselves entitled to do as they please, when they please, the rights of The People be damned.

Tolerate no disparagement.  Fight Themme††† every step and for ever scrap of that which is rightly yours.

Mors tyrannis!

Be good, learn all you can of that which is right and proper between people, and until next time please accept my best wishes.

†Often referred to as "government" or "the state"

††Most often imagined... or more likely schemed

††† Those in material political power, holding the ability to impose upon others changes that effect the rights of some or all people.  Politicians are the prime example of Themme, but they are not the only ones.  Anyone with such power might a member of Theire cadre, as well as those willing to act as their agents.

Contain, Thwart, And Disparage Progressive Tyrants

 

Of late, the currently entrenched "establishment" has been trumpeting on about the greatest threats to "democracy" and mankind's very survival.  Naturally, they are stating in the most absolute terms that the top spot is occupied by people of white European descent, especially the men, the next greatest threat not so much as even in the rear view mirror.  Therefore, all non-white people should be getting their raging hatred ginned up really good, lest the white man drive them into slavery.  It would all be mildly comedic, were the results not so corrosive and dangerous to all that is good between people.

President Joe Biden has been at this for years, as have all those who are his incestuous political and philosophical fellows.  As the loom of a second Trump presidency hangs ever more menacingly in the withered minds and corrupted souls of the essential communists, so thinly and every so ironically labeled as "progressives", they have ramped up their usual frenetic and exaggerated rhetoric to logarithmically growing tenors as they shriek, rage, and gruesomely gnash their teeth in grotesque grimace such that basically nobody but the most stunted pay them the least heed any longer.  The American left has wildly over-played their hand, and those chickens are now piecemeal wandering home to roost.  We now even see subsets of their following turning their backs; those whose minds have not yet been quite completely digested by the acids of the decay-promoting progressive world view.  

The mental and moral disease of progressivism is the actual threat.  It appeals to the emotions through the use of very carefully chosen words, phrases, slogans, and a host of deeply tacit and very vaguely expressed concepts that promise things that fly in the face of liberty and of basic, hard-wired human nature.  The false promises of progressivism play upon the inherent corruptibility of the human animal, and a vast plurality of us seem quite content, nay eager, to cash in regardless of the deeper truths that bespeak nothing better than abject servitude and its attendant miseries and erosions.  Progressivism promises that which may never become possible.  But far more importantly, even if those misbegotten promises ever proved materially feasible, they would nonetheless prove cancerous to liberty because they are based in dependence upon outside agency for one's every need and desire, placing every individual at the mercy of those third-parties' deign and caprice.  

Vast legions of people have allowed themselves to be convinced that they want such a utopian world which comports in perfect lockstep with the progressive ideal. This is the greatest and foulest lie, claiming that individual liberty is best protected by the "state".  It is the single most dangerous political notion ever to have been foisted upon humanity.  It is a candy with so venomous a center as to be unavoidably fatal to liberty, and therefore to all that makes life worth the living, reducing it to mere existence and daily torment. It is the lie whose reality is the diametric opposite of that which it claims as its truth.

Nevertheless, the so-called "left" has managed to do its job well with its endlessly fallacious "logic", if we can even call it that. The progressive argument appeals solely to the emotions of morally intact people such that they inevitably become morally corrupted, betrayed by their good hearts into accepting that which may seem superficially appealing, but which any sane and intact man of nominal capacity instantly recognizes as intolerable with so much as even the most casual scrutiny.

Make no mistake, the "left" are absolute devils in terms of real results, regardless of intentions. They masquerade ever so ironically as the holders of a moral and intellectual high-ground, which rises not even to the laughable.

My raw emotional impulse is to declare that they should be destroyed physically to the very last man. But when I put emotion aside in favor of a soundly strategic logic, it becomes apparent that taken alone such measures are not sufficient to the accomplishment of good ends in the longer term. Taken as a strategy, the immediate destruction of an enemy at best represents a palliative measure that fails in time due to incapacity. Even in those cases where it may prove a necessary tactical measure, it can never be sufficient to the broader goal of long-term stability for abiding and unassailable freedom. Unless an adequate majority come to a better understanding of the principles of proper human relations, as well as that of an attitude of comprehending and embracing the true nature of proper human freedom in not only its glory, but its burdens, the human prospect will continue to grow ever more grim.

Generally, the only long-term solution is for a people to adopt a culture of proper moral and intellectual propriety where the endless ironies of the leftist and other unsound world views are rejected utterly and are afforded no tolerance whatsoever for imposition. Let every generation give those views the twice-over of close, competent, impartial scrutiny afresh, such that they may themselves reinvent the wheel that leads intact minds and souls to reject feloniously dangerous idiocies, the acceptance of which lead only to endless disease, misery, and death. Leave for them treatises of well-tested and continually reconfirmed demolitions of false philosophies such that the young may come to know the how's and why's that reveal false political philosophies for the dangers that they are.

The tenets of progressivism lead to precisely that for which it sycophants claim to seek utter eradication. I swear, it's gag-reel of all time.

The long term solution in defense against the ravages of progressivism also includes the shunning of those of a left-bent, while leaving them to their devices to the point that they transgress against the rights of their fellows. Once that line is crossed however, one addresses the circumstance with grim intolerance. At such points free men respond by shutting criminals away into prison colonies, or in the more extreme cases killing them outright where the immediate threat justifies it, which is what we usually call "war". In the case of the progressives, where their transgressions are concerned, our judgments upon their crimes must be significantly aggravated by the dangerous and intrinsically violative philosophical idiocies over to which they have willingly given themselves. There can be no excuse for such choices and where such people choose to commit crimes, their world views must be taken into consideration as said aggravating factors.

Additionally, war must be recognized and assessed not by the words bandied about by those unworthy of our trust (politicians, for example), but by what we witness in terms of actions taken. Rioting is naught but a euphemism for "war", yet many fail to recognize this, believing the lie that war is only that which "governments" say it is. Make no error in the belief that the material acts in violation of your rights is anything other than acts of outright war against you. They do not have to be waging physical acts against you in order to qualify as warring. Legislative acts that prescribe disparagements of your rights, regardless of degree, and which are enacted into statute that is materially enforced by men with swords constitute such acts of war in trespass against the sovereignty of all.

Think for yourselves and never trust "government", for that is the first step in leaving ajar the door to tyranny. All "government" must be regarded with utter distrust at all times, not just those of the progressive ilk. Nothing said by agents of "government" is to be taken at face value, but is to be regarded with utmost suspicion with said agents being made constantly aware that you have your eye on them and are ready and eager to take them to task for even the most seemingly innocuous of transgressions including the mere appearance of impropriety. Such extreme intolerance and the will to take violators to the woodshed is the only thing that will keep "government" on its maximally foreshortened leash. The moment our hold on that chain is relaxed even in the least measure, the slack is immediately taken up and more is brazenly demanded. This is the nature of those who hold such positions and it must be countervailed with zero tolerance or remit. The threat of gruesome violence is the only thing that those in positions of governance understand and respect. Removal of that threat has proven the downfall of all civilized humanity across the ages in every single instance, there being not so much as a single exception to this result. It is universal and predictable with utter and absolute perfection.

The epoch of tolerating the intolerable must come to an end, or else the human race is in fact doomed, and at the time of this writing, humanity dances on that razor's edge, regardless whether it wishes to acknowledge the fact. And so as always, we stand at a nexus where the choice is to be made as to what sort of a world we will leave for our great grandchildren. It is a choice that every single human being will make because there is no escaping that responsibility. The only question remaining is whether one makes the choice actively, or in passive default. What will you tell your children's children if you chose the coward's way out, failing to stand tall as a Freeman and thus leaving to your filial posterity a world of pretty (or not-so-pretty) slavery? Is that what you really want? If not, then get out of your comfy chair and do what is needed. If you do not know, find people who do and learn not only what is to be done, but to love what is needed and to love freedom in all its glory, its risks, its burdens, and its scariness, because no matter how tough it may be to be free, and it is plenty of all that, it is infinitely preferable to subservience of any form or degree. Death to tyrants and an end to all tyranny. That should be the most immediate goal for all the people of the earth. May you find your way to the Good Place, and have above all things the courage and determination to defend it with your last breath. Contain, thwart, tightly circumscribe, and disparage all tyrants and their wannabes, progressives being the worst of the lot. God bless all free people, and until next time please accept my best wishes.

Time Is Here, Part Deux

 It should be acknowledged that in spite of the apparent turning of the worm with the most recent elections, the grand malefactors remain a threat to all, and let me be very clear that those are people who typically ID as "left", "progressive", and so on down that list of misery-laden sorts who seek not to live their own lives, but to dominate yours. Here I speak of the first-line threats - the useful idiots of those whose names never see the light of day for the eyes of we the people. Those root-cause agents should be identified and aired out, but that task is vastly difficult to achieve as they hide behind 8-fold fences of obfuscation, both legal and material. But the aforementioned useful idiots are readily identifiable and targetable.

As long as we tolerate the material interferences of scoundrels, which is supposedly a sign of individual and societal moral virtue according to some, free men will have little opportunity to peaceably live their lives as they see fit in accord with the principles of proper human relations because those choices will always stand under threat and even outright attack from those who have no intention of respecting the rights of others. We unavoidably stand as potential victims of the perpetual hypocrites, liars, felons, and even murderers who pose perennial threats to liberty and all that attaches thereto.

There is the tolerable, and there is the intolerable. Threats against a man's free prerogatives to live as he pleases constitute clear and present dangers to every right to which he lays valid claim and should be met and addressed as such. Anyone acting to violate the rights of another should stand in immediate and grave jeopardy of losing their lives at the hands of those who would righteously defend against such felonious trespass.

But we live in an upside-down world where evil is worshipped and basic sense and decency is criminalized.

I am not optimistic that the human race will be able to continue into the longer term future without a physical showdown between the light and the dark because the latter incessantly and ever more egregiously seeks to trespass upon the former. At what point does one decide to brook no further violation of his sacred and God-given rights? How far must he be degraded, disparaged, threatened, and violated before he acts in accord with the dictates of basic moral sense and self-respect? In practical terms and on a national scale that could mean effective civil war, a circumstance nobody wants, but one which decent men must consider as a prudent and necessary option, perhaps even the only viable one in the face of an implacable foe who will stop at nothing to foist and force his vile tyrannies upon others.

The ill-bred mantra of "violence is never acceptable" is false, prima facie. It is a vile and bald-faced lie told by those who seek to remove or constrict one's freedoms with his consent as he sits idly, watching in the hideously mistaken belief that to act in his own defense is not just immoral, but criminal and unprofitable to his better interests. It is the devil convincing a man to climb the gallows, place the noose around his own neck, and pull the lever by dint of his free will, believing he is committing a sane, morally correct act of profit to himself.

All violators must be defied, resisted, and if push comes to shove, killed just as any sane man would respond to anyone attempting to rob, maim, or murder him. There exists no valid moral imperative to tolerate felonies perpetrated against oneself, whether by a thug on the street, or the thugs of a legislature and their enforcers. There exists no valid basis for accepting mandates that require one to violate himself, reducing himself in an act of free will to the status of a Weakman and de-facto slave.

The time is upon us for those of free and courageous hearts to rise as sovereigns and stand tall in grim and unrelenting defiance of the false authorities that have foisted themselves upon the world and who now stand so nakedly blatant before all people as such. Nigh is the time for men to choose freedom over slavery regardless of how pretty the bondage may appear and how cleverly it may be falsely peddled as liberty.

Time is upon us to stop complying in open and loudly sneering insubordination to the Tyrant, and to come together as brothers in liberty, ever prepared to smite the evildoers and their bloodlines into the dust of death for the sake of the freedom God has gifted to all men. Those who refuse to govern themselves properly in accord with the equal rights of all people shall be governed through the intervention of their fellows, the endeavor to be undertaken with grave determination to instill a bitter but just and unequivocal lesson in how to behave properly. This is a central requirement of a free people, who make no compromises where their freedoms are concerned, regardless of how seemingly trivial or necessary, and tolerate no breaches of the relevant proprieties. The mere suggestion by one man of such improprieties should raise the ire of all around him and cause him to become recipient of the most grave warnings of the threats he faces if he dares make material good on his mistaken notions.

The era of blind and indiscriminate tolerance must end today for the sake of humanity's future, for it is a clarion call to self-destruction masquerading as moral virtue. It is a damnable lie that threatens the welfare of every man and entices him to abandon the responsibility he holds to himself and his fellows to develop his skills of sound judgment of the words and deeds of all men, for such skill is one of the things the Tyrant so ironically cannot bear to tolerate. Men who possess such abilities of refined discrimination cannot be fooled into tolerating that which is evil, thereby leaving them in the position to neutralize much of the Tyrant's power.

Rise. Stand tall. Become powerful. Learn and embrace moral rectitude, rather than weakness. Reject incapacities in the knowledge of right and wrong between men so as to avoid being ineffectual in the world to work against the perpetual onslaughts of the evil plotters and their cadres of endlessly dangerous fools who represent the boots-on-the-ground elements of the men who would see your freedoms insulted, disparaged, and ultimately destroyed. Freedom is an all-or-nothing proposition. One is either free, or he is something else. There are no degrees of freedom, but only of servitude.

Close your mind off to the poisons of the so-called "left", the ironically labeled "progressives" and all others who seek to circumscribe your morally rightful prerogatives. Become strong and congeal into powerful communities whose defining hallmark is an intransigent love of liberty and an utter intolerance of trespass. Work tirelessly to bring freedom's antagonists to endless fatigue, frustration, anger, bitterness, and force them into the choice of putting up or shutting up. This is a matter of practicality, and of self-respect.

Forever regard with keen suspicion and the ready will to dismantle joint by joint all who approach Patrick Henry's sacred altar of Liberty.

Become a warrior, desirous of peace, but ready to do what it takes to destroy all comers who would have free men corralled and constricted in violation of all moral propriety. Such people must never be tolerated insofar as they materially act pursuant to their vile sentiments and intentions, and who must otherwise be shunned as enemies of all that is good between people. Deny them all benefits of communion with their betters until such time as they amend their opinions with respect to the rights of all men and the proper regard and treatment of their fellows. Leave them otherwise to their devices so long as they refrain from trespass. But in the case that they commit mischief beyond the metes and bounds of their rights, leave them in states of long-standing cause for self-reflection, or in the appropriate cases, their remains for the coyotes.

God blessed Americans as no other people on the planet. Show not the contempt of disrespect, or of ingratitude, for the greatest of all gifts bestowed you by the Divine, for I promise that if you do, the day will come that you shall rue with acid and bile this most grave of errors.

Mors Tyrannis

Mortem ad Tyrannidem.

Until next time, please accept my best wishes.

Change Must Come From The Bottom

"Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And weak men create hard times"

-G. Michael Hopf

The quote describes a cycle that has repeated itself over and over throughout our history.

If a new America is to rise better than ever it was before, and if it is to be maintained, then we will be fighting for at least a whole generation or two to come because the malefactors who helped bring us to this sad pass shall remain and they will never give up.

This is a good thing. The fight against the silent usurpers and their whining and raging useful idiots, those we know as "left" or so ironically as "progressive", should serve to keep us united and strong. And if that perchance those malevolent elements return to the woodwork, the challenges to us will be even greater, because it was the great material prosperity of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that lulled us into the complacency that landed us here.

More than any other nation in our recorded history, America needs to adopt a warrior culture. This does NOT mean becoming a war mongering people. Warrior culture, in a nutshell, is one where the people constantly prepare for the worst and hope for the best, suspicious of all who approaches Patrick Henry's altar of Liberty. They are well educated in the fundamentals of proper human relations. They are knowledgeable in moral proprieties and are raised to love all that is good between people. They are sternly intolerant of the intolerable; of all moral turpitude, and they know the difference between the morally abhorrent and that which is merely distasteful to some. Of these they are intolerant of the former and tolerant of the latter, a VERY important skill to have.

They are thick-skinned and know how to bear without complaint things they themselves find distasteful. They are the captains of themselves such that they are not offended by unflattering statements and sentiments.

Weakmen will always exist, even in a predominantly warrior culture. It is up to the warrior class to keep the Weakmen under control to the extent that they dare attempt to upset the status quo with criminal acts, attempting to achieve by transgressive mischief what has been heretofore so successfully accomplished in early twenty first century America. We now stand as a people teetering on the razor's edge of a bottomless abyss that still threatens to consume us and all our posterity. This must be remedied and never again allowed.

The so-called "greatest generation" was nothing of the sort, for they allowed their issue to stray from the path, whose children in turn strayed further, and theirs even farther afield to such a point as we now fund ourselves.

But none of this is to say that we ought not engage in self-reflection or that we ought never change anything about ourselves. Self-examination, properly employed, may lead to proper change, but people who live well amongst each other need be ever cautious about any changes in the basics because that is the brand of creep that sets the wheel in motion back toward that precipice. The "left" accomplished what they have through the stealth of what was once called "salami politics", applying their morally void changes in thin and almost imperceptible slices such that the American people, preoccupied with vacations, professional wrestling, and wringing their hands over what color the new BMW should be, failed to properly assess that which was happening right before their very eyes in plain sight. We must never again fall to such lows of individual character, but must become as monsters in defense of the good against the stealthily encroaching evils that beset us on all sides.

Every generation must renew its commitment to liberty, strength, propriety, and love for one another. And with our current technologies of instant and mass information transfer we hold in our hands the ability to remain aware both of things past, and of that which is currently developing. No longer do we hold title to the excuses of ignorance or powerlessness in the face of false authority and its attendant tyrannies. It is up to us to learn the metes, bounds, and requirements of proper civil liberty, as well as its rewards, and to cling to them like grim death; to defend it to our last breaths against the insidious and creeping threats who seek to usurp our freedoms for the sake of wielding powers to which they hold no valid claim.

The key lies in ATTITUDE... the warrior's attitude. Learn it. Embrace it. Love it. Defend it. Live it. Perpetuate it. Anything less virtually guarantees our reversion to chaos, poverty, disease, misery, and death as a people.

Mors tyrannis.

Mortem ad tyrannidem.

Until next time, please accept my best wishes.

ICE Going To Work Even Before Trump Takes Office

 In another forum it was announced that ICE is now actually doing their jobs at the border. Bravo.

I surmise that they no longer fear Biden and his lackeys, so they now are emboldened to to the job for which they were hired and swore their oaths. My suspicion is that most of those fellows are breathing sighs of great relief.

Good. This also reveals just how weak Biden really is. Were it otherwise, he'd be clamping down on them hard, but he does nothing because he IS nothing.

I believe this also reveals in a similarly back-handed way that the cowards of Biden's America are now prepping to run for the hills because they, too, are not stepping up as they did before. Mayorkas is nowhere to be seen, though I suspect they can find him cowering in his mom's basement, filling his pants in anticipation of having his ass handed to him for dereliction of duty in the face of a foreign invasion. I live to see the day he goes to a cell on Gitmo as per NDAA and dies in his cell, alone and in abject misery. He will have done it to himself.

However, more important that my well developed sense of justice is the need to move on from this most dreadful and embarrassing era of American history. It is more important that we repair what needs it and ensure that we never fall so far again. It's been 100 years and more in the making. Let us never again be so complacent and blindly obedient. Never again is anyone in "government" to be trusted, not even Trump. Not eve Jesus, for this is the most vile game ever contrived by men. It is pure filth and it tempts all men to stray from virtue in spite of their putatively good intentions.

A new America must rise from the ashes of what the past 60 years has brought forth. The New American is to be a Freeman, rather than a Weakman. He is ever vigilant of "government" action and gravely, grimly, and utterly intolerant of even the most seemingly insignificant impropriety or misbehavior, any of which must be treated the moment it is uncovered, and addressed with the most resolute determination to set to rights that which has run amiss and to mete harsh but just punishments to those who have transgressed in violation of their sworn and solemn oaths to serve both in good faith and with proper competence. Tolerance of the intolerable is an era that must come to its abrupt and long overdue end with the swearing in of a new president, and hopefully a new era where Americans are transformed into the ultimate governors, holding all elected, appointed, hired, and contracted people in whom the public trust has been vested on the shortest possible leashes with threats of great and cataclysmic dangers to all who violate their sacred oaths.

Death to all tyranny no matter how seemingly trivial or harmless. It must be stamped out in toto.

God bless America and may freedom ring once again, and better and more completely than ever has it before anywhere on civilized earth. Merry Christmas everyone, and until next time please accept my best wishes.

Why Lefties Are Ideologues And Righties Are Not

 Greetings and felicitations!  May the spirit of the season seize upon your heart and bring you and yours a cornucopia of joy!

Today we shall examine the reasons why the mean "lefty" is an ideologue and why the mean "righty" is not.  To begin, note my reference to "mean", as in the "average".  This should indicate to you that I now intend to speak in statistical terms, which is to say to the average case.  This further implies that there are examples of such people who lie to either side of the mean, meaning most relevantly that there are those lefties who are not so much ideologues and righties who are, but that each represents a distinct minority of each population.

Let us begin with some definitions.  Firstly, what is an "ideologue"?  One online dictionary gives a succinct summary:

noun

1. a person who zealously advocates an ideology.

Historically, "ideologue" was defined and intended as a disparaging moniker.  Labeling someone as an ideologue was quite the insult.  It implied a brand and degree of willful, functional imbecility on the part of an individual, attributable to his blind and intransigent clinging to an idea whose merits have been securely demonstrated as void.  It originates ca. 1815 in scathing reference to French Revolutionaries.  It is this sense of "ideologue" that we use today, rather than any of the more modern distortions of the original which carry less damning tones.

My thesis is as the title encapsulates: lefties tend to be ideologues, while righties tend not to me.  How is this so?  When confronted with conclusive evidence that an idea to which a lefty has wed himself, he will most typically reject the contrary evidence, with rather predictable and greatly overwrought displays of vituperative expressions whose sentiments live in the ultra-violent end of the spectrum.  Such drama-queen productions are the rule for such people, rather than the exception.

Typical contemporary scenarios where such qualities are made manifest by lefties include:

1. Climate Change Debate: In spite of hugely conclusive evidence that torpedoes the basic tenets of so-called "climate change", those who strongly advocate for climate action (they overwhelmingly lean hard-left, though not universally) habitually discount scientific studies and data from reputable sources that so much as suggest alternative views on climate policies or the effectiveness of certain interventions. They overwhelmingly focus instead on data that aligns with their perspective, even if the counter-evidence substantially demolishes the validity of their views.

2. Economic Policy: Similarly, advocates of bankrupt economic models such as those of typical socialist/communist schemes that include wildly wrong-headed notions such as universal basic income and heavy taxation on the wealthy, predictably reject empirical studies or economic analyses that highlight potential negatives or the unintended consequences of such policies. They almost universally insist that any negative findings are biased or misinterpreted, supporting their beliefs despite contradictory evidence. So thoroughly dislodged from truth are such people, they reject the readily observable real-time negative results of those things with which they agree, as well as the good results of those things to which they reject with such raw violence.

3. Health and Nutrition: In discussions about health diets and nutritional guidelines, individuals of a left-bent unsurprisingly and almost without variance cling to specific diets such as veganism and dismiss anything that suggests the benefits of a more varied diet, especially those that include animal products. They tend to argue that any research contradicting their view is funded by industries that benefit from these dietary choices. This from the people who so habitually accuse of those whom they view as their enemies as "conspiracy theorists". The complaint here against such people lies not in their choices of diet, which as a matter is one solely of their own discretion and choice, but of the fact that while they demand their views and choices be respected, they resolutely refuse to afford others likewise courtesies. Not only must their choices be seen as right for them, but for all humanity and may fie and biblical misfortune descend upon any and all who disagree, no matter how slight and oblique the contention.

4. Social Justice Issues: The generally accepted positions of lefties in the fooleries of so-called "systemic racism" in America and "social justice" sees such people rejecting with their usual violence any and all evidence that so much as suggests that conditions may not be quite as apocalyptic as their grand-mal fits of shrieking rage would have the world believe. For instance, the generally ignore contrary data because it doesn’t fit the narrative of systemic oppression and victimhood that they peddle with such untiring dedication and force.

These are but four examples from the mountainous heap of similar ways in which those who identify themselves as "left" or "progressive"† ignore reality for the sake of the visions of sugar plums which dance in their heads.†† And to reiterate, this is the trend. My assertions are in no way to be taken as any sort of universal claim against all individuals. In a similar way, we see that those who self-identify as "right" or "conservative" tend to accept properly constructed arguments that disprove any given ideas and beliefs they may have held. Examples include:

1. Criminal Justice Reform: There has been a growing recognition among conservatives of the need for criminal justice reform, particularly concerning issues like mass incarceration and the war on drugs. As evidence mounted about the ineffectiveness of certain policies, many conservatives began advocating for changes to sentencing laws and rehabilitation programs.

2. LGBTQ+ Rights: Over recent years, many conservatives have changed their views on issues like same-sex marriage and LGBTQ+ rights. This shift often occurs as individuals come to understand the implications of their previous beliefs, leading them to support more liberty-oriented policies, even though the specific life choices may otherwise chafe or even disgust. This is a fundamentally different approach to things from that of the so-called "left", whose opinions tend to advocate for the sanction of anyone whose views wander from their impossibly narrow path of rectitude, a "sin" of which they so loudly and obstreperously accuse their perceived enemies, calling for punishments such as prison time, and for their own views to be foisted upon all by force.

3. Marijuana Decriminalization: When confronted with new evidence, conservative politicians and voters have begun to support the decriminalization or legalization of marijuana. Some have shifted their stance due to realizing the financial benefits of tax revenue and reduced law enforcement costs, all in the face of not just the lack of evidence to support end-of-civilization predictions, but also as people have become better educated in terms of the basic principles of liberty and all that they imply regarding this long standing issue

4. Technology and Privacy: Some conservatives have also had to reassess their views concerning privacy and technology, especially with the rise of social media and concerns about surveillance. Some have shifted toward advocating for stronger privacy protections in response to growing awareness of data misuse and the implications of technology in modern society. Lefties have taken the diametrically opposed position, that "government" needs to ban speech and spy on people who might be posting mean words.

The data to which anyone with the inclination is free to access on manifold fronts demonstrates the validity of my assertions. Those of the left persuasion tend to intransigency even in the face of evidence that overwhelmingly destroys their positions, whereas those of a right inclination are far more likely to alter their views in light of evidence that calls into question their beliefs on any given issue. Clearly, lefties tend to be ideologues, whereas those whom they view as their most bitter rivals tend to be far more open to persuasion, given the right arguments, data, and other evidence. These differences reflect a fundamental dissimilarity of character between the two populations, and further cast a very clear picture as to whose general demeanor comports itself to the higher standard of behavioral ethics. To my way of thinking, those who ID as "left" have a deep and dangerous problem not only of the ethic to which they have chosen to ally themselves, but of a moral fabric that would prompt them to choose such an ethic. And if their individual issue lies not in their moral choices, but rather in their capacities of intellect, more's the pity. The one leaves choice as an option, whereas the other closes that door for want of ability. Let us hope that our brethren who have by their will chosen a bereft ethical standard will one day see the light and set course in its precise direction. As for the rest, they must be relegated to the silence of irrelevancy. It is a choice I do not relish, but such people do pose non-trivial threats to the rights and freedoms of all men. They must not be allowed to bring to the world tyranny any greater that that to which they have already so generously treated us. Indeed, the time is nigh that we begin rolling back the clock on all the perditions that have been foisted upon us. The age of instant information cross-loading holds out to humanity the promise of breaking the Tyrant's hold on our throats.

Mors omnibus tyrannide!

Death to all tyranny! 

We no longer need it, nor do we accept it.

Be well, and may God bless us, each and every one†††, even you lefties out there. We may yet become friends, or at least friendly with one another. Let us not be enemies, for that is exactly what the Tyrant wants. So long as we fight one another, we're not fighting him. Think on that awhile.

Until next time, please accept my best wishes.

† Oh, the irony.

†† Apologies to Clement Clarke Moore ††† And now I find myself obliged to apologize to Charles Dickens as well. Oh, the humanity!

America Needs Repair

 Allow me to preface by saying that America is the best nation on earth, warts and all; that it is my home, and that I love it. That said, America is broken and has been since day one. How, you may ask? It is so in that the American architecture for governance was, and remains half-baked. The Framers put together a set of feel-good ideas that are in themselves valid, but that are insufficient to the tasks to which they were set. The tasks in question were few, but very essential to the establishment and maintenance of a free land.

The question arises: what is the valid purpose of governance?  The answer is clear: to protect the natural rights of every individual.  There is no other valid purpose, however this single imperative leads us to the question of what, precisely, defines such defenses?  What are the metes and bounds? The answers are those that the Framers failed to incorporate into the Constitution, and a grave error it was, indeed.  Instead, they relied on the largely tacit assumption that the principles of English Common Law would sufficiently serve as the basis for judicial comportment, for example.  They assumed that a moral people would be capable of stemming tides of incompetence and corruption.  They assumed wrong.

For one thing, the establishment of America set a global precedent against tyranny that had not been known for millennia, and it pissed the Tyrant off something terrible.  People of the civilized world had had the Tyrant's boot on their necks for so long, they knew not in sufficient measure what it meant to be properly free, and subsequent tyrants went immediately to work to establish their comparatively petty tyrannical framework for the new land in the form of early precedents so that the people would have the least opportunity to get wise to the broader and deeper implications of what it meant to be a free human being living amid and among his fellows.  Early Americans simply didn't know, save that they were freer than they had been under the king.  It was all very new. and in typical human style, having secured victory over a tyrant, they then grabbed a beer and celebrated, unaware that a new set of tyrants were already hard at work to circumscribe the rights and valid prerogatives of free men to the greatest degree they felt the could get away with at the time.

It is oft quipped that fortune favors the bold.  And so it was with the First Congress who, desperate to raise revenues to pay off "national" debts to foreign holders, passed the so-called "whiskey tax", a legislative step that set a deep precedent that stands to this very day and has proven itself a cancer of the deepest and most deleterious sort.  And some of the people revolted against it, what we call the "whiskey rebellion", and in the end the federal "government" sent the US military against its own people to crush the valid and proper dissension that had arisen against this first and foremost outrage upon the very rights of humanity for which countless brave and good men gave their lives over the course of seven years fighting the rot and tyranny of the British crown.  It was already the beginning of the end for the ideals of the City on the Hill that was to become the beacon of hope for the rest of the world in spite of all the errors of intent and miscalculation.

But the absence of very explicitly specified and formalized foundational principles, in combination with the understandably incomplete knowledge of people naive to what it truly meant to be free, all but guaranteed our descent into tyranny in one form and degree, or another.  

This is all very curious in the face of the fact that the Framers were in no way naive to the nature of politics.  They well knew the propensities of human beings where political considerations were concerned.  This was well represented in the old story about Benjamin Franklin who, having emerged onto the streets of Philadelphia, was accosted by a woman who asked him what form of government had the people been given. "A republic madam... if you can keep it."  If, indeed.  I will give the Framers credit in assuming that none of their failures were concocted with ill intent.  

I would also note that the woman's purported question carries with it a clue as to the general mindset of the people.  She asked what form of government, rather than of governance.  The difference may seem subtle, irrelevant even, but I assure you that it is essential and that the differences it may make in terms of the qualities of life for a people are vast in every direction.  The mindset difference alone is huge.  For one thing, "government" as an entity in sé, does not exist.  It is merely a script that people follow, but it has no reality its own in the way that a building does, or a vehicle or bologna sandwich.

Governance, on the other hand, represents real action in the real world.  This is what the early American people either failed to grasp, or simple failed to pursue it with sufficiency in order to ensure that tyranny would not arise in their hard-won land.

Government, when seen incorrectly as a thing that exists in and of itself, causes the human mind to lend it qualities that are all lies.  The quality of substance, for instance.  It's the King's New Clothes on steroids and half tons of LSD and methamphetamine each, and a healthy dose of steroid rage in the deal.  It is literally nothing at all in which people have come to believe is actual material reality, and that it is large and powerful and dangerous as all get-out, and that it must be obeyed.  Just try to wrap your minds around the truth of this.  It is the belief in unicorns and the flat earth.  It is the very definition of what it means to be a raving, screaming psychotic, for the disconnection from reality in order to believe any of this lies at the very root of one's humanity.  The wild insanity of this cannot be overstated, nor can the dangers.

But if we take 1791 as the year of our actual beginning as a formalized nation-state, then we can say that as of this writing we have the benefit of 233 years of hindsight from which we can learn just where we as a people went wrong, where the holes and cracks reside, and how we may better endeavor to affect the necessary and hopefully complete, correct, and uncompromising repairs not only to the so-called "system", but to our ways of thinking, including our understandings and attitudes toward and about what it means to be a free human being.

Principles.  Without these, we are as a ship with neither rudder nor anchor.  We are a tall building with a rotten foundation which cannot hope to stand for long.  Without them we are lost.

Those principles must manifest the characteristics of clarity, correctness, and completeness.  Without correctitude, we go wrong.  Minus completeness, we may go right at times, wrong at others.  Sans clarity, our understanding of otherwise valid principle falters and once again we wander into error.  These qualities must be non-negotiable.  We must not compromise them away for any sake whatsoever, especially for mere convenience or expedience.  We must test the principles for error, holes, and other failures so that when all is said and done we have in our hot little hands a set of precepts by which we may judge the actions of those who take up the mantle of the Public Trust in service to their fellows, as well as ourselves.

There is nothing new here, save that we may have formalized what it means to be a free civilized man as part and parcel of a framework for governance for all.  In this, there is no "government" to which we lend all the false qualities and characteristics of an actual, extant entity.  There is only the function of governance, and that function comes into play only where the individual fails for some reason to properly govern himself.  National defense comes validly to the fore when people of other nations fail to govern themselves properly by threatening danger to those of America.

The ways in which we have failed ourselves as free human beings are manifold. For example, it has long been clear to me that our judiciary is largely broken, what with it being polluted and infested with so many rotten principles such as chevron deference, which were added in ad hoc fashion to address the cracks that arose in the course of our judicial evolution, the architects clearly unwilling to, or incapable of seeing beyond the immediacy of their concerns with an eye toward unintended consequences.

Humans being what they tend, fail to establish with sufficient rigor the basic principles by which a system shall operate. The American judiciary is a glaring and tragically dangerous example of this failure, as is much of the Constitution - a document written for saintly men, rather than real ones.

I am a computer scientist. When designing software, especially that of a decidedly non-trivial nature in terms of its functional complexity and size, one must be extremely circumspect in how he goes about formulating the designs lest severe consequences arise that could impact, say, a business from many standpoints including that of criminal liability. I am in the deep-seated habit of approaching problems in the ways of proper computer science, which is to say I always look to exhaustive consideration of the possible outcomes of given schemes with an eye for failure points. This is boilerplate, and we of a well seasoned caste do it well and we do it as a matter of second nature. It is a habit that is in vanishingly small evidence in all branches of "government". It is all but nonexistent in the legislature where the rot of incompetence and malicious intent in the formulation and passage of statute leaves a stench that adversely and unjustly impacts the lives of all, causing unjust harm and at times utter ruin in violation of the very rights one's oath promises to protect in good faith and competent service.

In the executive, the same may be said for the formulation and adoption of policy, and in the legislature, the functionally self-same problems exist that give rise to laws that are arbitrary, vague, broadly interpretable, and therefore fly in the face of the natural rights of men and result in gross and felonious violation.

All have failed to define the fundamental frameworks with sufficiency such that all these blatantly arbitrary and ill-considered, ad hoc policies became possible and arguably necessary to plug holes in the dike, so to speak. The essential principles were either not worked out at the beginning, were not included in foundational documents, or were simply ignored by those in whom the public trust had been and continues to be vested, the latter being perhaps the more disturbing head of the hydra.

As an example, in the case of legislative ambiguity, advantage and benefit should always be settled by the court in favor of individual liberty and the attendant prerogatives of freedom over the purported interests of the "state" or any other consideration that seeks to more tightly constrain a man. Decisions should without exception be made in favor of individual liberty such that if such a decision so deeply offends the Congress or the executive, let them then go back to the drawing board to do their jobs correctly such that legislative and/or policy-related ambiguity is erased in favor of semantic clarity, as well as propriety of principle and the proper respect for the rights of all men.

If ever a project were worthy of human endeavor, it would be the one where the principled foundations of all governing action were laid out and passed into Law and set beyond the reach of the corrupt, inept, and malicious. Without this, we will continue only to proceed in ad hoc fashion, willy nilly. This may occur with all good intentions, but I remind you that such intentions count for nothing. Where liberty is concerned, we must never compromise even on the most seemingly trivial point because there is no point relating to human rights that is so insignificant that we can bargain them away in the interest of any other expedient, regardless of how grand and centrally critical it may be. Once a door is opened in this way, the precedent has been set for further degradation and disparagement of our fundamental rights. Never ever allow this; not even once. Be well, be prosperous, be free, and as always please accept my best wishes.